Top ten greatest weapons in history

[emeraldrafael]

I'd honestly say fire should be up there. I mean... if we didnt have fire... we wouldnt really have anyhting. Besides... its fire. Have you seen what people look like after they've been on fire? Its not a pleasant thing to wnat to live through.

 

[Shock and Awe]

...the katana's broad point (by which I mean the obtuse angle at which the kissaki comes to said point) makes it a less than exemplary thrusting weapon... especially against chainmail. Will it thrust through chainmail? Yes... but only with a lot more force than a western longsword.

Also, I love my Glocks, especially the 21. Recoil is easily manageable, mag capacity is high, and my groupings are fast and tight at up to 20m, which is almost 3 times further out than 90% of pistol engagements. Honestly, I'd say they deserve a place on a similar list to this for standardizing composite, striker-fired auto pistols... just not in the top 10. Top 100, definitely.
Remember not to get your 1911s and SiGs dirty, boys. I'll just knock the bigger chunks of dirt off my handgun with my boot and it'll keep firing.

Nice to see some love for Glocks around here! Though I prefer the 19 myself.

 

[Double A]

I'm a big fan of pre-industrial warfare.

10.) The atomic bomb/nuclear weapons in general - Possessed by most developed countries today
9.) The pike - Used from the Ancient Macedonians up into the eighteenth century
8.) The English/Welsh Longbow - Used by England from about 1200 to about 1500
7.) The bombard cannon - Used by the Turks from about 1350 to the nineteenth century
6.) The Roman Gladius - Used by the Romans
5.) The Saxe - Symbolic weapon used by the Saxons until about 1000
4.) The Franchesca (throwing axe, I probably have the name wrong) - Used by the early Frankish tribes
3.) The horse - From the era of the stirrup until the twentieth century
2.) The composite horse bow - Used by nomadic tribes of horsemen (such as the Huns or Mongols)
1.) The human body/mind - Durr

Wait... not only are atomic bombs pre-industrial, they aren't as powerful as composite bows? And what's the deal with the Gladius hate? I mean, the Romans only conquered most of Europe, their main sword can't be that great.

Yep, I did make a booboo with the nuclear weapons, I suppose what I meant was that with the exception of nuclear weapons, I like pre-industrial weapons.

As for the gladius, I enjoy the weapon and I believe that it is a great weapon, just not the greatest. After all, the composite bow was the main weapon of the Mongols, who had a larger land empire than the Romans. I stick by my standings, but I don't feel any dislike for the gladius.

Ok, fair enough about Mongols... but the Saxe and Franchesca? I'm not seeing it. I'm not saying either are bad weapons, just not as good as the Gladius.

 

[TOGSolid]

Am I, not really. I just wanted to add a fancy word.

You just contradicted yourself.

Still my point on the katanas versatility shows with my Masashi example.

His winning that fight had nothing to do with the weapon and instead was entirely based on the intelligence of the fighter. This is a guy who, according to legend, won a fight with a bokken he carved out of a boat oar and then beat a guy who was wielding a nodachi.

 

[Psycho Cat Industries]

Why an rpg? The things are so inaccurate.Personally,I would have said the lever-action-rifle which means no shoot gun powder lock push set down ram down powder and shoot,the axe which has proven to be one of the most capable killers of all time or the grenade which actually dates back to the days of the Trojans and is undeniably deadly and easy to use

 

[Psycho Cat Industries]

The M1991A1 is the 1991 7 rounds pistol.It ain't no 9mm block.Best ones will shoot any .45 and some even .44 rounds.

 

[Angus565]

Pretty cool choices but I can't believe you left this out!

Fact: This gun has had only been shot once by it's previous owner...

 

[VanillaBean]

You forgot about the Grenade Launcher, no other weapon can cause CoD fans to go beserk as much as that gun.

 

[spartan231490]

True; but when virtually the entire population advocate it, and that population was responsible for the deaths of millions, it certainly does mean that its wrong.

No it doesn't. Just because one person, or group, believed something that was cruel, or incorrect, does not invalidate everything else that they believed. There is no corelation between the fact that the man was part of the genocide of the jews and his believe that victory would bring peace.

I understand the fallaciousness of my argument; however, obvious logic doesn't apply to predictably to real life. Any kind of logical argument as to the nature of anything is inherently fallacious because we can't possible account for every person or occurrence that ever has been or ever will be. Does this mean all arguments are pointless? Of course not. That would be boring.

Practically speaking it's quite possible to deduce from a limited set of instances what the results of further occurrence of those variables will be. That's what the entirety of science is based on.

In this case, I am deducing from my knowledge of the usage of that particular phrase, that the usage of that particular phrase is indicative of societal problems or problems with the national conciousness. I do this because of all the times I've heard it bandied around, it's been during difficult cultural/socio-economic times, and didn't end well.

No, I'm distinguishing by saything that the former has to be active while the latter can be passive or active. Just because I am willing to punch a man in the face, doesn't mean that I am going to. I am perfectly willing to punch someone who attacks me first, but I've never done it, because I've never been assaulted.
The former is like saying: "If I kick his ass, he'll leave me alone." The latter is simply saying "He'll leave me alone because I'm the size of an offensive lineman."

Nah, this doesn't fly. If one country has weapons, it has to be willing to use them to crush its opposition, or else there is no threat. It requires activity to function as a threat.

Say a country has a number of super-high tech fighter jets, but no pilots who can fly them. What then? They have superior weapons, but can't deploy them. There is no threat there. All those planes are for nothing.

Think of all those scrawny kids who talk big at you, who say they're gonna fuck you up, but you just laugh it off, because you know that they're not going to do anything.

A threat is only a threat if people know you're going to follow through with it, so, once again:

Peace through superior firepower= Peace through victory.

Because a threat requires you to follow through.

But the point I'm trying to make, which you're deftly avoiding with walls of logic, is that saying stuff like that indicates there is something iffy with your point of view, based on what I know.

And i'm saying that that is flawed logic.
Ability =/= activity. Just because i can do something, doesn't mean I will. If a country has vastly superior firepower, it's because they are willing to use it, and they will be less likely to suffer an invasion.
Using a phrase that someone else used doesn't mean that i am at all similar to them except in that i use that phrase. Just because I say "Git 'r done" doesn't mean I'm a stand up comedian. You logic is predicated upon a flawed logic that is entirely based on prejudicial opinion, not on any established causality.
Also, as I mentioned, "peace through victory", and "peace through superior firepower" are not the same thing, nor do they have the same meaning.

 

[maturin]

Bear in mind their bullets bigger than your head.

The rounds are approximately 1.2 inches in diameter. I don't why I always hear people saying "They're as big as beer bottles!" and the like. Folks need to learn the darn metric system.

This will plough through tanks ^^

GAU-8 Armor penetration:

* 69 mm at 500 meters
* 38 mm at 1000 meters

Frontal armor of a T-90 is something like 600mm.

In short, the Slostin or M134 would be a scalpel (a very sharp scalpel, but a scalpel nonetheless!), whereas something like the GAU-8 would be a sledgehammer. You wouldn't use a sledgehammer to perform heart surgery, would you?

The M134? A scalpel?

Dear God, I never thought I'd hear that. Anything multibarrel with that kind of rate of fire is an incredibly sloppy area-effect weapon, all the more so if you put it on an aircraft.

The GAU-8 is an autocannon, whereas all those others are just high RoF weapons firing rifle and HMG rounds. It practically counts as artillery, in terms of precision and damage.

Never heard of the Solstin, and apparently is was never fielded much. The YakB gun on the Hind is comparable, although just chambered in 12.7mm.
http://kbptula.ru/eng/str/cannons/yakb.htm

Still, you gotta love the Russians and their big guns. Putting 14.5mm HMGs on lowly scout cars so they can threaten any APC on the battlefield, and slapping 30mm autocannons on anything bigger. A lot of really scary glass hammers.

 

[Starke]

(on the semi-joking note) Probably the most deadly and effective weapon is depression.

(seriousness)
My list consists of all Japanese weapons, but to be honest, #1 is most likely the Ninjato. It is the most practical weapon ever created.

By the Japanese, which is to say it is about as versatile as a dead prostitute in Calcutta.

Only some of the uses are, a breathing tube for under water,

Drowning is a known side effect.

attached dart tube, Shuriken on some Tsuba, most had hidden compartments for darts and medicine and poisons,

But no compartment for Shuriken, because those have to be purchased separately.

only one of the reasons it was straight was so it could be suck in the ground and used as a stepping stool,

Once. After that it became a can opener.

and much more.

Accidental castration resulting from using a blade as a stepping stool is not covered under your manufacturers warranty.

The sword itself was deceptively short while the Sheath was rather long.

This was ironically very similar to most of the prestigious individuals who carried them.

This was for several reasons, some of which were that it would catch the enemy off guard,

Not to mention compensating for sword envy.

and also it was much easier to draw because of it's length. There are many other reasons why it is the ultimate weapon.

My father studied Ninjitsu from one of the 8 Ninja that reside in America.

He lived in Louisville Ky, then? or maybe in San Fran, no, wait, I know of a school in Los Angeles, hmm... maybe there are only eight ninjas in the united states, but they have been cloned many many times using ninja magic. Never mock ninja magic. Shh, don't turn around, there's one behind you whenever you mock ninja magic.. NO DON'T LOOK... Oh fuck, well we can always clean that up later I guess.

His Sensei's name was Gabriel from Israel. People only knew Gabriel's first name because he didn't have a last name,

After careful research it turns out his last name was in fact "Stumpy", though I can understand why he'd want to get away from that.

he work in the Israeli special forces and they told him to go to Japan to study Ninjitsu.

While there he was eaten by a dragon, we don't know how he came back from that.

Apparently he's a pretty soft-spoken, nice guy.

Well, that's how you identify the genuine badasses. Nice, soft spoken, and carrying a Chuck Norris in their suitcase.

With help from my father, and some training on my own, I know just a little bit about the Shadow art that is Ninjitsu.

Congratulations. When you know more, you may begin to understand what you do not understand. They're secretly iguanas.

P.S.
Don't confuse my account name with that, my account name is based off my art name and my Fursona.

Well, that's a mental image that will haunt my dreams for a good fifteen seconds.

 

[Elf Defiler Korgan]

*snip*

You clearly seem to have a lot of knowledge about the rapier and its application, how it works, the innovation of the Capo Fero lunge, the disengage, the sheer fucking speed of the thing. Not too much I can add. Armour was not entirely absent when it was used. You still had the buckler and sword combination holding out in England for a while, light brigandine had been worn by nobles concerned for their safery for some time (goes under the puffy outfit) and still lasts into the Renaissance. Pikemen and equipping them with some armour lasted for a while and depends on time and place. Go east and the Ottomans and Arabs still used lamellar, leather, leather-scale for a damn long time. Brigands and highwayman would equip themselves with whatever they could get away with and afford.

The rapier is not a heavy armour puncturer (just go round and find the opening), you would want a pick or a polearm for something like that (bec de corbin perhaps, or spetum or awlpike). Then again the tuck or estoc is a two-handed rapier designed to pierce armour

http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_euroedge.html

I find the Spanish and German basket-hilt rapier designs the most pleasing, combining buckler and sword together, as the epee in fencing illustrates. Course I also find some of the European one-handed falchions quite nice and look to be useful and used more amongst Europeans then we might think, but then again, the Swiss also made two-handed sabres which look a lot like the lauded katana).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falchion
http://bjorn.foxtail.nu/h_conyers_eng.htm
http://www.myarmoury.com/review_lut_10006.html

Did you know, despite a lot of criticism, some cavalry units actually went for rapiers over sabres or cavalry swords? (Cohen 2002). Some generals said it would never work and would break, others insisted it was just fine in the field. Suppose it could be used like a swift light lance in a way.

Thanks for the info. We're in total agreement as for the look of the weapon. Granted, I would much rather have a full buckler in the off hand were I somehow caught up in a sword fight (how the hell would that happen?, but that beautiful ping on the piste when you block with the handguard is very satisfying and drives home the importance of that guard.

Sure, there was some armor in the Renaissance and beyond, and you've done a good job pointing out where and when you could find it. However, as a whole it was going away very quickly, and I'll stand by the generalization "armor was disappearing" while still agreeing with your specifics. That's why I believe the rapier should be on that list; it transformed how individual combat took place at a pivotal moment, and pretty much everything and everyone had to respond to it.

I'm enjoying the articles. Do you happen to have the Cohen article online somewhere?

I'm going to avoid commenting on the katana, since it seems its detractors and fans are already close enough to slapping each other silly.

It is a book by Cohen, By the Sword.

The katana the katana the katana! It is in so many games and films, it has so many fans. We couldn't convince the believers of their error much in the way that you can never convince belivers they are in error. Other weapons have better reach or speed, or the capacity for more damage and different types of damage. The katana does sit on a nice plane of capacities and merits though.

 

[NeutralDrow]

A perfectly valid argument exists that the ICBM and nuclear weapons (whether delivered by submarine, bomber, or missile) are being used all the time - by creating such fear of an attack that conventional warfare between nations which have such weapons has all but disappeared.

...except for, you know, India and Pakistan.

You realize that only nine or ten states have nuclear capability, right? And that the ones who have been in a position to engage in warfare have had no problems finding non-nuclear forces willing to fight against them? The US and Russia never really stopped fighting through the second half of the 20th century, Britain and France sat on their asses (barring NATO), China was too busy destroying itself from the inside-out (during Mao) and encouraging economic growth (post-Mao), and North Korea doesn't know what the hell its doing, anyway.

MAD may have worked during the Cold War, but the main reason stockpiles kept developing post-Cuban Missile Crisis was due to paranoia and industries with vested interests in their construction. Nukes are a security liability today.

#2 - AN602 "Tsar Bomba"
Highest yield nuclear device detonated to date. It had a 2.3km blast radius. I don't mean the shockwave, fallout or anything else there, that's the size of the actual explosion. The total magnitude of destruction would be around 35km. That's just... D=

...pointless, I'm hoping you were going to finish.

Prohibitively expensive and difficult to make, especially compared to a number of smaller nuclear weapons that could accomplish the same thing much more cheaply. And especially since no target existed or exists that was large enough to warrant such force.

 

[MrNickster]

I don't bother with specifics, so here.

Nuclear Bomb
Machine Gun
Grenade
Cannon
Poison
Garrotte Wire
Bow and Arrow/Crossbow
Sword
Spear
Club

 

[Pyro Paul]

list is forgetting:
the Maxim Machine Gun. changed War And Guns forever. no longer would armies stand opposed of each other several hundred yards apart and take pot shots at one another nor advance on a foe when one of these where deployed.

Except, it was the Breech Loading Rifle that was the reason armies no longer stood opposite each other. Go read my post on page four and it explains why, then read my other post on page nine for a list of sources.

the standard line combat tactics where starting to crumble with the advent of the breech loading rifle but that does not mean that it disappeared. infact, in most conflicts the usage of the infantry colomn still existed, it is just the over all distance between my line and your line grew farther apart.

it also further increased the effectiveness and over all usage of Calvary and Artillery for given situations as well as the usage of defencive positions and cover. however you look at it though, you could still look at enemy troops and they could still look at you.

the Maxim Machine gun out and out removed the Line Combat mentality all together as well as calvary. with the volume of fire put out by just one of these troops no longer stuck their heads out to look at the enemy. what evolved was Trench Warfare as either side simply dug defencisve positions and in some cases never acctually saw each other through out the entire engagement.

 

[Starke]

3. Peacemaker. Had the best accuarcy, range and damage for it's time and still a base for most revolvers today.

I'm not certain about the claim to best accuracy, range and damage. What I am certain of is that the Peacemaker has some of the most comfortable ergonomics I've ever felt in a handgun. It biases towards a single hand stance, that is quite frankly bizarre for a modern shooter, but within it's intended stance it is remarkably natural to fire. This in turn makes it extremely easy to aim accurately, and a true joy to fire. That said, the .45 long they were originally chambered for is still a very respectable round, and anymore they make peacemakers chambered for .357 and .44.

 

[Daverson]

#2 - AN602 "Tsar Bomba"
Highest yield nuclear device detonated to date. It had a 2.3km blast radius. I don't mean the shockwave, fallout or anything else there, that's the size of the actual explosion. The total magnitude of destruction would be around 35km. That's just... D=

...pointless, I'm hoping you were going to finish.

Prohibitively expensive and difficult to make, especially compared to a number of smaller nuclear weapons that could accomplish the same thing much more cheaply. And especially since no target existed or exists that was large enough to warrant such force.

In all seriousness though, MIRVs are great and all, but... I mean, let's say you were given the choice between 3 big Christmas chocolates, or the biggest Christmas chocolate ever made by mankind. Even if there more in the former, the latter is still the biggest!

Besides, MIRVs are much more expensive. They need much more material and a hell of a lot bigger rocket. Never mind the advanced onboard systems for such a device.

(Of course, you're arguing from a "we don't need nukes!" standpoint. But let me tell you, when the Aliens come and enslave you, because you're an easy target, you'll be thinking different!)

 

[7moreDead_v1legacy]

No mention of the humble spear?

It's easy to make and has defensive and offensive applications...I would honestly put it in the top 3 in my list.

 

[C95J]

I myself would have put the AK at number 1 switching places with the Katana, maybe removed 1 or 2 from the list and replaced them but overall it's a good, well thought of list.

I might take the time to make my own list later if I can be arsed...