Are they feasible? Obviously not at the size depicted in souls games, but if you made them a more reasonable size, would they make for a decent weapon?
>is this size sword feasible? obviously not this size, but a different size?
>>29552804
Wasn't talking about the size. I meant more the style of sword. Like, is it useful to have a curved sword be that big? Or would it just be better to have something like a sabre or a falchion?
>>29552856
Way better to have a falchion. I mean, a curved greatsword is just as feasible as a straight one. The curved one would have a better cutting effect thanks to the smaller surface area initially contacting the target.
That being said, two-handed swords are great in the hands of skilled soldiers. Handing one to the common man, like you or I, would do us a disservice. We'd be open a lot on the battlefield.
I'd want a falchion, sabre, yatagan, kopis, or sickle-sword over a claymore, zwei-haender, curved greatsword, or even a falx. I would have a free hand to either wield a shield or use freely to better counter my opponent.
Using a curved sword of that length would also making half-swording more difficult... I think. Not going to say definitively here but I feel that the curved nature of the sword would make this style of fighting harder. It'd be unusable or have to be changed to adapt to the curved sword
>>29553009
in that webm, isnt he just using that "sword" like a staff? whats he point that theyre trying to illustrate?
>>29553031
he could have pretty easily sliced his throat open in the first 5 seconds of the demonstration
>>29553031
yes, that style of fighting is called "half-swording". It's interesting, but turning into a bit of a meme thanks to Ubisoft using it in one of their upcoming games.
He's illustrating that it can be used effectively in combat. Using two-handed swords does not mean you have to hold it like a baseball bat
>>29553081
here is an image from a fighting manual, their art styles always make me giggle. The artists sure did try but they never seem to emerge above a middle school level
>>29553031
that dull swords wont cut off his fingers, and half-sword is only useful for racking up points in HEMA or ENEMA or whatever the fuck they call that.
>>29553122
Halfswording with a sharp sword won't cut you, video related.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwuQPfvSSlo
It was used historically when going up against a fully armored opponent. It was used to get a better grasp on the aiming of the point to get into the chinks in the armor since you can't just bash against armor with a sword.
>>29553242
You're supposed to throw the pommel at him and end him rightly
>>29553094
During that point in time the execution of the image didn't really matter if it got the point across. It's more about substance than accuracy.
>>29553276
I reserve that for righteous opponents (anyone besides the French)
>>29553299
Good answer
>dubs confirms
>>29552774
Dark Souls weapons are generally oversized by a factor of roughly 1.5.
However, primarily two-handed curved swords existed. Katana for example, or war knives.
>>29552774
maybe if it were curved the other way
The way it's curved like that would make you over extend your wrists before you put any force on target
>>29553242
the idea is that swords typically weren't that sharp
Go brab a modern knife and bash with it and see what happens
>>29555785
>>29555792
Swords were sharp enough - and there's plenty of evidence of it - both in terms of depictions and descriptions as well as in archaeological findings on battlefields. However, you should consider that swords don't just cut with sharpness alone, but also with momentum and edge geometry. If you gave a sword the edge of a knife, it wouldn't survive for long since it would immediately chip away and you couldn't cut with it any more. The edge of a sword is more "robust" and won't cut you from merely touching it. Though most people who went to war would have likely worn gloves or gauntlets.
>>29555791
Save your wrists and cut further with your arms instead.
>>29552856
>Wasn't talking about the size.
>is it useful to have a curved sword be that big?
uwot
>>29552774
>>29552856
Curved two-handed swords did exist and were used. There's the japanese odachi, some medieval european two-handred sabres or "kriegsmesser" and the Changdao and Zhanmadao from china.
Only in china do they seem to have gotten much use, while they were more of an oddity in europe and japan. They were apparently meant to cut horse legs in an anti-cavalry role, while westerners used greatswords for some kind of melee-shock role.
Logically, for small scale or one-on-one combat, you would only use a greatsword (and forgo a shield) if you're heavily armored, and then only use a curved one if your enemy is very certainly not so heavily armored. For large organised formations, this may be different - possibly the reason they found use in china and europe saw such weapons emerging with the landsknecht's kriegsmesser, but no earlier.
>>29555792
>the idea is that swords typically weren't that sharp
this is wrong and you are retarded for thinking that
>>29555792
You dense piece of shit. I going to guess you have never tried to use a real fucking sword. Its a tool for cutting flesh you moron
>>29555801
I acknowledge that swords weren't that sharp but you'd better not be fighting Talhoffer without thick leather gloves
>>29556133
Of course. I didn't say that swords weren't sharp, on the contrary. I merely said that there's a difference in sharpness between a sword and a knife - or a scalpel or razor for that matter. The latter being "sharper" but also a lot more fragile, while swords had a reasonable degree of sharpness while still being resilient enough to deal with the stresses of impact.
>>29555792
Kill yourself. Swords were usually not sharpened up to the guard but only ~1/3 to 1/2 because you want to cut with the percussion point. On top of that you should try using a mail gauntlet.
>but not everyone wore gloves
And nobody would halfsword or grab a knife.
As long as you have a decent purchase on the blade and aren´t gripping the tip you are fine.
>>29552774
Straight Great swords are for adding weight to bash an armored enemy
Curved are for cutting large unarmored targets, mainly horses
>>29556172
Montantes were also used for crowd control actually. Some of the texts that describe specific techniques for them are about how 4-5 members of the town guards can keep a mob in check with them because no one will be stupid enough to get close to them.
>>29556172
>Straight Great swords are for adding weight to bash an armored enemy
This is a misconception.
First of all: swords are not made for bashing. They are light weapons. Especially most straight swords, since they are tapered, i.e. they get thinner towards the point, making them particularly bad at this. Most curved swords would be a lot better for this, since they're more top-heavy. Against armour, you want to use the acute, central point of a straight sword to thrust it into the gaps where the armour doesn't cover. Bashing a sword against armour does very little. You can see it in re-enactment or Battle of the Nations type competition. They bash each other all the time there to very little effect.
>>29555792
>>29555801
>>29556133
>>29556142
Seriously guys, 10 seconds of research.
http://talhoffer.blogspot.com/2011/05/how-sharp-were-medieval-swords.html
>>29556214
He claims people fought war without gloves, and that it's fine to do all these maneuvers with kitchen knife sharpness, so he's not very convincing here.
>>29556207
>greatswords
>posts a longsword
A greatsword weighs usually twice as much with 2-3kg and at least long enough to reach the wielder axel cave from the ground it sure as hell would knock you out if someone were to smack against your helmet with one of those.
>>29555792
I tried with my esee-6 which is sharp as all hell and I could bash as hard as I could
>>29556317
I still don't buy into the "bashing" idea. If you want to bash someone over the head you don't need a sword but there are polearms that do a better job. And looking at Scandinavian greatswords it's pretty obvious that these were thrusting weapons more than they were cutting weapons.
>>29556492
A sword is a long sharp metal pole, a greatsword is a really long and heavy metal pole. Whacking people in the head with metal poles tend to hurt.
I think in OP's context of greatswords, curved ones probably wouldn't fare any worse than straight blades for thwacking things. It could be used more like an axe if it were DaS sized.
>>29556546
>a greatsword is a really long and heavy metal pole
Not exactly. A pole has a uniform distribution of weight over its length. A sword generally does not. They get lighter towards the top. that in-itself makes them not very good at "whacking" things. They're more for cutting things and stabbing things.
HEMAfag here, have handled swords including both sharp replicas and blunt training swords.
Swords aren't for bashing. That's what maces, clubs, poleaxes, etc. are for.
Swords are cutting weapons. They are sharp. Trying to say they are more or less sharp than a kitchen knife or scalpel or razor is meaningless since they have different edge geometry and there's no one single way to measure sharpness. But they are sharp enough to cut off limbs, heads, to slice into people's arms if you press against them and push or pull.
Halfswording is a well-established method of using a Longsword to kill someone wearing armor. Cutting at him is going to be pretty much useless, so you need to use your sword like a short spear and use it to grapple, use leverage, and get the point in the gaps.
>>29556546
if you want any kind of force behind it this is a better way to go
getting hit in the head with a sword while in full plate isn't a huge deal, blows tend to glance off before actually transferring much of their force into a target
that's why maces where invented m8
>>29555785
>>29555793
>dem kriegsmessers
>>29553298
Seems like a revisionist excuse for being shit.
>>29556492
>obvious that these were thrusting weapons more than they were cutting weapons
Fighting manuals for greatswords primarily show cutting.
http://www.thearma.org/manuals.htm
But halfswording quite literally allows it to be used as a polearm.
Beeing a jack of all traits was likely the reason that greatswords were popular among mercenaries and even forbidden be some swiss brigades who insisted their members use pikes putting an emphasis on formation over individual flexibility.
>>29557429
To be fair they were fighting instructors and not painters.
>>29557557
Fair enough in that specific case, though all art from that period/culture is pretty shit. They really had a young child's understanding of perspective.
>>29557557
>all art from that period/culture is pretty shit
>>29557529
>Beeing a jack of all traits was likely the reason that greatswords were popular among mercenaries and even forbidden be some swiss brigades who insisted their members use pikes putting an emphasis on formation over individual flexibility.
Spears
BTFO
T
F
O
(Big) swords were so good that experienced fighting men were dropping sharp sticks for swords.
How can polearms ever recover?
>>29557529
They started using pikes because it turned out their halberd-heavy army constitution wasn't effective against cavalry charges. Halberds turned out to be better in any case. Greatswords were outlawed among the Swiss because they were shit.
>>29559449
>Greatswords were outlawed among the Swiss because they were shit.
pic related
>>29559358
Pikes are pretty gud tho and better in formations than greatswords.
>>29559587
They dropped their greatswords for halberds.
Therefore halberd>greatsword
weight gives the weapon more damage potential, but makes it harder to use. Momentum also plays a role in swinging attacks. This means it makes the most sense to have the weight closer to business end of the weapon.
Consider the modern golf club driver, the shaft is as light as possible to put as much of the weight into the head of the club to accelerate the mass and impart as much force as possible into the ball. It is for this reason giant swords are crazypants when polearms exist
>>29559879
How did they end up solving their problems with cavalry once they came full circle?
>>29552774
Best answer is this>>29555954
Two-handed curved blades are fairly uncommon, because as far as big choppers go, you'd better get a halberd or a glaive, as it's easier to make and have greater range and scope of use, all the nation that used some of those big curved two-handers (China, Japan, Germany, etc...) also used halberd-like weapons (Guandao, Naginata were fairly popular weapons during the asian middle-ages), so basically, curved greatswords are kind of a solution that's looking for a problem.
It's a great way to make a formidable cutting and slashing weapon in a more compact format than a dedicated cutting polearm, but why would you except for very specific guard roles for instance ?
It's definitely doable and done, but it kinda lacks purpose, just like any greatsword really. They were used, but even in Europe, they weren't that popular compared to polearms and less bigger swords.
Nonetheless... During the 1930's, China had dedicated "big-sword unit" armed with a sword called the dadao which was, perhaps not exactly a greatsword, but still a two-handed curved sword. It apparently had a revival as a form of "all-around compact weapon" that still had quite a good potential and could definitely ruin someone's day in a single dedicated cut.
