Was anyone using warhammer as his main weapon? Why bother with swords if warhammers were easier to fuck up an armored opponent with? Why are they so underrated?
Why use a mace over them?
>>1298877
>Use mace
>Blunt force fucking everyone
>No worries about it getting stuck
>Use warhammer
>Smaller area to blunt force fuck someone
>Use spike get stuck
People have been bashing skulls since the beginning, Maces rule
>>1298894
That spike was very useful in penetrating armor besides warhammer still has the blunt part for bashing dumb fucking nigger loving homo.
>>1298894
>mfw this mace meme wont die
>>1298894
Most maces are incredibly short, warhammers are often a bit longer.
Its almost like theres no weapon perfect for every situation
>>1298964
For example axes suck all the time.
>>1298982
Not Dane Axes.
>>1298908
Spikes get stuck, and it has a smaller area for bashing, Now learn reading comprehension and come back
Maces 2 - Faggot hammer 0
>>1298877
Swords are, with rare exception, a side-arm. They're the pistols of the middle ages. Good all-around as they can cut and thrust, can be used with one hand or two, and are very responsive to movements. While there are obviously swords that are nothing like I've described (montante/zweihander, machete, etc.), they're either rare, for a specific use-case scenario, or both.
Maces are great weapons against kuhniggets and anyone with armor, but the hammer has its charms. Namely the charm of being a breaching weapon. Using an ax on a reinforced door is acceptable, but smashing it in with a hammer is better. Hammers also, usually, have the benefit of being able to hook people like an ax can.
>>1298994
>it has a smaller area for bashing
So, you mean, equal or greater force concentrated into a smaller surface area? As in, it's more effective at doing the same job which is to kill an armored faggot by crushing him in his own armor?
Yeah, definitely a +1 for maces there, all right.
Real talk, though, the smaller target area would definitely be a concern in landing blows, but the payoff would be worth it.
Because it's slow and clumsy as fuck, and generally when you're trying to kill someone they are trying rather hard to stop you by killing you first.
>>1298877
these types of things where most common on the battlefield
swords, maces, warhammers etc where sidearms or cavalry weapons
>>1298982
unless its on a pole
>>1298988
axe is axe moron.Dane axes is not something unique
>>1299189
No Dane Axes have a longer haft and are bearded.
>>1298877
Fun fact. Holding a sword by the blade will not cut your hand. If you flip it, it's a warhammer.
>>1299263
>holding sword by blade won't cut your hand
Unless it moves, in which case it will cut flesh.
>if you flip it, it's a warhammer
Crowbar would be a more accurate for how you use the pommel & guard of a sword in combat.
>>1299092
To be fair, most soldier on a battlefield are peasant mooks armed with the cheapish shit their lieges were willing & able to provide. That isn't to say that a pike-block or other spear formation isn't formidable, but let's not pretend that European armies wouldn't have run 100% heavy cavalry armies if they could have.
>>1299299
> Crowbar would be more accurate for how you use the pommel & guard of a sword in combat
> Not unscrewing your pommel to throw
Knave
>>1299308
One should only end an opponent rightly when the situation calls for it; 'tis the equivalent of striking the foe with an RPG and teabagging upon their freshly ownt corpse.
>>1298877
Charles Martel, grandfather of Charlemagne, was known for his warhammer and driving the Arabs out of Spain
Source: his name
>>1299350
Doesn't mean he ever actually used it.
>>1299299
>most soldier on a battlefield are peasant mooks armed with the cheapish shit their lieges were willing & able to provide
This is a meme. It's true of some time periods but not others.
Besides, it's in a lord's best interest for his soldiers to be equipped as best as they possibly can be.
>>1299350
>>1299358
"The Hammer" is a referenced to Judas Macabeus, as is Edward I of the England's title "Malleus Scottorum"
>>1299359
Depends on the conflict as well as the period. In small-scale Feudal conflicts, I'd expect a greater levy of the peasants than when the great lords with their many retainers engaged in wars. Furthermore, a great many battles are peasant revolts and peasant-backed revolts of minor nobles. The Battle of the Golden Spurs (aka, Courtrai) comes to mind.
>>1298894
>use hammer bit to knock him down
>use spike bit to penetrate his skull
>>1298988
Dane Axes are even more unusable.
What're you going to do when the enemy closes with you?
>>1299439
You've got that backwards.
>use spike to pull his leg out from under him
>use hammer-end to collapse his faceplate into his face.
>People on this board will spend hours calling each other faggots about how effective a certain medievival weapon really was
What is a main weapon?
During the late medieval period where you'd actually need a warhammer, it would be one of maybe 2 or even 3 weapons you are carrying.
>>1299299
>To be fair, most soldier on a battlefield are peasant mooks armed with the cheapish shit their lieges were willing & able to provide.
Wow please educate yourself. Through basically all history this hasn't been the case. Only at select medieval periods did this happen and it still wasn't the norm.
