Does anyone feel like gunpowder literally ruined combat? I mean, any retard can shoot a gun. Apart from "Chris Kyle", there are no famous "warriors" anymore. And he's just some sniper who shoots civilians.
Imagine if we still used swords. I'd be able to master my craft and be one of the best. Combat would be up close and personal, not fought with a playstation like in 2015 (muh drones).
What does /k/ think about this?
i think romanticizing war is for idiots.
>>28029381
No, it only ruined your romanticized notion of combat.
As a less than stellar physical specimen, I'd rather have a gun than a sharpened hunk of metal that I would require me to get up close and personal with someone in order to kill them.
>>28029381
You've been watching "Into The Badlands", haven't you.
>>28029381
Does anyone feel like steel ruined combat? I mean, any retard can swing a sword. Imagine if we still used our fists.
>>28029400
this
>>28029381
White death
Audie murphey
Marcus luttrell
Every single seal, ranger, green beret, marsoc, delta, devgru, and all the foreign spec ops forces are famous warriors.
Guns made combat better. With swords, it was not dueling, and skill, it was getting in a line and running into the enemy trying to push them over. It was shitty, a single man could get 20-30 kills in a lifetime, max
The white death got like 500, kyle got like 200, and every single seal gets like 100.
>>28029400
Back to Reddit.
>>28029407
>sharpened hunk of metal
Swords are superior to firearms, aesthetically speaking. They'd require you to get up close and personal but you'd be able to outskill them.
Literally a 9 year old ISIS militant could get lucky enough and kill you.
>>28029400
Only idiots are anti-war.
>>28029423
>Every single seal, ranger, green beret, marsoc, delta, devgru, and all the foreign spec ops forces are famous warriors.
>spec ops are famous warriors
>famous
>>28029426
Some Gallic peasent could sling a rock at you and you die.
>>28029381
Honestly, warriors were only known in small circles back then and now.
It's us that can name people like Vining, but can YOU name a famous swordsman who was exclusively a soldier without googling?
Any retard can swing the sword too, but can it be effective? Same with firearms. Studies show that only 11% of police-fired shots at distance of 100m land. Go ahead and improve on that number. Learn to guess ricochets so you can skip shots under cover or against the walls, take up marksmanship and shoot things from kilometers away.
And honestly, if you can't master gunfighting while saying any retard can use it, you'll hardly become the "master" of your swordcraft.
>>28029432
Kyle and luttrell appeared on talk shows. Flash the trident and people will bow down and suck you off
>>28029381
I highly doubt you can even come close to matching my ability with a firearm. It's taken me a decade of training with tend of thousands or rounds and thousands upon thousands of dollars to get me to where I am.
>>28029426
Then you should put more points into luck.
Go outside and stop being a faggot.
>>28029434
This literally could not happen since I'd be wearing armour.
>>28029400
When did Reddit start coming here? I thought they hated guns.
>>28029381
I think you have no clue how horrible pre-gunpowder combat was.
I think you're romanticising the entire "warrior" idea, when the reality is not even remotely romantic.
I very much doubt you would "master your craft" - and that tells me that you're something of a sad figure, intelligent enough to realise that in the scope of the world, you're a nobody, but not intelligent enough to realise that virtually everyone is in fact, no-body. Your concern with being respected has made you start to imagine that, in this romanticised notion of a sword-based warfare, you would somehow transcend your current state, and attain the respect and recognition you desperately crave.
Which is pretty sad.
the reality is, pre-gunpowder combat was seconds of lethal conflict resulting in horrific injury, maiming, men screaming as their guts fell out, and worse, no different to modern war, only even more up-close and even more liable to go horribly wrong at any split second for you.
>>28029452
some Gallic peasant runs up to you and crushes your skull in with a mace.
>>28029449
>I highly doubt you can even come close to matching my ability with a firearm.
>It's taken me a decade of training with tend of thousands or rounds and thousands upon thousands of dollars to get me to where I am.
>>28029449
You can buy a $100 sword and just put your own food acquired energy in it, and be just as good as your ass up close and personal with your thousands of dollars wasted.
>>28029426
Aesthetic is a matter of opinion, and a 9 year can get a lucky stab in too. Firearms have just as many skill sets to train as swords.
>>28029400
>>28029407
This.
It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it.
>>28029431
>Only idiots are anti-war.
Only idiots who have never fought in war are pro-war.
>>28029472
>You run at him with your chinese-knock off sword
>He draws faster than you can run 10 meters and point-shoots you straight in the dick
Damn son, who knew ranged weaponry could strike people before they reached them!
>>28029483
And yet history is full of those who grew fond on war.
>>28029487
>"Every military man loves war. The ones who claim they don’t are liars. Either that, or they should be chucked the hell out, sacked without pay, because they’re really only civilians in disguise, like post office clerks. " - Jean Raspail
DUELING IS BULLSHIT
IT IS NOT SKILL
IT IS F=ma
YOU GET IN A LINE, RUN AT THE ENEMY, AND BREAK THEIR LINE
SKILL DOES NOT MATTER
REAL LIFE IS NOT FUCKING GAME OF THRONES.
The only way to be a special unit in the past was to own armor and horses, which was the cost of several villages, or millions of modern day dollars. Skill was irrelevant.
Today, skill is the most important thing in combat. Delta is armed more or less the same as marines, but delta is a hundred times more effective.
OP is a tard. In the past, all that matted was how much you weighed, and how fast you can run. It was literally football. Skill did not matter. Only today does skill matter
>>28029381
>I'd be able to master my craft and be one of the best.
Yeah. Sure you would.
>>28029423
>every single seal gets like 100
And people say the SEALS don't have an over-inflated reputation.
>>28029417
>>28029472
I would much rather take a pistol at close range. When you swing I'd step in right up on you, try to grab your hands if possible (or your blade as close to the hilt as I can if not,) and start mag dumping into your gut. My hand would get fucked up, but I'd live.
>>28029499
they get way more than 100. Look it up.
But rangers get more total, and less per person.
Even marines get like 30 in the space of 5 years
>>28029452
>Of course I'm a wealthy land owner and not one of the literal hundreds of thousands of peasants
You really know nothing of war, present or past.
>>28029381
you have a much better venue in the modern world. if you can master the craft of basketball, racing, football, baseball, or soccer you can be rich and famous. loved by millions (of third worlders in the case of soccer), and respected, with very little risk.
>>28029381
>gunpowder ruined combat
eh
>>28029381
Really? Carlos Hathcock, Audie Murphy, and Lauri Törni aren't famous? Plenty of military become famous
>>28029494
>quoting Jean Raspail
Yeah the French version of Glenn Beck is such a hardcore warrior, and expert on all things military.
Were you trying to intentionally mislead people, or were you just hoping noone would know who he was?
>>28029417
>What is iron
>What is bronze
>What is stone
>What is anything that can be sharpened and put on a stick
>>28029381
Swords are literally meme weapons
>>28029536
Not really the point of my post.
Does anyone else think rocks ruined combat? I think we should go back to just using sticks.
/k/: where any and all bait will be taken without hesitation
>>28029532
trolled softly :^)
>>28029536
fucking stickfags, they ruined chivalry.
I remember when I was the best rock smasher, I was known by over 20 people. Now with sticks, anybody can fight
Carlos Hathcock > Chris Kyle
>>28029497
Spotted the retard
>>28029452
>Armor makes you literally invulnerable
>Nobody has ever died while wearing armor
>>28029572
oh yeah, im a retard for wanting historical accuracy, fuck all that shit, real life is game of thrones. Any peasent can just find a sword and be a great warrior, and in combat eveybody splits off and duels like in the movies.
No. Just no. Ask any military historian.
>>28029483
If it weren't terrible there would be nothing wrong with growing fond of it.
>>28029381
As someone who actually has learned to use three different kinds of swords (classical two handed, saber, and foil) and also shoots, I'd take a gun any day. I mean, there's a fucking reason why we stopped using swords and went to firearms. Swordsmanship takes an absurdly long time to understand and train with just to be effective by comparison. That's why it was mostly nobles that were these "famous swordsmen" you seem to have a fetish for.
tl;dr just take off the goddamn fedora and quit whining you'd never win a fight with modern weapons
>>28029697
as someone who;s done a whole metric fucktonne of HEMA, I can second that.
>>28029381
Swordfighting was the drones of its day you elitist fuck
>>28029381
The only thing you'd master is dying young and clumsily.
Well first off, you'd be fighting with a spear not a sword. Reasons being that you're an uneducated and untrained peasant who would be far better suited to a stick with a pointy end than a sword which isn't a great weapon to begin with and you probably don't know how to use.
Now get in line with the rest of the spearmen and try to poke that guy before he and his buddies poke too many holes in you.
>>28029407
hell, even as an above average physical specimen, I'd still take the gun. Because fuck wrestling with knives.
>>28029381
You're an idiot. Look up how melee fights actually went when they weren't "1v1 me bro ill rekt you" bullshit. They were literally masses of dudes pressed together too close for any meaningful footwork. The front ranks would trade blows to the head with hand weapons, and the rear ranks would stab with longer weapons. It was shit that no amount of skill or experience could practically save you from. Veterans were lucky, not super skilled. Almost like, gee I dunno, today.
>>28029417
Does anyone feel like fists ruined combat? I mean, any retard can throw a punch. Imagine if we used our words.
>>28029381
Plenty of folk all around the world are hacking each other up with machetes as we speak, go join them and master your art
>>28029801
fucking liberals
>>28029426
>Swords are superior to firearms
>aesthetically speaking.
Who in the living fuck cares about aesthetics when you're comparing swords to something that can kill more effectively by eclipsing margins?
>>28029381
>he's just some sniper who shoots civilians
lmao you're a kek.
Anyone else feel sex toys ruined sex?
Guns are the equalizer.
With a melds weapon, it's typically the biggest brute that wins. If it wasn't guns, you'd be whining about crossbows. Then long bows. Then slings.
Even then, you'd be whining about the guy who slips into your camp at night an kills your commander as he sleeps. Because "no fair."
The sword wasn't even the primary weapon back then. It was a sidearm. The spear was king of the ancient battlefield.
Learn your place as a dumb brute. Now shut up and take that hill, meathead. Maybe you'll get lucky and the enemy will plunge a bayonet in your belly.
>>28029529
>this
>>28029381
classic day/k/are
Even when swords were a common weapon to bring to combat they were still outdated and being made obsolete by more long range weapons like the fucking bow and arrow
consider the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt
>>28029801
I feel like becoming multicellular was worse. Back in the old days you'd just engulf and consume your opponent whole using your membrane and digest them with enzymes. Like a man.
listen, no one really likes swords
Imagine being in the most intense blackfriday crowd ever.
There is no room to move, and the 30 rows of people behind you are all pushing you into the person infront of you.
Now...imagine everyone is holding pikes/spears pointed foward.
Imagine you are outside in +90f temperature.
Imagine you are pushing against a opposing "black friday mob" (and they are pusing agains you). The crowd moves slowly, sometimes. The pikes pierce people equally slowly. As the rows infront of you die off, you begin desperately poking around trying to find openings.
No matter how many people you stab, eventually you are close enough to the front line to be stabbed.
You do your best to avoid being skewered, but there is a pike at chest level. It inches through your bronze armor with the weight of thousands behind it.
Just a pierced lung, still alive.
You get stabbed couple dozen more timed until your strength wears out.
You fall to the ground alive, your own men step on your body until you are trampled to death underfoot.
This is what being in a phalanx was actually like....not the nonsense from 300.
>>28030226
You die a nameless, faceless, childless soldier whose bloodline is lost to the dirt.
Compare this to now...where everyone is immortalized in some way through pictures, video, records, etc.
>>28029381
Even when swords were common, spears, lances, and ranged weapons ruled the battlefield. Swords were status symbols and sidearms with only a few prominent exceptions (Roman legions being the big one). Even Rome used other, more flexible tactics and weapons when available.
Even then, battle was never a romantic contest of skill against skill. See >>28030226
What you're thinking of (and what your pic shows) would be duels. Duels between nobles using a weapon chosen because it is a status symbol, not because it's effective. Now, if you want to bring back duels as a legal means to resolve conflicts, that's one thing: it would raise the price of being an asshole or a liar. Even then, pistol duels would probably be the better choice (and historically, many pistol duels ended in a draw as both parties fired a single shot and deliberately missed).
But if you think guns ruined war, you need to read up on old wars.
>>28029381
90% of all old battles where just one-sided massacres.
There was no thing like fairness you autist.
Try to win any teamsport being two people off and you know what being outnumbered means.
>>28030226
Should have just told him about Cannae.
Fuck ancient combat.
>>28030460
beat me to it
>When the Carthaginian cavalry attacked the Romans in the rear and the African flanking echelons assailed them on their right and left, the advance of the Roman infantry was brought to an abrupt halt. The Romans were enclosed in a pocket with no means of escape. The Carthaginians created a wall and began destroying them. Polybius wrote, "as their outer ranks were continually cut down, and the survivors forced to pull back and huddle together, they were finally all killed where they stood."
>As Livy described, "So many thousands of Romans were dying... Some, whom their wounds, pinched by the morning cold, had roused, as they were rising up, covered with blood, from the midst of the heaps of slain, were overpowered by the enemy. Some were found with their heads plunged into the earth, which they had excavated; having thus, as it appeared, made pits for themselves, and having suffocated themselves." Cowley claims that nearly six hundred legionaries were slaughtered each minute until darkness brought an end to the bloodletting. Only 14,000 Roman troops managed to escape, most of whom had cut their way through to the nearby town of Canusium.
>>28029381
>implying individual skill matters when warfare is based around sieges and mass formations poking each other with spears
Gun powder only ruined the Jihad
>inb4 Hello Akmed
Jihad was about killing with swords and spears not guns and bombs. Taking as many infidels as possible with blade was honorable not blowing them up.
>>28029801
Jhon Lennon pls go and stay go.
>>28029400
>>28029452
Some English peasant could shoot an arrow at you and you die.
Some peasant could pick up a gun and shoot you and you die.
>>28029523
What the fuck are you on about, you mongoloid? I'm talking about TODAY.
>>28029468
>>28030799
Literally couldn't happen because of my skill.
>>28030888
>I'm talking about TODAY
Oh ok, then you get shot
>>28030772
I came I keked I fell in love
Thank you
>>28029381
Your a goddamn idiot
Not everyone could master swordsmanship and you would more than likely be a peasant armed with a shitty pike or short sword and old as fuck leather armour. Waiting to be fed to archers and cavalry.
Sure sounds romantic
OP is moron
>>28029426
back to the rock you live under
>>28030888
> Literally couldn't happen because of my skill.
how good are you at dodging speeding cars, m'lord
/k/ are atheists better at fighting?
I think the idea of a God or Deity naturally comes with a moral code. The French, who were very much religious in world war 2, were not ready to fight dirty in order to expel the Germans. Their religious leadership was also not ready to sacrifice the country. Hitler, who was an atheist, was ready to sacrifice his whole country on the gamble that defeated France.
Meanwhile, the Soviet Union was initially doing terribly, and I think it's because whilst the leadership was atheist, the troops were very much peasants that held onto their religion. However, as the meat grinder went on, those who survived quickly lost their faith and those who arrived new were whipped out of believing in God by atheist units formed by the atheist Bolsheviks, such as the SMERSH, and the Germans were overturned.
Does believing in God make a soldier not as good? Would atheist countries always risk more to win wars due to not having the same moral qualms?
>>28031052
Hitler was religious and the Soviets were shit at war.
>>28031052
Not all religions come with moral codes. I'm deist, my morals are 100% unrelated to my religion.
>>28029381
>implying you'd get to use a sword
>implying you wouldn't just be one of these poor bastards
>>28031052
>Meanwhile, the Soviet Union was initially doing terribly, and I think it's because whilst the leadership was atheist, the troops were very much peasants that held onto their religion. However, as the meat grinder went on, those who survived quickly lost their faith and those who arrived new were whipped out of believing in God by atheist units formed by the atheist Bolsheviks, such as the SMERSH, and the Germans were overturned.
what
no they initially did terrible because the soviet union murdered the fuck out of all the experienced officers out of paranoia and field experience was required for new leaders to arise.
morals do not interfere with battle proficiency, because during combat itself there is no such thing as choice.
OP
YOUR PERFECT EXCALIBUR
http://youtu.be/f5rwrUhihEI
>>28029381
I hope you aren't trolling. You're so pathetic it is funny either way, but it's even better if you actually think that way.
>>28029381
>Apart from "Chris Kyle"
Carlos Hathcock
Chuck Mawhinney (this fucking dude)
Simo Hayha
After that, it does kind of thin out considerably quick.
For the modern era where Chris Kyle hails from, we get frontline commanders that get notoriety like Motorola, Givi, and Issam Zahreddine in Ukraine and Syria.
That said, if we still used swords, combat would be a complete numbers game. Even if you were a "master" you will get tired, and a shitty conscript bum can kill you when you can't swing your sword anymore.
Even the guy in your picture got captured after butchering 11 people on his way to the enemy commander once his forces were surrounded in battle.
>>28029557
It is our moral obligation to take any and all bait in order to protect the other boards from faggots like OP.
>>28029470
kek
>>28031034
Don't you know? If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge pretty much anything. So using this knowledge we can figure out that OP is a master at dodging everything that flies towards his face except dicks.
>>28029381
There are still famous shooters, you dumb yank.
I'm pretty sure Medieval combat was just as gritty and horrifying as is is today.
A common way to kill a knight was to simply knock him over, open his visor, and stab him repeatedly in the eye sockets.
Hell, a ton of french knights drowned in the mud during the battle of Agincourt. Imagine being stuck by arrows and trapped under the mass of an advancing army.
>>28029497
> Sports don't require skill
You are a fucking idiot. Plus to you obviously don't know shit about warfare.
>>28029381
>Does anyone feel like gunpowder literally ruined combat?
Ruined war, perhaps. Not combat.
>I'd be able to master my craft and be one of the best.
You can still do this. The problem is war has changed. You would have to find some battle fought on a personal level. Your only options there are criminal or top tier special forces bullshit.
Yes.
>tfw 6'5 and can wield a heavy sword
>tfw 6'5 and nothing more than a big target for bullets
Gun powder is a manlets best friend.
>>28029381
Romanticizing combat is stupid.
War with swords wasnt any more noble than war with gunfire.
You think it was like on kingdom of heaven or 300 where the secong a guy gets stabbed or sliced he just goes "ARRRRGH" and falls down dead?
Fuck no, he writhed and bled in the mud with hundreds of his comrades being kicked and trampled, then you got left there until the battlefield scavengers came along to slit your throat with a dull knife or beat you to death with a rock.
Or you survived long enough to fester and die from gangrene days or weeks later.
The idea that it was two noble warriors is bullshit too. They used to kick eachother in the balls, claw eyes, headbutt, bite, pretend to surrender and beg right of ransom just to slip a shank under thier opponents armpit.
The idea that noble warriors honed thier swordcraft to perfection is as false as the idea that gunfighters in the west had to rely on thier quickdraw for when they stood 20 paces apart at noon and didnt just shoot eachother in the backs or turn eachother in to be hung whenever possible.
Killin is killin.
>>28029381
Do you not think modern infantry combat doesnt take skill?
>>28031758
>tfw 6'7" and "SPC ANON CONGRATS YOU'RE MY SAW GUNNER"
>tfw you try to go airborne just to drop down to 6'4"
>>28031972
>Do you not think modern infantry combat doesnt take skill?
Nice fucking sentence mate.
>Do you think modern infantry combat takes skill?
No.
>>28031594
War never changes though.
>>28029449
This, any idiot can swing a sword.
>>28031952
This is the realest shit I've ever read.
>>28029381
>any retard can shoot a gun
any retard can swing a sword too
>Imagine if we still used swords. I'd be able to master my craft and be one of the best
Imagine if we all trained with rifles. We'd be the master of our craft and be some of the best.
Sword combat is just as bloody and nasty as ranged combat, if not worse. I'd rather be shot in the head than fatally wounded, curled up on the flooring bleeding out for an hour or so.
>>28032107
Its no different than my war.
You think "precision ordinance" equals "clean killing."
Fuck no. Do you know how many battle damage asessments ive been on where minutes before a drone launched hellfire impacted in the middle of a group of shitheads?
If it outright kills half of them its a good strike. The rest gurgle and scream and cry for thier mommies, thier god, or a drink of water just like mortally wounded humans have since cain killed able.
Romanticizing combat is just something people who havent expierienced it do because its a fun power fantasy.
Anyone who wants to know the truth of combat outta read a book called "On Killing."
It breaks down the psychology of military combat and goes over casualty reports and accounts from the ancient era to modern and the various human responses to witnessing it. The author even goes into how todays generation treats killing (atleast on a mental level) like its as simple as faceless badguys immediatley collapsing dead in front of the hero who treats it as something as trivial as putting them to sleep.
I have the sneaking suspicion that OP and a large percentage of the posters in this specific thread have limited physical ability.
>>28029381
>And he's just some sniper who shoots civilians.
>No official uniform = civilian
>Women and 'children' are never combatants
Sure...
>inb4 french nukes
>>28032302
Not what you were talking about, but the fucking 'new' Russian thermobarics...
I do not like it sir, I do not like it one bit.
What the idiot says:
>Before guns you had to look a man in the eye when you killed him. It was better.
What actually happens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDGHKyB3T_U
>@1m10s
>>28029381
>train your whole life
>first fight die because bigger stronger guy takes you out
>feelsbadman.jpg
there is a reason why competitive fighting has weight / height classes and strict rules.
>>28029416
That's why they made that blatant piece of antifun propaganda so fedoras like OP are cool with fÃn control.
>>28033044
They clearly weren't trying to be nice about it.
A weapon can only be as humane as intended. You could shoot a guy 30 times, slowly, in the legs/groin and let him bleed to death, or 4 times fast in the neck/head.
>>28029381
And then you die to archers.
>>28029431
only keks die for jewish interests overseas :^)
>>28029515
>implying killing poorly equipped sandniggers is worthy of merit
>>28029436
Under rated post
>>28029381
>Does anyone feel like gunpowder literally ruined combat?
No
>Imagine if we still used swords. I'd be able to master my craft and be one of the best. Combat would be up close and personal
No
Sorry, but you would not be some Jamie Lannister-tier faggot with plot armor that can simply slice your way through a few seasons worth of faceless enemies.
You would be a peasant.
A malnourished, poor, manlet, stupid, peasant. You would be born and you would die in the same 5 sq mile area that your great great great grandfather lived in. Your life exists only as a means of enriching your local lord, and thus you till the ground and follow the orders of your betters until the pox kills you or a simple accident means you die of infection.
Maybe, for once in your short, 35 year long life, the country goes to war. You get drafted. They throw a spear in your hand, and you get to drill for a bit in the town square with the rest of the dirty, manlet peasants. Maybe you have enough surplus grain to buy a helmet, or some good shoes. But you probably don't, thanks to the Church, your local lord, and your local bandits taking over half of everything you produce. Then off you go for your "mandatory 40 days" of summer service.
So you and a bunch of other filthy malnourished manlets are marching off to war! To bad there are no real supply trains or standard issue rations, so your little march is punctured by the occasionally robbing and banditry on the local population so you don't starve to death... people just like you, a few days ago. Within the first week your little merry marching column is hit with its first death from dysentery. It won't be the last.
Finally after two weeks of marching, you finally meet up with the rest of the king's bannermen in their grand army! And you're just in time for the major battle of war! You and your fellow manlets are formed up into a battle formation, and directed towards the enemy center.
*continued*
>>28029381
Swords still outmass the number of weapon deaths in war for civilians than any other weapon by roughly 300 million since 8,000bc.
You can argue the club or spear, but when it came down to executing entire towns and "clensing cities" swords did more than any other.
>>28033064
this is without doubt the most retarded post in the thread
on the board
currently live on the website
within the top 100 dumbest posts ever
>>28034499
Not even the dumbest shitpost I've made on this board in the past hour faggot.
Kill yourself.
>>28029464
This. OP, combat with swords wouldn't be fun like in the witcher or the samurai in your animes. It would be horrific.
>>28034593
It would actually be totally fucking awesome right up until someone got hit.
>>28029381
How would you be able to spare the money for the equipment and accompanying armor? Swords and shit are expensive. How are you going to feed yourself? How are you going to be able to spare the time to practice?
That's right, you'd need to be in the nobility. Which is unlikely as hell.
Thank God for gunpowder.
>>28029381
>I'd be able to master my craft and be one of the best.
you can do that with guns and drones too
>>28034368
You and the rest of the peasants, standing shoulder to shoulder in a tight formation made up of hundreds of other filthy manlets, charge towards the enemy center, the front two rows with their spears out. As you a member of the third row your feeling pretty good, as its likely that the enemy pikes won't reach you.
Soon, you make contact with the enemy; a blob of men armed with long, pointy sticks. Their front two ranks are squatting, spears out, and stationary, even as the front two rows of your own blob charge into their spears. Most of the men in front of you are impaled, and their screams piece the air like a hot knife through butter. Others lay trampled or knocked unconscious from the impact of two great masses of men slamming into each other. Others still remain, and they work thrust after thrust into the direction of the enemy. All this occurs in a 15 second span, upon which both sides perform a short "retreat" of maybe 5 paces.
Since the two men right in front of you are now laying out in the hot summer sun, you are now a member of the frontline. You don't have more than a few seconds to think before the great mass of muscle and bone behind you starts to lurch forward again, taking you with it. You ready your spear forward.
Unfortunately, its seems the other, filthy manlet peasant from the next valley over had a spear that was about six inches longer than yours. At least as he strikes you in the lower gut you manage to slip one thrust into his neck, which causes him to recoil backwards, giving you some breathing space. It appears, in fact, that the whole other blob of peasants is recoiling back, their flank now being pushed in by some of your own men to your right! Soon their back petaling turns into a rout as they drop their spears and run away.
Of course, the bleeding hole in your stomach sours the victory. You soon fall, the pain unbearable. For the next 6 hours you lay there until the world goes cold and dark and the pain finally ends.
>>28029560
HUBLUHUGHH
IM NOT RETARDED, IM TROLLING
>>28034663
Thank God for the aristocracy.
Thank the Chinese for gunpowder.
Swords are the status symbols of nobility.
Guns empowered the common man.
Get fucked, OP.
>>28029381
>Chris Kyle
>>28034844
>man famous for being a sniper on a battlefield with little wind
TRULY A DISPLAY OF SKILL
The only skill in sniping is of the designers and manufacturers of the weapon. The monkey pulling the trigger doesn't even do the math related to the shot, they've got cheat sheets or an assistant monkey with a calculator.
>>28034584
can I do it gently
>>28034889
If you want...
You wouldn't mind if I watched, w-would you?
>>28029515
So is your retardation a result of genetics, your mother's alcohol/drug habits, or some medical mishap where you were deprived of oxygen during birth.
>look it up
And just where do you look up how many kills someone has, oh humble mouthbreather? Not to mention you think this number is fucking tracked in the first place.
>>28034871
Someones mad they didn't get sniper training
>>28035287
>Someones mad they don't have a calculator monkey spotter
FTFY
>>28035460
you probably couldn't hit shit with a spotter, it's harder than you think.
>>28036117
>I've Never Shot a Quality Precision Rifle: The Post
>>28029381
>Swords would win!
Daggers for life bitch boy. Why learn an art when you can just stab a nigga
>>28029381
Does anyone feel like gunpowder literally fixed combat? I mean, any retard can thrust a spear. Apart from "Jacques de Lalaing", there were no famous "warriors" back then. And he's just some Walloon who wrestles knights.
Imagine if we still used swords. It'd take me 30 years to be one of the best. Combat would be a cacophonous melee, fought like everyone was playing Star Wars Wii (muh lightsabers).
What does /k/ think about this?
>>28029381
The internet was mankinds worst invention.
It has festered so many ideals and cultures. Has given the "special snowflake" generation basis for their ill conceived notion that they are indeed, unique. It allows for fucks like you to spread word of their worthless ideals and beliefs. Oh you believe sword fighting was honorable? Use this man made hell pit to do some research on medieval fighting before you blabber off some retarded nonsense about honorable killing. Killing isn't honorable. It isn't fun. It isn't something you idolize. You have some autistic, spergnific fixation on a katana don't you? Believing Samurais were gods gift to men? They were a warrior class in world where strong and brawns ruled with money and blood lineage backing them up, allowing them to pilfer and ravage the undefended and unworthy of such a "honor." You know what the gun did to society? It gave the poor, the weak, the right, the smart, the unprivileged, the little guy, the shy guy, and the rape victim a chance to fight back. Cordite and smoke, allowing to equal out muscle and mass. Fuck you and your pathetic fixation and misconception of the past. You should be thanking the Chinese, not the Japanese, for such an innovation. Firearms allow a quicker death. And skill? Try firing a battle rifle sometime you shit and then get back here. You be amazed how much skill is required to operate such weapons. Are there some that require no skill? Yes, and that's how it should be. Not everyone has the privilege to devote themselves to an art. Not every is so skilled. But they should be given the god given right to defend themselves. Unless you're an advocate of rape, senseless murder, and genocide? Because the Japanese were.
Go stick your dick in some unwed whore and keep preaching your idiotic beliefs, but don't bring that shit into a board dedicated to societies great equalizer: the gun.
>>28036166
Actually it's about weapons. Goodbye.
>>28036166
Fuck yeah.
>>28029494
>implying the officers hiding behind ranks and ranks of infantry have any right to say shit.
>>28029560
was only pretending to be retarded.
>>28029426
The Japanese tried this in WWII. Didn't end well for them
>>28029426
Are you a neckbeard?
>>28029400
This 1 million times
>>28029431
>implying humanity overcoming what is natural to us in order to create what is ideal to us is a bad thing
>>28034368
being a bandit sounds better than being a peasant imo.
just jumped into this thread but...were bandits all that common or did the lords do a pretty good job of keeping them in check? I know there is a the legend of Robin Hood, but I am guessing that most brigands were just murderers and thieves that pillaged farms and raped, killed, stole whatever they wanted until they got cut down by soldiers/town guards.
>>28036166
"God made man, samuel colt made them equal" would seem to fit in there niceley.
The mass production and modularization of guns meant that decent weapons were no longer an item available only to the gentry.
It became apparent that society needed as many guns as possible to fight the other society that were stockpiling as many guns as they could get. This meant kings allowed gunsmith leeway to experiment and find an edge, as guns proliferated so did civil liberty (can only tell a musket armed mob what to do so far before they blow your inbred hemaphilic brittle boned eurotrash ass off your horse)
More freedom meant more innovation (gunsmiths were free to do what worked best rather than make specific comissions at the demand of a monarch who knows nothing) so gun technology began accelerating. Better and more guns, people overyhrew the monarchies with thier guns, more freedom less taxes more room to experiment, technology advanced further now that common mens idea were given greater and greater weight, where before the common man just slaved away and never advanced, never got to educate himself or innovate.....
Meanwhile asia decided guns disturbed the chi too much and spent a thpusand years practicing how to pick the perfect cherry blossom while thier unarmed peasants starved and technology stagnated at the precise level the nobility agreed it should be at.
In short, guns invented modern democracy and the concept of a free middle class.
>>28036651
Bandits being common would have depended completely on the lord and economy of a region; obviously if a lord didn't hire enough guards there were going to be more bandits, and if most of the population were well-fed there would be less crime.
I have read that based on analysis of ancient documents/censuses and some educated conjecture that the murder rate of (peacetime) medieval England would have been about 30 times the rate of modern England. Modern England has a murder rate of about 1.5 per 100,000 people, so 30 times that is about 45 per 100,000; this is just under the murder rate for modern day Detroit.
However, during times of war banditry would have skyrocketed. All the fighting men are off to war, the town guards are off to war, there is less food because there are less men bringing in the harvest, and because there were no centralized food resource allocation for armies; all armies relayed on what food their lord had stockpiled for the campaign (lol) and/or simply took what they wanted from the local peasants in banditry.
>>28029381
Ya know why Alexander the Great and Romans issued spears?
Because range is King. Range means you can kill the other fucker before he can get close enough to cut you. There is very little honor in dying three weeks after you got nicked in the arm, got gangreen, then went into septic shock.
The crusades weren't call of skyrim, and it wasn't all heavily armed knights. Most of it was dudes likely given spears to start, then turning to swords when the spearing time was over.
>>28029381
I think you sound like a fucking retard and couldn't swing any sword for shit. Enjoy your BudK katana neckbeard.
>>28037052
holy shit, what episode is that? fucking hilarious
>>28029423
Bunch of Hollywood faggots.
>>28035287
Chris Kyle is only famous because of his relentless campaign of self-promotion
If you like swords, carry one as a last resort side-arm, for if you run out of bullets.
>>28036718
>12,000,000 people clapping for 7 years
>>28037190
>If you like swords, carry one as a last resort side-arm, for if you run out of bullets.
There's this new invention that lets you turn a gun into a spear, you might not have heard of it as it's very obscure
>>28037273
Fuck you, I'd carry a sword if I want!
>>28029423
Carlos Norman Hathcock II
is missing from your list.
>>28037313
>weight and bulk that does nothing
You would not want to carry one
![0112[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/xmCPL7s.jpg "0112[1].jpg")
>>28029494
>No normal man who has smelled and associated with death ever wants to see any more of it. In fact, the only men who are even going to want to bloody noses in a fist fight after this war will be those who want people to think they were tough combat men, when they weren't. The surest way to become a pacifist is to join the infantry. - Bill Mauldin
![2014-01-17-Strip_302_NCO_Sword_web[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/KGxANY9.gif "2014-01-17-Strip_302_NCO_Sword_web[1].gif")
>>28037313
Follow your dreams.
>>28029381
I am quite certain you are the only one with this opinion
>>28029400
this
nothing great about dumbshits dying for politicians
>>28029431
>quoting a guy who defended the divine rule of kings
faggot
>>28029801
Does anyone feel like words ruined combat?
I mean, any retard say words.
Imagine if we all used grunts
>>28029381
Have you ever shot a gun? It's fucking hard to shoot accurately, move fast, and maneuver obsticles with a firearm, in combat situations. Join the military then tell me again if you think gunpowder sucked all the skill out of combat.
>>28029381
God made man, Samuel Colt made man equal.
What if there are those of us who can't handle a sword properly? Clearly a man with superior physical strength would be able to kill me.
With a gun, he's now my equal.
>>28037347
Depends.
I'm I'm in a military and have to lug a ton of shit everywhere, then no. Except maybe a machete.
Its better as a civilian weapon.
>>28040532
*correction
If I'm in a military and have to lug a ton of shit everywhere, then no. Except maybe a machete.
>>28029381
This is low quality bait or you're retarded.
>>28029381
>Does anyone feel like gunpowder literally ruined combat?
What do you think would have happened to the kingslayer if Jory had a crossbow instead of a sword?
>>28029381
I used to fence and that picture totally triggers me
Ranged weapons go back to the stone age.
Combat is bloodsport. There's plenty of land and resources for everyone despite what sensationalists would lead you to believe.
Combat can be applied in many ways.
If every video game was the same, it would be boring wouldn't it?
If you wanna duel someone with swords or flintlocks, seek it out and it'll find you. Plenty of people got together and drank Jim Jones's cool aid, there's bound to be secret fight clubs out there.
There's tons of marital arts and fencing enthusiasts, too. So you can get your high legally.
