That’s why spears are just over all my favorite, and in my opinion, the best medieval weapon. Just stab them with the sharp stick before they get close to you.
They were most commonly used bg the military and the main weapon due to their cost efficiency and effectiveness. Swords were for generals and a secondary weapon in case someone got too close
Complex Polearms are even better than spears. Spears are like assault rifles. Main battlefield weapon and versatile. Swords are usually your sidearm, so pistol or PDW. But there are Longswords and Greatsword (Montante, Zweihänder etc) as main battlefield weapons.
@@1IGG complex pole arms are more expensive to make and a lot of times are only better in certain situations. A normal spear or similar, simple pole arm si the best for equipping and training a large army
Yes and no. Spears are very effective, but because they are thrusting only and cannot cut, they have less options in a sword. And because of their length, the only really useful in open areas. On the battlefield, very useful, anywhere else, things get a little more complicated. We are going to do some experiments with the spear, because I have my thoughts on this topic. But that reach is going to be a huge obstacle to overcome.
@@SellswordArts i'd recommend a shorter spear, the armpit technique, and/or a shield to block the sword. That is what I would think is most effective in a duel if you need to use a spear, though soldiers typically had swords as secondary weapons so they wouldn't really use the spear in that situation because they had a choice
@@ig100magnaguard I don't follow. Why would it make a difference in maneuvering the weapon? In my experience with self practice (not saying i'm good. Just bear with me), my arms were able to move my practice boken just as easily regardless if I was running or backing away.
@@ig100magnaguard Forgive me, sir/miss. I don't mean to be difficult. One thing I do wonder is if the issue pertains to really short swords like what Sellswords used in his videos. My preferred blade-grip ratio is that similar to a katana (two-handed, 29-30" blade) as it is more compact and fits my grip style (can be European styled for all I care)(also, for the fun of it, i can draw from a back-mounted sheath). With this blade length, I do wonder if it matters less when faced against longer swords since the blade can cover the user more easily and is reinforced by using both hands. Just wondering
@@cadethumann8605 Precision. I mean, it's kinda obvious that moving anything, specially a "heavy" one, is more difficult because of balance and gravity center. Try doing anything while running and compare with doing it normally. You lose a lot of precision because of how you're moving the weight of your body.
It should be remembered that this is colored by tournament rules. Not all hits are equal and taking a hit in order to get a kill was often part of the calculus of fighters. Dan Inosanto once said that anyone who gets into a knife fight is going to get cut, the expert is the person who gets to choose where and how deeply they get cut.
In historical combat, most fights would end from cuts to the hands and wrists. (most of the rest would be won and lost by grappling technique). The most common calculus was to deliver a non-lethal disabling cut in order to avoid getting cut at all.
In my swordsmanship class, the first thing they said about dagger fighting was that if by entering such a fight you’ve already lost. You have to sacrifice specific hits in order to stay alive, or in our case win
It’s so hard to fight at such a massive disadvantage. I was helping a friend who was in his late 50s work out but I wanted to handicap myself so I didn’t hurt him so I only used a tanto and gave him a practice katana. He’s never picked up a sword and I’ve trained for 13 years. I can’t remember the last time I fought that hard to overcome such a massive disadvantage
I unintentionally discovered this today playing lightsabers with my sister. She had essentially a pole arm thats 60% lightsaber, and I had a short lightsaber. No matter what I did, I just couldn't close the gap without getting hit.
Spears are a little bit easier to beat though if you know what you’re doing. Its a lot more unwieldy for the opponent to be moving something that long and there’s a lot less blade built in compared to a longsword or even a shortsword. Much easier to beat it to the side and close distance (as well as bind it up) than something like a longsword thats near 85% sharp edged blade. (Edit) though of course, if the spearman knows what they’re doing they’ll do what they can to maintain grip, dip in and out and do their best to maintain the distance and whittle the opponent away with critical thrusts so I guess (just like most weapon comparisons) its mostly down to the fighters wielding them
I think one of the factors that people fail to take into account is that in confined spaces, it’s often not possible to use a longer weapon to its full potential, giving the combatant with a shorter weapon the advantage, or at least equalizing the disadvantages. When you have reduced an opponent to only being able to thrust, it is much easier to get inside the range of the longer weapons and negate the advantage of length.
Reminds me of a conversation that came up at a D&D table, that a rogue in D&D would do much better with a longer weapon since rushing someone with a longsword while the rogue has a dagger would probably get the rogue killed if not severely injured in the exchange. One person tried to point out "just side step and stab him, he would be slower," one of our guys had HEMA experience and just shook his head and pulled out his gear. Next 20 minutes we were all laughing at each other was we all took turns of daggers vs a longsword.
Unfortunately, as much as I love D&D, its combat isn't particularly as reflective of real combat as some would like to believe (that said, it can also be a bit more reflective of real combat than some would like to believe). Like, sticking with the idea of two characters next to each other on the board, one with a longsword and the other with the dagger, the game definitely fails to take into account how the dagger wielder has a clear physical disadvantage since they have to cover so much ground to make an attack on the sword practitioner. If that kind of stuff was important to the DM and/or players, one thing I'd look into doing would be to have every melee weapon have a reach characteristic (daggers would have short reach, shortswords medium, longswords long, then come up with a new name for the current REACH trait), and if a shorter reach weapon is going up against a longer reach weapon (eg, dagger vs longsword), then the dagger character might have disadvantage on their attack, or the longsword character gets a situational AC bonus.
I think that I (with the short weapon) would be the one backing up. They're the ones that have to chase so when I feel comfortable I step forward at the same time they're doing it. They close the distance for me and now I get to attack cleanly in their gap.
Reminds me of all those gun related, self defense techniques I've seen online where people legitimately think they can move faster than a person can pull a trigger. When you try to walk up on someone who has a weapon pointed at you, they're just gonna position the tip so that you walk into their weapon. One way you CAN get the one up on someone with a larger weapon is by throwing your dagger. You'd think it would be easy to just knock it away but, it's really not and, most people don't expect that during melee combat.
One thing people often fail to mention is... The opponent can also move, backward, and fast. So rushing in, although most likely your best chance, will still probably lose to someone that also moves and tries counters. Even someone without knowledge can run backward mindlessly swinging at you with greater range.
In my younger year Skyrim made me fall in love with the idea of dual wield daggers, that is till I did a bit of larping with my brother who had against my daggers a nice hunky great sword. A great smack to head made me convert to heavy weapon on Skyrim
It's also important to note that fighting styles which use shorter weapons generally use them in pairs, one to parry, one to attack. It would be highly unwise to close with an opponent wielding a longer weapon if one did not have some means of parrying.
One thing I've theorized about is having a sickle in the offhand as a parrying tool. It provides more control over an opponent's weapon, essentially allowing you to grab it without grabbing it, and giving you the chance to close in with a thrust with the main weapon. Still risky, but a more solid game plan than just dancing around the guy hoping to get lucky.
Honestly in my opinion range is the primary factor in most fights,in relatively open areas the longer weapon would probably win but with in the tight confines like small hallways and small rooms the shirter weapon would do better generally
To give an analogy, imagine you are a soldier with a close range pistol, and you know there is an enemy soldier with a guided RPG across a field. Sure, you could try to run at them fast enough before they can get you, at which point you can win because your pistol fires much fast than a rocket launcher, but the guy with the rocket will probably just blow you up as your coming towards him. Same concept applies
I’ve found when fighting rondel against longsword, you have to start in the nacht and take the vor; while aggression and closing distance are possible it can only be done once you have control of the opponents sword.
Yes, longer weapon usually wins; just as having a longer reach is a huge advantage in boxing. But Wing Chun butterfly swords seem to do very well when used skillfully. I would be interested to see your take on that weapon and the associated tactics against something like a 1-handed arming sword.
This is why you need to learn unarmed combat. I found that by learning distance and timing with my hands. Distance was easier to read with arms. It also helps you learn to read your opponents. The longer the weapon most likely the longer it takes them to move it. You can't just watch a person's hands I find it best to watch their shoulders and hips. But that's just me
This is the issue, most of these people aren’t athletes or competitive fighters so idk how much their opinions really matter as they’re taking part in historical fiction. If they were wielding a 12-15lb sword against someone with a short sword I can’t imagine the short sword losing. Seeing how slow these people swing those long swords and the way they step out and strike down? Just applying what I know from fighting parrying and moving forward shouldn’t be hard, we do it with take downs and such all the time in MMA. If you stand stiff and are walking backwards and forwards at each other just constantly chopping as your only attack then maybe but when I watch these fights they seem like the stiffest most choreographical things.
@SS Psyops yeah I was thinking the same thing you said about the smaller sword vs the giant claymore and such. Its like a round house compared to a jab. One you can flick out there the other you need to step into to get the full potential from.
Alternatively, throw the knife, it might be a more dangerous idea for sparring and it won't surprise them twice, but in the context of a real duel you would only need it to work once...
I feel like when a shorter blade is all you have, you just do your best. But I see what you're saying. A longer length allows folks to dismantle your with far more comfort.
I’ve found in my experience 2 weapon fighting works well in duels if you can act fast enough even against people with greater reach, however if you’re fighting multiple people that doesn’t work, and if you have many Allie’s and are fighting melee, the pike is king
That’s true. Rush in, eliminate range advantage, only sounds good in theory or if you fight someone who is bad. It’s very easy for them them to maintain their distance and hit you. Before the speed of the weapon matters, it’s their weapon vs your bodyweight as you try to move close enough. Reach advantage is huge.
Honestly, rather than a buckler, one's best bet would be a full sized shield; either a strapped kite/heater shield, or a center grip round shield. Of course, getting a sword as long as theirs would be the better option as long as one was trained with it. But if you HAD to fight with a shorter weapon, a full sized shield is the best option.
I've actually won with a Peter pan dagger against a much longer sword. The key is to stay alive and just catch the blade in the gard. Work your opponent into a cramped space where the big weapon keeps bumping into surroundings rather than you.
This is why daggers should have some sort of disadvantage when paired with a side arm gun (Deepwoken game. Daggers have insane damage per seconds with the highest swing speed but low range. But a side arm gun can completely make up for that making their range stat nearly impossible to counter)
Something to keep in mind, if you're opponent has the greater reach, you are generally at a disadvantage. And like the video said, getting in there is really tough. Doable, but the odds are not in your favor. Somethings you might try (emphasis on try) Pick your moment to charge in. Let them get tired or careless, maybe even bind their blade first. There are better options than charging in as fast as you can.
one of my favorite kills I ever got in Mordhau was styling on a kid with a polearm and armor while I was a naked boy with a hand axe. I times the movement perfectly and ran in just after his swing missed and got 2 hits on him before finishing him off with a kick. In chat he was even giving me props for the kill.
SMH! You show a Clear lack of understanding in martial arts. What are you planning to to do when your opponent hits X in time for the QTE and dodges those bullets?!?!
Be that as it may, fights rarely happen on flat, even, terrain and not every opponent has the coordination to dodge, feint, parry, riposte AND keep their balance.
I am a really tall guy, and I have gotten very good at fighting in retreat. I do this because I can usually carve up people on their way in, usually my size makes it so I can hit them while they're fighting with my feder trying to get close enough to hit. I can only imagine how much this effect would be multiplied tussling with a 5th the reach of your opponent
Probably why short weapons weren't the go-to option but more so a sidearm. Just like in the gun world. The short swords and other little blades were a backup for when your polearm or spear was gone.
I've experimented a fair bit with chinese weapons sparring and using double butterfly knives against a longer weapon is always a challenge. There's a technique called "trapping the spear" in which you hold the opponent's weapon between the flat of one knive and the edge of the other, forcefully holding it in order to allow you to move in. It's hard, but with practice you can pull it off consistently enough. I've always found it harder to fight a jian, which is very fluid and rapier like in its movement, than a pole weapon or a saber.
As my instructor often said "trust to your feet." Said another way run first if you can, if not here's some ways you might win. Nothing is for granted in a fight.
the way I do it with my gladius is by hitting their sword hard out of the way they most often focus on rebounding with the sword while I'm closing in, I also try to grab the sword when possible
That's what we're talking about in the video. Doesn't take much to avoid that incoming attack on the blade. Even if you manage to get a solid beat on the opponent's blade, all I need to do is Retreat quickly and bring their blade back around and keep you out of distance. Not saying it can't be done, I'm saying it's quite hard
@@SellswordArts yeah one thing is that I'm also rather larger then anyone I duel with so often they lose balance as well but I have lost numerous times still even though I have every other advantage just due to the length of their weapon alone
However when I started martial arts and when we sparred. The more I would retreat, the more my opponent would attack. Dodging from side to side has always helped more.
The one exception to this rule: hallways. Doesn't seem like a common issue, but in castles there could be a lot of narrow passageways that would hinder the use of a longsword or similar. This is yet another point to add to the argument in favor of spears that I see brewing in this comment section, however, as thrusting weapons have far less of an issue in close quarters, and is in part why some castles would be designed to force invading armies into close quarters.
Without armour or a shield having a shorter weapon is of course a disadvantage, range is a factor in all martial arts and is always an advantage to be able to hit your opponent before they can hit you. Even in armoured combat a longer weapon like a polearm would be your main weapon and any small sword would be a sidearm. Even some two handed swords like katanas were used as sidearms on the battlefield.
When I was younger I did some Middle Ages fighting reenactment. There were 3 kids including myself at on event. The other two kids were much more skilled than me. We started off all using sword and shield. I lost like 90% of my matches. At one point, my coach let me swap to using a two handed sword. A lot of folks thought that would be worse as I lost my defensive shield. I proceeded to win 15 rounds straight, then continue to win 75% of my matches. Range does so much, and folks don’t realize how much of an advantage it is.
That's why you want either armor or big shield if you are outreached by opponent. Or you want to fight in somewhat tight spaces where opponent couldn't get much use out of their reach. But in duel on comparatively open field you are dead, unless your opponent fucked up
It’s why the phrase "cloak and dagger" exists. Daggers are meant to kill people who let you get close or who can't see it coming. Or rondels to pierce a knight through the visor. Too bad a lot of games don't feature that mechanic more
With a shield. The "get in close and jam up their range" school of thought works best if you have something you can feed to their weapon so you can get close enough to use yours. We see this a lot in cloak and dagger, shield and sword, escrima, buckler and knife. You also see it in boxing and MMA (striking) when there's a reach mismatch. Guy will present a half guard to the guy's lead hand while stepping outside the blender. This creates back exposure. He will then take his other hand and send it to the liver or kidneys, or proceed to grappling. The Romans used to slightly tilt their shields (while in formation)and stab through the gaps. That's why they were curved. Can't stab what you can't touch. Trouble with this approach is that it requires two tools and most people don't like getting stabbed or cut. With a single short weapon against a single longer weapon, you need to be able to fully commit to the approach. Most people can't fully commit because they are afraid of being cut or stabbed. It's a lot of training and a lot of cuts to get over that, and most people aren't willing to put in that sort of work in the era of the gun. The two out of ten times this guy is citing that the shorter weapon won were probably when the shorter weapon user closed faster than the longer weapon could get on point. Remember- the manuals do say that if two fencers of equal skill square off, and only one has mastered the thrust, the fight will likely go to him. You will get cut if you do serious bladework. Nicks under armor aren't unheard of. Points aren't necessarily indicative of who would have died. Staying in the cell isn't always a good thing. Sorry this went long. Hope this helps.
This reminds me of the classic boxing style match up between the in fighter and the out fighter, the out fighter using movement and straight punches to keep off the ropes and maintain distance, while the in fighter tries to cut off the ring and close in, the thing is, in boxing, the in fighter takes a lot of punishment trying to close in, hoping to cause double the damage once he's inside, and even the most defensive in fighters like Tyson would still take damage going in, while out boxers like Mayweather took little to no damage maintaining distance, but when it comes to swords you can't really afford to take the damage going in, cause every single move could be lethal
In my experience, the problem also lies within the commitment. Like, a dagger can work against a two-handed sword as long as you dodge and commit. But it appears that many people do not like trying when the possible consequence is certain death... It's a lot easier to stay semi out of range and hope for a mirical until you get hit 😅
One thing I am curious about is using a dagger (preferably one with cross guards as opposed to a rondel dagger) as a self-defense weapon against a longsword. A scenario I had in mind is a dude with a sword and dagger being surprise attacked by a swordsman. The former only has enough time to draw his dagger to quickly defend until he can get enough space to draw his sword (so, it's not a dagger user trying to win, but to defend before reaching a better weapon). Do you have any insight about this?
@@cadethumann8605 no... I have not been suprise-attacked with a longsword whilst walking around with my dagger and longsword yet 😂 But like, when in doubt, just run I guess...
@sake3857 No, I meant about practicing a dagger defense method to create distance before you can draw your sword. Have you ever experimented through practice (at the very least with defending and retreating with a dagger as opposed to closing distance and attacking the swordsman)? (And I know you can always try to run away. But what if the attack is so sudden you need to defend yourself? What if the way out is closed off? Etc.?)
@@cadethumann8605 well... stepping back is kinda easy as long as you have the space. The space would probably be there as you need space to fight effectively with longswords. So just use it like a parry dagger and hope for the best I guess ^^ (I'm in no way an expert, but this seems kinda straight forward)
@sake3857 I do hope that I can experiment using a foam dagger (or anything where I can't get hurt in the worst case scenario). I do recall watching Skallagrim's dagger vs sword test where it didnt work very well but my issue was that he only used a rondel dagger and tried static blocking with a reverse grip (this channel's favorite). I wonder if results would be different by using a dagger with a crossguard and using deflections in an orthodox grip. One thing I confess is that the reason for my interest in this subject is to see how a backscabbard wearer can defend in absolute emergencies. And yes, I am aware of the drawbacks to wearing a sword on your back, but I have been working on improving it. Long story short, I have studied and practiced a lot and am capable of drawing blades up to 29" using a normal scabbard and drawing it the more (in)famous way. And I can actually draw it pretty fast. However, it's not as battle-ready or space efficient (even when I lean forward to draw under a low clearance, it can still take up more space to draw) as on the side and I wonder how to defend from dangers that happen at a very close range until I can get my sword out. Mind you, I'm not walking around with a sword in real life (at most, foam or plastic props at events). This is just a hypothetical thing for fiction. Just thought I'd share. I hope this won't be a tense discussion. I just like to experiment.
Yep. That's how you deal with a longer, heavier weapon, but that's about evening out an advantage they have. If they can hit you when you can hit them, you're in a bad spot. Getting out of it is a desperate play
If you're non-lethal fighting in gymnasiums and open fields, of course the longer weapon wins. Try fighting in a basement with a 5 foot ceiling, and support pillars. Try fighting in a trench. Try fighting with their backs against the wall. Backing up is very dangerous in rough terrain. Try fighting on a shield wall.
So yes you are correct it is very difficult but that being the case it’s still the ultimate way of dealing with someone with a longer weapon than you. Like no matter what you do if you have the shorter range you’re best chance is to take advantage of that as either way you have to close distance the best you can do is to make sure that they aren’t as effective in that distance. So it’s not a 100% guarantee it works, and anyone saying they’ll just do it like it’s easy is kidding themselves, it’s still a dangerous play, but if you have to do something that is the best thing you can do. And as someone else pointed out not all hits are equal so it’s not like all hits will kill you, doesn’t mean they’re fun to take but better than the ones that kill you if you can get them in the process.
Mike Tyson had a similiar problem fighting heavyweight at 5'11". that's why the evasiveness of Cus D'Amatos peek-a-boo technique was so important. Mike used his shorter stature with strong evasive drilling to close the distance on opponents with SIGNIFICANTLY longer reach. Those 2/10 must be the Mike Tysons of swordsmen
Gotta really play with the range. When they retreat, you change direction and also retreat. Opening the distance beyond their range. Problem then is you are back to square 1. It's simple, but simple doesn't mean easy.
Me and my brother do “live action role-play” he prefer to use a weapon more of great sort of length wail I liked to too wield hand and a half blades. The one maneuver I always do that is like me to feed him a few times every single time I pull this move off I have one engagement. The mover is waiting for him to come into a strike, block with one of the blades and then push in for a strike with the other. This has allowed me to enter striking range while my opponent uses a much larger blade.
I would not say that's true. Retreating is incredibly important in Hema. Controlling the distance is one of the most effective strategies in all forms of combat. With two weapons of equal length, you should be advancing and retreating about equally. But if you have a weapon that's longer than your opponents, you should continue to retreat to maximize your reach advantage. Why get close enough to let them hit if you can avoid it?
There is the leaf bladed spear for anyone who wants to sacrifice durability and piercing power for the ability to cut. It is also significantly harder to use. Then we have the halberd, which are able to do both well, but are MUCH more top heavy and thus much slower. Spears are the strongest weapon, easy to pick up and one who masters them incredibly effective. They can break bones quite easily and pierce armor. Plus, there are forms intended for close quarter combat and a good fighter with a spear can hold off 2-3 equal fighters with swords. This isnt speculation, there is footage of it. Spears are by no means as flashy as a sword, but they are the weapon I know off with the most benefits to it. It's only main weakness is being grabbed
However the recoil or recovery for a next attack is slower and once you can close the gap they shouldn't be able to get away before the damage is done. Just because they land a hit it doesn't mean they win the fight. Also like you said if you have a second hand knife or dagger that's a projectile and that can be used as a distraction for you to land a finishing strike
Weaponism has some interesting videos with uneven ranged fights like a Spear fighter vs 3 Kendoka or vs an Eskrimador with 2 sticks or Kendoka vs unarmed martial arts She really tried to show how hard it is for the shorter ranged fighter, while also showing the few times the shorter ranged fighter got in and did something
@@Tkoutlosh Yeah i guess. In a real scenario the 1 wouldn't have much room to move (which is funny, since she's a Kendoka iirc, you'd think she'd make the Kendoka look good)
@@KazanmaTheSilverWind It was fun and nice to watch, but my main concern was about the weapons and its weight and possible durability in fight, especially what was shown with that spear was not much realistic. If you hold it just onehanded like that you will gain lot more reach, but you can't just slide it over the floor so it will be way more tiring for a wrist and mabe even impossible. I own several spears and big and long and bit hefty ones can take some more damage from sword blows before break, but lighter ones, more like javelins, which could be used like what was shown won't be that durable and good cut from a sword could damage it too seriously in just one hit.
Same thing accures in kombat sports aswell; if ur opponent has a better arm range (in boxing for example) then the opponent will probably have the upper hand
I think shorter weapons are handier in an urban setting. We as HEMA fencers often forget that historically speaking, our favorite implement the longsword would often time just spend its' time resting in a sheath. In this case, a brigand that would have an issue with you could most definitely bumrush his target with his trusty knife or bauernwehr.
Definitely a strong disadvantage but possible. It turns pretty much impossible though if the person is more skilled. I'm very fast and when larping and sparing with escrima sticks for Kali. But if someone was equal skill or better it became around those 8/10 odds. Very fun though and definitely improved fighting against longer reaches. If in tournament though would just dual weild to even it up a bit more but still a disadvantage like u say.
Stepping in and jamming them up is the ideal way to deal with this, it's the only way to deal with it because until you can reach them they get nothing but free shots. Just because it's what you have to do does not mean it easy. Also if this is Anna fencing situation if I push you out of the list continually you're eventually going to have to deal with me being there
It's like boxing. Reach is usually an advantage but you can use being shorter to your own advantage. Longswords are way heavier and once you pass their guard you're on a better position. Besides pretty much all great empires chose short swords or sabers as their cut and thrust weapon
Completely agree with you. I can charge someone who's unarmed because they're taller. But if they have a sword what am I supposed to do, not get stabbed on the way in. Fists hurt but not nearly that bad.
Won a mail coif from a certain giant who’s nicknamed T-Bone, on account of he hits you like a Mack truck t-bones a car. In this particular tourney I rushed him repeatedly with German long sword 🗡 techniques but his nearly 6’6” frame and incredible reach was still longer with Florentine long swords ⚔️. We double killed one another repeatedly and it impressed him so he awarded me the coif which he had made
Basically to close distance successfully with drastically shorter reach in any form of combat you have pull a mike tyson. Step one - feint in order to get the opponent to attack Step two - sidestep or parry and then stepthrough Step three - retaliate once closed in range. Opponents long reach will become smothered. In mikes case he could simply duck under the smothered fighters blows, but someone with a long sword just wouldn’t be able to use it super effectively in clinch range. And with a sword one good blow is all you need. Problem with this plan, if you dont finish it in one go, good luck getting it to work again. Now you are at a severe disadvantage, especially if the person with the longer weapon calmly waits for a charge.
That’s why spears are just over all my favorite, and in my opinion, the best medieval weapon. Just stab them with the sharp stick before they get close to you.
They were most commonly used bg the military and the main weapon due to their cost efficiency and effectiveness. Swords were for generals and a secondary weapon in case someone got too close
Complex Polearms are even better than spears. Spears are like assault rifles. Main battlefield weapon and versatile. Swords are usually your sidearm, so pistol or PDW. But there are Longswords and Greatsword (Montante, Zweihänder etc) as main battlefield weapons.
@@1IGG complex pole arms are more expensive to make and a lot of times are only better in certain situations. A normal spear or similar, simple pole arm si the best for equipping and training a large army
Yes and no.
Spears are very effective, but because they are thrusting only and cannot cut, they have less options in a sword. And because of their length, the only really useful in open areas.
On the battlefield, very useful, anywhere else, things get a little more complicated.
We are going to do some experiments with the spear, because I have my thoughts on this topic. But that reach is going to be a huge obstacle to overcome.
@@SellswordArts i'd recommend a shorter spear, the armpit technique, and/or a shield to block the sword. That is what I would think is most effective in a duel if you need to use a spear, though soldiers typically had swords as secondary weapons so they wouldn't really use the spear in that situation because they had a choice
Short sword: I'll close the distance and jam you up! Haha!
Long sword: steps back a little
Shortie: wait thats illegal
But isn't running forward faster than walking backward? just curious.
@@cadethumann8605 Yes, and because of that is easier to move the sword while walking backward.
@@ig100magnaguard I don't follow. Why would it make a difference in maneuvering the weapon? In my experience with self practice (not saying i'm good. Just bear with me), my arms were able to move my practice boken just as easily regardless if I was running or backing away.
@@ig100magnaguard Forgive me, sir/miss. I don't mean to be difficult.
One thing I do wonder is if the issue pertains to really short swords like what Sellswords used in his videos. My preferred blade-grip ratio is that similar to a katana (two-handed, 29-30" blade) as it is more compact and fits my grip style (can be European styled for all I care)(also, for the fun of it, i can draw from a back-mounted sheath). With this blade length, I do wonder if it matters less when faced against longer swords since the blade can cover the user more easily and is reinforced by using both hands.
Just wondering
@@cadethumann8605 Precision. I mean, it's kinda obvious that moving anything, specially a "heavy" one, is more difficult because of balance and gravity center.
Try doing anything while running and compare with doing it normally. You lose a lot of precision because of how you're moving the weight of your body.
I'm surprised with the amount of content that you've put into this short video, it feels like I'm listening to years of practice in under 60s.
Thanks.
It should be remembered that this is colored by tournament rules. Not all hits are equal and taking a hit in order to get a kill was often part of the calculus of fighters. Dan Inosanto once said that anyone who gets into a knife fight is going to get cut, the expert is the person who gets to choose where and how deeply they get cut.
If you are not an expert probably you are gonna die either way as a winner or as a loser
Amazing
Iirc, they only count incapacitating hits
In historical combat, most fights would end from cuts to the hands and wrists. (most of the rest would be won and lost by grappling technique). The most common calculus was to deliver a non-lethal disabling cut in order to avoid getting cut at all.
In my swordsmanship class, the first thing they said about dagger fighting was that if by entering such a fight you’ve already lost. You have to sacrifice specific hits in order to stay alive, or in our case win
It’s so hard to fight at such a massive disadvantage. I was helping a friend who was in his late 50s work out but I wanted to handicap myself so I didn’t hurt him so I only used a tanto and gave him a practice katana. He’s never picked up a sword and I’ve trained for 13 years. I can’t remember the last time I fought that hard to overcome such a massive disadvantage
And that's why I only use short swords in games, where I can be slashed 20 times before my health is down to half.
I unintentionally discovered this today playing lightsabers with my sister.
She had essentially a pole arm thats 60% lightsaber, and I had a short lightsaber. No matter what I did, I just couldn't close the gap without getting hit.
Thats why our pointy sticks got longer until we invented projectile weapons that made them obsolete.
We invented a way to make pointy metal sticks go from us to our location to an opponents very faaast
@@romantheblack-cat not just faster, but the range has extended much much farther
Pointy Stick not see now.
Pointy sticks, without the sticks
Pointy.
Cue the minstrels singing about Brave Sir Robin...
BRAVE SIR ROBIN HE BRAVELY RAN AWAY
@@simplycinclair8979 🤭🤣👍
I genuinely use this channel to help me write accurate medieval fights, and my god knowing all this information makes re-reading such a joy
Kinda why I always love Spears. Just ultimate stabbing at long ranges :D
It's social distanced melee combat
Spears are a little bit easier to beat though if you know what you’re doing. Its a lot more unwieldy for the opponent to be moving something that long and there’s a lot less blade built in compared to a longsword or even a shortsword. Much easier to beat it to the side and close distance (as well as bind it up) than something like a longsword thats near 85% sharp edged blade.
(Edit) though of course, if the spearman knows what they’re doing they’ll do what they can to maintain grip, dip in and out and do their best to maintain the distance and whittle the opponent away with critical thrusts so I guess (just like most weapon comparisons) its mostly down to the fighters wielding them
@@lucashayes346 Yeah, aside from the fact that a spear is also essentially a staff that can be used to WHACK your face or hand or head with.
OR the balls, if the spearman wanted to be cheeky. There is a reason Spears were considered to be the Assault Rifles of the ancient world.
You have a 'point' there.
I think one of the factors that people fail to take into account is that in confined spaces, it’s often not possible to use a longer weapon to its full potential, giving the combatant with a shorter weapon the advantage, or at least equalizing the disadvantages. When you have reduced an opponent to only being able to thrust, it is much easier to get inside the range of the longer weapons and negate the advantage of length.
I always appreciate the high quality of discourse in the comment sections for this channel’s videos.
"or is it? Hey! Vsauce, sellsword here. And what is the best way to defeat a better opponent?"
with a stick in their bed
If its a fair fight your tactics suck
*Pulls out a gun*
"Parry this, you filthy casual"
”Pulls out Katana and parries bullet“
Reminds me of a conversation that came up at a D&D table, that a rogue in D&D would do much better with a longer weapon since rushing someone with a longsword while the rogue has a dagger would probably get the rogue killed if not severely injured in the exchange. One person tried to point out "just side step and stab him, he would be slower," one of our guys had HEMA experience and just shook his head and pulled out his gear. Next 20 minutes we were all laughing at each other was we all took turns of daggers vs a longsword.
Unfortunately, as much as I love D&D, its combat isn't particularly as reflective of real combat as some would like to believe (that said, it can also be a bit more reflective of real combat than some would like to believe).
Like, sticking with the idea of two characters next to each other on the board, one with a longsword and the other with the dagger, the game definitely fails to take into account how the dagger wielder has a clear physical disadvantage since they have to cover so much ground to make an attack on the sword practitioner.
If that kind of stuff was important to the DM and/or players, one thing I'd look into doing would be to have every melee weapon have a reach characteristic (daggers would have short reach, shortswords medium, longswords long, then come up with a new name for the current REACH trait), and if a shorter reach weapon is going up against a longer reach weapon (eg, dagger vs longsword), then the dagger character might have disadvantage on their attack, or the longsword character gets a situational AC bonus.
I think that I (with the short weapon) would be the one backing up. They're the ones that have to chase so when I feel comfortable I step forward at the same time they're doing it. They close the distance for me and now I get to attack cleanly in their gap.
Reminds me of all those gun related, self defense techniques I've seen online where people legitimately think they can move faster than a person can pull a trigger.
When you try to walk up on someone who has a weapon pointed at you, they're just gonna position the tip so that you walk into their weapon.
One way you CAN get the one up on someone with a larger weapon is by throwing your dagger. You'd think it would be easy to just knock it away but, it's really not and, most people don't expect that during melee combat.
One thing people often fail to mention is... The opponent can also move, backward, and fast. So rushing in, although most likely your best chance, will still probably lose to someone that also moves and tries counters. Even someone without knowledge can run backward mindlessly swinging at you with greater range.
If they don't have experience, they probably don't know proper footwork either, so it'd probably be pretty easy to outmaneuver them
@@TocsTheWanderer I'm not sure which side you're arguing on but honestly it applies to both so fair point xD
You can move faster forwards than backwards, but somehow this always seems more difficult with weapons in hand. Or maybe I need to train more.
In my younger year Skyrim made me fall in love with the idea of dual wield daggers, that is till I did a bit of larping with my brother who had against my daggers a nice hunky great sword. A great smack to head made me convert to heavy weapon on Skyrim
Did you use mods to do multiplayer on Skyrim? Sounds fun.
@@yekkub9425 larp is done in real life with modeled weapons (we had pvc pipes with pool noodles and duck tape
Me, an Archer:
"Look at what they need to mimic a fraction of our power."
Very good explaination
It's also important to note that fighting styles which use shorter weapons generally use them in pairs, one to parry, one to attack. It would be highly unwise to close with an opponent wielding a longer weapon if one did not have some means of parrying.
Best lesson ever. Thank you David. I really needed to know this
One thing I've theorized about is having a sickle in the offhand as a parrying tool. It provides more control over an opponent's weapon, essentially allowing you to grab it without grabbing it, and giving you the chance to close in with a thrust with the main weapon.
Still risky, but a more solid game plan than just dancing around the guy hoping to get lucky.
The parrying dagger and sai were invented for this reason.
Honestly in my opinion range is the primary factor in most fights,in relatively open areas the longer weapon would probably win but with in the tight confines like small hallways and small rooms the shirter weapon would do better generally
To give an analogy, imagine you are a soldier with a close range pistol, and you know there is an enemy soldier with a guided RPG across a field. Sure, you could try to run at them fast enough before they can get you, at which point you can win because your pistol fires much fast than a rocket launcher, but the guy with the rocket will probably just blow you up as your coming towards him. Same concept applies
I’ve found when fighting rondel against longsword, you have to start in the nacht and take the vor; while aggression and closing distance are possible it can only be done once you have control of the opponents sword.
Yes, longer weapon usually wins; just as having a longer reach is a huge advantage in boxing. But Wing Chun butterfly swords seem to do very well when used skillfully. I would be interested to see your take on that weapon and the associated tactics against something like a 1-handed arming sword.
*obligatory greatsword praise*
True, reach is such a massive advantage in almost every type of fighting.
This is why you need to learn unarmed combat. I found that by learning distance and timing with my hands. Distance was easier to read with arms. It also helps you learn to read your opponents. The longer the weapon most likely the longer it takes them to move it. You can't just watch a person's hands I find it best to watch their shoulders and hips. But that's just me
This is the issue, most of these people aren’t athletes or competitive fighters so idk how much their opinions really matter as they’re taking part in historical fiction. If they were wielding a 12-15lb sword against someone with a short sword I can’t imagine the short sword losing. Seeing how slow these people swing those long swords and the way they step out and strike down? Just applying what I know from fighting parrying and moving forward shouldn’t be hard, we do it with take downs and such all the time in MMA. If you stand stiff and are walking backwards and forwards at each other just constantly chopping as your only attack then maybe but when I watch these fights they seem like the stiffest most choreographical things.
@SS Psyops yeah I was thinking the same thing you said about the smaller sword vs the giant claymore and such. Its like a round house compared to a jab. One you can flick out there the other you need to step into to get the full potential from.
That one nerd in the back of the class "Kevlar glove and pain tolerance"
Alternatively, throw the knife, it might be a more dangerous idea for sparring and it won't surprise them twice, but in the context of a real duel you would only need it to work once...
The problem with that is that if you fail to get a fatal blow in on your first try, you'll be completly unarmed.
I feel like when a shorter blade is all you have, you just do your best. But I see what you're saying. A longer length allows folks to dismantle your with far more comfort.
Usually the shorter weapons weren't your go-to anyway. More so a backup weapon
I’ve found in my experience 2 weapon fighting works well in duels if you can act fast enough even against people with greater reach, however if you’re fighting multiple people that doesn’t work, and if you have many Allie’s and are fighting melee, the pike is king
That’s true. Rush in, eliminate range advantage, only sounds good in theory or if you fight someone who is bad. It’s very easy for them them to maintain their distance and hit you. Before the speed of the weapon matters, it’s their weapon vs your bodyweight as you try to move close enough. Reach advantage is huge.
Honestly, rather than a buckler, one's best bet would be a full sized shield; either a strapped kite/heater shield, or a center grip round shield. Of course, getting a sword as long as theirs would be the better option as long as one was trained with it. But if you HAD to fight with a shorter weapon, a full sized shield is the best option.
I've actually won with a Peter pan dagger against a much longer sword. The key is to stay alive and just catch the blade in the gard. Work your opponent into a cramped space where the big weapon keeps bumping into surroundings rather than you.
This is why daggers should have some sort of disadvantage when paired with a side arm gun
(Deepwoken game. Daggers have insane damage per seconds with the highest swing speed but low range. But a side arm gun can completely make up for that making their range stat nearly impossible to counter)
Facts! I love buckler and backsword, but even with that I can barely get in close enough to make an attack at all against a long sword.
This supports my argument that having a room-sized blade will win any fight
Yep. Even when you know how this has to be done the skill difference has to be really high in your favor to win at that kind of disadvantage
Do you guys ever try deflecting tennis balls or Nerf guns with swords? That sounds fun.
Something to keep in mind, if you're opponent has the greater reach, you are generally at a disadvantage. And like the video said, getting in there is really tough. Doable, but the odds are not in your favor. Somethings you might try (emphasis on try)
Pick your moment to charge in. Let them get tired or careless, maybe even bind their blade first. There are better options than charging in as fast as you can.
Him: talks about a sword and how the long one is better for range shots
Me: *pulls out a gun*
one of my favorite kills I ever got in Mordhau was styling on a kid with a polearm and armor while I was a naked boy with a hand axe. I times the movement perfectly and ran in just after his swing missed and got 2 hits on him before finishing him off with a kick. In chat he was even giving me props for the kill.
Counter argument, my secondary weapon to balance things out is a gun
Ah yes, I’ll just use my gun to win this game of football or basketball.
Totally how you do it right?
SMH! You show a Clear lack of understanding in martial arts.
What are you planning to to do when your opponent hits X in time for the QTE and dodges those bullets?!?!
It’s so different with unarmed combat because even if they’re taller than you you could probably still work your way into range and get your shots in
Range is extremely important it's why spears and staffed weapons in general
Don't forget about the most of important element, the element of surprise. Doesn't matter what weapon you wield if no one sees you coming.
Just stab them while they sleep!! (?) Lol
Brilliant.
Be that as it may, fights rarely happen on flat, even, terrain and not every opponent has the coordination to dodge, feint, parry, riposte AND keep their balance.
I am a really tall guy, and I have gotten very good at fighting in retreat. I do this because I can usually carve up people on their way in, usually my size makes it so I can hit them while they're fighting with my feder trying to get close enough to hit. I can only imagine how much this effect would be multiplied tussling with a 5th the reach of your opponent
Probably why short weapons weren't the go-to option but more so a sidearm. Just like in the gun world.
The short swords and other little blades were a backup for when your polearm or spear was gone.
I've experimented a fair bit with chinese weapons sparring and using double butterfly knives against a longer weapon is always a challenge. There's a technique called "trapping the spear" in which you hold the opponent's weapon between the flat of one knive and the edge of the other, forcefully holding it in order to allow you to move in. It's hard, but with practice you can pull it off consistently enough. I've always found it harder to fight a jian, which is very fluid and rapier like in its movement, than a pole weapon or a saber.
As my instructor often said "trust to your feet." Said another way run first if you can, if not here's some ways you might win. Nothing is for granted in a fight.
But short swords and daggers exist for a reason. And those reasons are grappling and places where a long weapon becomes a hinderance.
Also they're better for every day carry and easier to make
the way I do it with my gladius is by hitting their sword hard out of the way they most often focus on rebounding with the sword while I'm closing in, I also try to grab the sword when possible
That's what we're talking about in the video. Doesn't take much to avoid that incoming attack on the blade.
Even if you manage to get a solid beat on the opponent's blade, all I need to do is Retreat quickly and bring their blade back around and keep you out of distance.
Not saying it can't be done, I'm saying it's quite hard
@@SellswordArts yeah one thing is that I'm also rather larger then anyone I duel with so often they lose balance as well but I have lost numerous times still even though I have every other advantage just due to the length of their weapon alone
However when I started martial arts and when we sparred. The more I would retreat, the more my opponent would attack. Dodging from side to side has always helped more.
The one exception to this rule: hallways. Doesn't seem like a common issue, but in castles there could be a lot of narrow passageways that would hinder the use of a longsword or similar. This is yet another point to add to the argument in favor of spears that I see brewing in this comment section, however, as thrusting weapons have far less of an issue in close quarters, and is in part why some castles would be designed to force invading armies into close quarters.
I literally just commented on another video of yours about how I wonder about the precise strategy of using a short sword vs a long sword.
Without armour or a shield having a shorter weapon is of course a disadvantage, range is a factor in all martial arts and is always an advantage to be able to hit your opponent before they can hit you. Even in armoured combat a longer weapon like a polearm would be your main weapon and any small sword would be a sidearm. Even some two handed swords like katanas were used as sidearms on the battlefield.
The best would be a medium sword with a defensive shield type thingy protecting your hand
When I was younger I did some Middle Ages fighting reenactment. There were 3 kids including myself at on event. The other two kids were much more skilled than me. We started off all using sword and shield. I lost like 90% of my matches. At one point, my coach let me swap to using a two handed sword. A lot of folks thought that would be worse as I lost my defensive shield. I proceeded to win 15 rounds straight, then continue to win 75% of my matches. Range does so much, and folks don’t realize how much of an advantage it is.
That's why you want either armor or big shield if you are outreached by opponent. Or you want to fight in somewhat tight spaces where opponent couldn't get much use out of their reach. But in duel on comparatively open field you are dead, unless your opponent fucked up
People also forget that the pommel and hilt make a great bludgeon.
It’s why the phrase "cloak and dagger" exists. Daggers are meant to kill people who let you get close or who can't see it coming. Or rondels to pierce a knight through the visor. Too bad a lot of games don't feature that mechanic more
Very interesting topic! Can you talk about Roman's how they used short swords and the curved shields vs often much longer swords.
With a shield. The "get in close and jam up their range" school of thought works best if you have something you can feed to their weapon so you can get close enough to use yours. We see this a lot in cloak and dagger, shield and sword, escrima, buckler and knife. You also see it in boxing and MMA (striking) when there's a reach mismatch. Guy will present a half guard to the guy's lead hand while stepping outside the blender. This creates back exposure. He will then take his other hand and send it to the liver or kidneys, or proceed to grappling. The Romans used to slightly tilt their shields (while in formation)and stab through the gaps. That's why they were curved. Can't stab what you can't touch.
Trouble with this approach is that it requires two tools and most people don't like getting stabbed or cut. With a single short weapon against a single longer weapon, you need to be able to fully commit to the approach. Most people can't fully commit because they are afraid of being cut or stabbed. It's a lot of training and a lot of cuts to get over that, and most people aren't willing to put in that sort of work in the era of the gun.
The two out of ten times this guy is citing that the shorter weapon won were probably when the shorter weapon user closed faster than the longer weapon could get on point.
Remember- the manuals do say that if two fencers of equal skill square off, and only one has mastered the thrust, the fight will likely go to him.
You will get cut if you do serious bladework. Nicks under armor aren't unheard of. Points aren't necessarily indicative of who would have died. Staying in the cell isn't always a good thing. Sorry this went long. Hope this helps.
This reminds me of the classic boxing style match up between the in fighter and the out fighter, the out fighter using movement and straight punches to keep off the ropes and maintain distance, while the in fighter tries to cut off the ring and close in, the thing is, in boxing, the in fighter takes a lot of punishment trying to close in, hoping to cause double the damage once he's inside, and even the most defensive in fighters like Tyson would still take damage going in, while out boxers like Mayweather took little to no damage maintaining distance, but when it comes to swords you can't really afford to take the damage going in, cause every single move could be lethal
In my experience, the problem also lies within the commitment. Like, a dagger can work against a two-handed sword as long as you dodge and commit. But it appears that many people do not like trying when the possible consequence is certain death...
It's a lot easier to stay semi out of range and hope for a mirical until you get hit 😅
One thing I am curious about is using a dagger (preferably one with cross guards as opposed to a rondel dagger) as a self-defense weapon against a longsword. A scenario I had in mind is a dude with a sword and dagger being surprise attacked by a swordsman. The former only has enough time to draw his dagger to quickly defend until he can get enough space to draw his sword (so, it's not a dagger user trying to win, but to defend before reaching a better weapon). Do you have any insight about this?
@@cadethumann8605 no... I have not been suprise-attacked with a longsword whilst walking around with my dagger and longsword yet 😂
But like, when in doubt, just run I guess...
@sake3857 No, I meant about practicing a dagger defense method to create distance before you can draw your sword. Have you ever experimented through practice (at the very least with defending and retreating with a dagger as opposed to closing distance and attacking the swordsman)? (And I know you can always try to run away. But what if the attack is so sudden you need to defend yourself? What if the way out is closed off? Etc.?)
@@cadethumann8605 well... stepping back is kinda easy as long as you have the space. The space would probably be there as you need space to fight effectively with longswords. So just use it like a parry dagger and hope for the best I guess ^^
(I'm in no way an expert, but this seems kinda straight forward)
@sake3857 I do hope that I can experiment using a foam dagger (or anything where I can't get hurt in the worst case scenario). I do recall watching Skallagrim's dagger vs sword test where it didnt work very well but my issue was that he only used a rondel dagger and tried static blocking with a reverse grip (this channel's favorite). I wonder if results would be different by using a dagger with a crossguard and using deflections in an orthodox grip.
One thing I confess is that the reason for my interest in this subject is to see how a backscabbard wearer can defend in absolute emergencies. And yes, I am aware of the drawbacks to wearing a sword on your back, but I have been working on improving it. Long story short, I have studied and practiced a lot and am capable of drawing blades up to 29" using a normal scabbard and drawing it the more (in)famous way. And I can actually draw it pretty fast. However, it's not as battle-ready or space efficient (even when I lean forward to draw under a low clearance, it can still take up more space to draw) as on the side and I wonder how to defend from dangers that happen at a very close range until I can get my sword out.
Mind you, I'm not walking around with a sword in real life (at most, foam or plastic props at events). This is just a hypothetical thing for fiction.
Just thought I'd share. I hope this won't be a tense discussion. I just like to experiment.
Yep. That's how you deal with a longer, heavier weapon, but that's about evening out an advantage they have.
If they can hit you when you can hit them, you're in a bad spot. Getting out of it is a desperate play
That’s when armor like gambison comes into play.
And that's exactly why spears were the most common tool of medieval warfare.
If you're non-lethal fighting in gymnasiums and open fields, of course the longer weapon wins.
Try fighting in a basement with a 5 foot ceiling, and support pillars.
Try fighting in a trench. Try fighting with their backs against the wall.
Backing up is very dangerous in rough terrain.
Try fighting on a shield wall.
So yes you are correct it is very difficult but that being the case it’s still the ultimate way of dealing with someone with a longer weapon than you. Like no matter what you do if you have the shorter range you’re best chance is to take advantage of that as either way you have to close distance the best you can do is to make sure that they aren’t as effective in that distance. So it’s not a 100% guarantee it works, and anyone saying they’ll just do it like it’s easy is kidding themselves, it’s still a dangerous play, but if you have to do something that is the best thing you can do. And as someone else pointed out not all hits are equal so it’s not like all hits will kill you, doesn’t mean they’re fun to take but better than the ones that kill you if you can get them in the process.
Mike Tyson had a similiar problem fighting heavyweight at 5'11". that's why the evasiveness of Cus D'Amatos peek-a-boo technique was so important. Mike used his shorter stature with strong evasive drilling to close the distance on opponents with SIGNIFICANTLY longer reach. Those 2/10 must be the Mike Tysons of swordsmen
Gotta really play with the range. When they retreat, you change direction and also retreat. Opening the distance beyond their range. Problem then is you are back to square 1.
It's simple, but simple doesn't mean easy.
Me and my brother do “live action role-play” he prefer to use a weapon more of great sort of length wail I liked to too wield hand and a half blades. The one maneuver I always do that is like me to feed him a few times every single time I pull this move off I have one engagement. The mover is waiting for him to come into a strike, block with one of the blades and then push in for a strike with the other. This has allowed me to enter striking range while my opponent uses a much larger blade.
I’ve noticed over the years that sport fencing is all about the retreat and real fencing is all about the advance.
Two very different worlds .
I would not say that's true. Retreating is incredibly important in Hema. Controlling the distance is one of the most effective strategies in all forms of combat.
With two weapons of equal length, you should be advancing and retreating about equally. But if you have a weapon that's longer than your opponents, you should continue to retreat to maximize your reach advantage. Why get close enough to let them hit if you can avoid it?
@@SellswordArts why not just run away then ? And comeback with a bigger sword than he has 😂
There is the leaf bladed spear for anyone who wants to sacrifice durability and piercing power for the ability to cut.
It is also significantly harder to use.
Then we have the halberd, which are able to do both well, but are MUCH more top heavy and thus much slower.
Spears are the strongest weapon, easy to pick up and one who masters them incredibly effective. They can break bones quite easily and pierce armor.
Plus, there are forms intended for close quarter combat and a good fighter with a spear can hold off 2-3 equal fighters with swords. This isnt speculation, there is footage of it.
Spears are by no means as flashy as a sword, but they are the weapon I know off with the most benefits to it.
It's only main weakness is being grabbed
That is why they made the time honored move throw and run away.
However the recoil or recovery for a next attack is slower and once you can close the gap they shouldn't be able to get away before the damage is done. Just because they land a hit it doesn't mean they win the fight. Also like you said if you have a second hand knife or dagger that's a projectile and that can be used as a distraction for you to land a finishing strike
understood
Investing all my training points on DEX and PER.
Weaponism has some interesting videos with uneven ranged fights
like a Spear fighter vs 3 Kendoka
or vs an Eskrimador with 2 sticks
or Kendoka vs unarmed martial arts
She really tried to show how hard it is for the shorter ranged fighter, while also showing the few times the shorter ranged fighter got in and did something
That spear vs 3 shinai was really not much realistic... poor representation...
@@Tkoutlosh Yeah i guess. In a real scenario the 1 wouldn't have much room to move
(which is funny, since she's a Kendoka iirc, you'd think she'd make the Kendoka look good)
@@KazanmaTheSilverWind It was fun and nice to watch, but my main concern was about the weapons and its weight and possible durability in fight, especially what was shown with that spear was not much realistic. If you hold it just onehanded like that you will gain lot more reach, but you can't just slide it over the floor so it will be way more tiring for a wrist and mabe even impossible. I own several spears and big and long and bit hefty ones can take some more damage from sword blows before break, but lighter ones, more like javelins, which could be used like what was shown won't be that durable and good cut from a sword could damage it too seriously in just one hit.
Same thing accures in kombat sports aswell; if ur opponent has a better arm range (in boxing for example) then the opponent will probably have the upper hand
I think shorter weapons are handier in an urban setting. We as HEMA fencers often forget that historically speaking, our favorite implement the longsword would often time just spend its' time resting in a sheath. In this case, a brigand that would have an issue with you could most definitely bumrush his target with his trusty knife or bauernwehr.
Definitely a strong disadvantage but possible. It turns pretty much impossible though if the person is more skilled. I'm very fast and when larping and sparing with escrima sticks for Kali. But if someone was equal skill or better it became around those 8/10 odds. Very fun though and definitely improved fighting against longer reaches. If in tournament though would just dual weild to even it up a bit more but still a disadvantage like u say.
This makes Peter Pan regularly beating Captain Hook more impressive.
i think we all learned this at recess when we were kids while playfighting with sticks
Stepping in and jamming them up is the ideal way to deal with this, it's the only way to deal with it because until you can reach them they get nothing but free shots. Just because it's what you have to do does not mean it easy. Also if this is Anna fencing situation if I push you out of the list continually you're eventually going to have to deal with me being there
It's like boxing. Reach is usually an advantage but you can use being shorter to your own advantage. Longswords are way heavier and once you pass their guard you're on a better position. Besides pretty much all great empires chose short swords or sabers as their cut and thrust weapon
How to deal with a foe with a longer sword that you:
Step 1: *r u n*
Completely agree with you. I can charge someone who's unarmed because they're taller. But if they have a sword what am I supposed to do, not get stabbed on the way in. Fists hurt but not nearly that bad.
In other words the best way to deal with a disadvantage is to feint and surprise your opponent mid fight.
As a manlet, this is my eternal problem. Also why I picked up archery in addition to swordsmanship, also saving for a spear
Won a mail coif from a certain giant who’s nicknamed T-Bone, on account of he hits you like a Mack truck t-bones a car. In this particular tourney I rushed him repeatedly with German long sword 🗡 techniques but his nearly 6’6” frame and incredible reach was still longer with Florentine long swords ⚔️. We double killed one another repeatedly and it impressed him so he awarded me the coif which he had made
I need this guys review on how practical a Nodachi katana would be in real battle
a very well placed through might do it
Basically to close distance successfully with drastically shorter reach in any form of combat you have pull a mike tyson.
Step one - feint in order to get the opponent to attack
Step two - sidestep or parry and then stepthrough
Step three - retaliate once closed in range. Opponents long reach will become smothered.
In mikes case he could simply duck under the smothered fighters blows, but someone with a long sword just wouldn’t be able to use it super effectively in clinch range. And with a sword one good blow is all you need.
Problem with this plan, if you dont finish it in one go, good luck getting it to work again. Now you are at a severe disadvantage, especially if the person with the longer weapon calmly waits for a charge.