As this is intended to be able to feel like any number of layers of evolutions from that origin point, yes. It's very important that the original is considered a sacred cow.
I hear Joseph's voice echoing in my skull about he lays awake at night feeling like the C2C development gnomes are hard at work chipping away at the game he loves.
Have you forgotten that a week ago you had a plan to revise the sacred balance?
Swords are anti-archery units (though right NOW aren't specifically declared as such as they are mostly just a touch stronger than concurrent archery units and are given city attack, which is expected to be against archers and often archery units gain actual strength base from buildings when they are in a city ) as are throwing units and there's currently a gap in throwing units in Medieval that will also be solved. In the new review layout, swords WILL be specifically anti-archery units, which will help to directly counter them in the field and so on.
Practically, even you don't care about it. (thoughtfully) And whether a complete revision of the balance in Realism caused at least a couple of posts on the forum...
That difficulty to reach the rider is exactly why throwing gets a bonus in combat
Compared to the fantasy one-handed swordsmen/macemen/axemen - of course.
You ask about nunchuk and flail and I say those are largely shield and parry counters. It's almost impossible to block such weapons if the wielders know what they're doing with them.
I meant the agricultural flail. So, why don't they just hit the sheaf with a stick? By the way, the flail began to spread when the shields abruptly decreased. And yes, how many people are walking the streets with shields now?
Spears are by design great at setting against charge and for reaching the riders,
And how, with such an effective spear, did the cavalry manage to brazenly dominate the Middle Ages until the invention of the pike? Is everyone lying about using two-handed weapons against cavalry?
And now the ugly reality.
1. Take a small knife
2. tie to the handle from the shovel
3. Approach the horse
4... Think about how quickly you will kill her with this, if she is against it. At the same time, if you think that the horse will over-successfully commit suicide on a spear resting on the ground, then you are mistaken.
Even if the spear is 2.5 m long, the tip will be slightly larger than a meter the ground level at an angle of installation... 45 degrees. The problem is that you won't have it. Even wild boars are hunted with this. ="Boar spear "Saufeder" - a type of spear used for hunting wild boars: a short and heavy spear with a wide tip and a crossbar, transverse to the shaft. Boar spears are mainly known in Germany and Scandinavia.=
Everything else is 1. Will not cause anything lethal 2. just break down. And even if the horse dies, there will be a hole in the formation, and the infantryman is very depressed – for the inertia is also in the dead horse. The Greek phalanx was a terrible force ... against the ponies.
They are just very short. The 12th century and surrounding area is a standard spear about the height of a man. Moreover, shortening and thickening occurred with the development of cavalry. But the rider had no such restrictions.
and even then can be set and braced against a charging horse line effectively.
Again. Even if the spear is 2.5 m long, the tip will be slightly more than a meter from the ground at an angle of installation... 45 degrees. But in reality, the spear is much shorter.
1. The efficiency will be appropriate.
2. The horses turned out badly , you need to kill the rider. And then it turns out that the "boar" spear is all right with power, but with armor penetration is bad.
Therefore, we take citizens with two-handed clubs and an axe. And crossbowmen.
Meanwhile, the horse was rapidly turning into a tank.
As a result, they had to increase number of sticks stuck in the horse and a much more correct angle of installation. A side effect was the ability to get the rider. In general, there was a peak.
However, the very long shaft of the standard pike had a very small tip. There was a "Moorish" pike with a tip up to half a meter – but this is a highly specialized anti-cavalry monster. So.... We take halberdiers, citizens with two-handed swords and flails. We invent a crossbow with a collar and an arquebus. And finally, by 1500 – a musket capable of killing a horse with a single shot with great probability. And only then do we sigh with relief. Despite the fact that we had effective spears before the domestication of the horse.
As far as maces being used to destroy swords, meh, not the point. The point is that metal clubs are pretty good against blades
Again, they appeared in Europe in the 1470s. Haven't they thought of "pretty good" and much cheaper clubs than a sword in a few thousand years?
No, it's just that they are inferior to swords in almost all combat respects, except for armor-piercing characteristics. Because the "baton" is 1. Slower due to the specific balance 2. Shorter, because with the sword length it will yield in maneuverability quite radically 3. It is not able to deliver stabbing blows, which is fatal in dogfight. 4 is only dangerous when hit hard. Unlike the sword.
Therefore, after the appearance of minimally decent blades and before the appearance of heavy armor or the need to beat on infantry helmets, the mace is an ersatz
The axeman in the battle will also lose miserably to the swordsman in everything but impact forces and armor-piercing. Up to a certain limit - then stabbing and stunning blows will be the only effective ones for one-handed weapons
and they therefore seem to fit in pretty well as a half-city defense,
And even this is not. 1. For "take the enemy down the stairs" they fit weakly All the advantages are only too armored even for axes targets.2. In a dump on the walls not with an over-armored opponent, the piercing blow is especially important. The mace-bearer will be simply slaughtered.
and you can circularly argue with yourself to the point of insanity.
Most of what I'm telling you is a platitude and an unquestionable axiom.
Truth is the skill with the weapon mattered more than what weapon was against what weapon.
1. You need to watch less action movies. And, from the history textbook, it is easy to find out who won whom at the Marathon, for example.
2. Yes, the experience in the game is already taken into account