I believe you mean the Pommel of Mass Destruction lol

Please don't skip 3 when doing the count down though!

The most effective weapon in human history was always the pen.

No, you are all mistaken, it was just the dangerous bunny. No knight can win against such beast.

Eh, the Plague? God's wrath? Starvation?

Long pointy stick: "why not both?"

Long pointy stick didn’t work too well at protecting Scottish Lowlanders from English arrows at Falkirk. I reckon spear and shield would be better then pike.

@@lowlandnobleman6746 This video was about a *duel* so as long as you manage to avoid getting shot in the head or torso right off the bat you can probably rush an archer and finish them off. On a battlefield you still want longer spears than the opponent has _in addition_ to shields but yes, good shields in combination with _any_ stabbing weapon are vital against projectiles.

True, but a skillful opponent could get past the pike, so I’d still personally want spear and shield for that extra safety and versatility.

@@lowlandnobleman6746 There's a reason he banned shields in the video. Although that does pose the question, if you were allowed to use _any_ shield, would you use a very large or strapped one or a smaller more nimble option such as a boss-gripped roundshield? And do you use a one-handed spear or a more hefty and versatile cut&thrust weapon such as a gladius, arming sword or the like as the shield can negate enemy reach advantage? Basically if you have a shield you might want to rush an enemy spearman at which point the greater damage potential of a cutting blade would be valuable, but if the opponent is wearing plate armour (with polearm, with or without shield) you're still pretty doomed.

I have one of those !!!!!

or...fight near water if possible.

Or use a spear edged with can operner

the can opening spear!

Can opener on a stick

Ever heard of the wild west partner

@@chillycoldchomper9389 oh yeah, I guess you're right. Well played partner.

People already do that with WWII weapons

I don’t imagine guns getting much better 🤔

@@RealRagnar816 Well imagine them getting obsolete, they are better ways to sling slugs of metal at each other than gunpowder

Indeed

I really see the halberd at the top tbh.

I figured it would've been the bill tbh, but I had the top 3 correct

I was leaning towards rapier, but if your opponent might be armored and you're not allowed a shield...yeah, poleaxe all the way

I was thinking about the halberd the whole vid but k

@Rex Francorum Or you could just use your brain and summon the flying spaghetti monster. Obviously.

An army marches on patriotism.

Well when the Dutch fought the Spanish empire in the late 16th and early 17th century, the - always with war accompanying - famine had much less of an impact because of a new 4 field crop rotation system.

*poison

**laughs in rice**

"BuT It's NoT EfFeCtIvE AgAnIsT UnArMoUr eNeMy" Armour or not you're going to get beat the sh*t out of you

Also get back to work

Well It's still better to be hit by a blunt weapon while wearing armor rather then being hit with it while unarmored.

Get you a weapon that can do both. Most poleaxe had a chisel or hammer on the back. Spicy

Thick spikes, like cones, they wont get stuck, but they concentrate all the force in one point, with armour, and without armor, it could crack your skull or some bones

those heated arguments about top 10 ranking...

@@RW77777777 fr

You aren't?

Very funny.

​@@alexanderthompson7164 The problem with a mace is that it's slow and unwieldy compared to a sword, or the majority of other weapons. So if your opponent just so happens to use a sword you're at a disadvantage regardless of their armor.

true, padding and mail can displace some of the force, but the only difference would be plate. perhaps damaging plate which could put pressure on the chest to not breath properly or effect mobility. piercing is lethal but unless something vital is hit the fight could continue for minutes and slashing could remove a limb or the head, but I think by statistical probability blunt weapons would offer a game changing or fight ending strike more easily and quickly. he really should have elaborated more on maces or morning stars because he shows images of both but calls them all maces. you can definitely thrust with a morning star, if need be...and who says you can't thrust with a mace..? you can't pierce with a mace thrust, but that would hit hard to the face opening bleeding that could effect vision or damage a helmet visor, when your life is on the line everything is versatile...

Wrong

@@lordsesshoumaru8596 The word "morningstar" is complex to use because the meaning is not really fully agreed upon. Some people (and culture/languages) concider only a flail with a spiky ball a morningstar, others call any mace that is ballheaded and spiky a morningstar as examples. But that is not my main topic. There is a misconception that is very common that i like to adress here. You touch it in your comment so i would like to "fill out the gaps" so to speak: People in general seems to be fixated with the ability to kill in a weapon, even the need to kill in a battle scenario. There is no special use in killing in a battle, just put them out of action is enough. Death can be delivered after the fighting is over. So to but a hole in someone might be deadly tomorrow but useless right now. Here the blunt weapon makes much more sense i believe: A hit that cruches muscles, breaks bones and is immediately very painful is, Most likely, more effective "right now" especially when the wielder will hit again and again and again... To recieve a hit with a mace WILL make you loose focus, you can´t directly counter, it might even shift your balance slightly. That "stagger effect" gives the mace wielder time to recover and hit again. A good hit on plate transfer a lot of force into the body within. That is the reason blunt weapon was prefered against plated foes. There is no need to dent or poke a hole in the plate, the force goes through anyway. Just like the "toy" called Newtons Cradle. I hope you understand that i am not criticising you i am just elaborating.

@@meyes1098 not if your strong enough to swing it hard

@@alexanderthompson7164 there’s a difference? maybe i’m slow

exactly.. "Gimme some distance"

Well that's like the weapon right before guns, so yeah. Glaives, two handed axes, partisans, a big two-handed sword, ect.

Mine was "Why? That's a dumb rule"

@@alexanderthompson7164 the poleaxe was also modular while the halberd was made from one piece of steel

Keep in mind, if you're not trying to murder someone, it's far more ideal

@@Raigosai i mean its not like you wont murder them if you hit them with any form of commitment

If shields were allowed the warhammer would have place much higher. Roran will have his due.

Russians:it's a klevec(literally "pecker").

IT IS HERESY AGAINST HIS MOST HOLY GOD-EMPEROR OF MANKIND

Yea the idea that blunt weapons are somehow ineffective against someone who isn’t armored is dumb. The only perk slicing has is blood loss and cutting muscles/tendons which would cause complete debilitation of the body part. Blunt force is still very deadly as you can easily break bone and rupture organs. A mace strike to the torso can be potentially lethal and will likely take the person out of the fight just from the shock of the hit. It’s even a technique used in hand to hand combat. Watch Bas Rutten. He is a famous fighter known for punching his opponents in the liver which is one of the most painful spot to be hit. Even ruptured a guys liver in a fight just from his punch

@@clownworld4655 liver punch’s are devastating and it doesn’t even take a lot of power to completely rupture the liver with an accurate hit the problem is that it’s pretty hard to get an accurate liver shot in real combat

@@tannermeche7968 not really. Watch Bas Rutten’s fights. With some training and basically knowledge of anatomy it is pretty simple in a hand to hand fight

If a blow is abe to kill\debilitate a guy in armour, it's hard to imagine that same blow not doing at least as well if the armour isn't there. In a low armour situation, it might not be as good as a sword, but you'll have a chance, no matter what your opponent goes with. Can't say the same for a falchion.

@@clownworld4655 This. Even just watch Rutten's highlights, the man is a liver aimbot.

Matthew Doye What about a sock wrapped around a rock?

Where is swordstaves? How'bout Finnish's "Good day Sir!"?

the weapon of choice for woman on duel trial during talhoffer´s time.

@@andrewbatist6355 precisely

a rock in a sock is a shitty flail and a flail is a shitty mace

obviously skill between opponents is the same in rating these regardless of armor.

One thing he doesn't mention as well is that blunt damge to the body can **only** increase when less armour is placed between the weapon and the opponent. He tries to claim that a mace would be less effective at killing an armoured opponent, but the thing is without armour in the way you can only do more damge. A direct hit to an opponent's cheekbone for instance (or any bone for that matter) would **always** for more damage then hitting the armour between it.

When getting really up close and personal, mace wouldn't work. It's time for dagger to shine

Wrestling works well vs armored, as long as you can close. With a shield it's easy.

Usually good weapon againist unarmored opponents are easier to carry around, wich makes them better suited to carry around 24/7. It's the same reasoning on why people carry handguns instead of assault rifles.

thank you

@@ian-rr9to my pleasure

Thanks this tells me it is an incomplete list

Thank you very much!

Bill must be One hell of a unit of a man to Score 3rd place

Run around the arena until he dies of a heart attack.

*unscrews the pommel*

Truly. If I didn't know what my opponent would be wearing I'd never in my life pick a single handed sword. Even a two handed one, for that matter. A poleaxe, since they have both a point and a blunt end, would be perfect.

I agree, the Warhammer and Mace were HIGHLY underated, per say, if you hit an unarmored aponets head with a mace, he is going to die... And also, he stated that the warhammer can not cut, this is outright false. It could impale, cut, hit you on the head with a sometimes spiked hammer. Warhammers were VERY versitile.

​@@acecrimson2393 even if you get hit in the arm, i assume few people would be able to keep fighting with a broken(probably shattered) arm. Mace should be much higher up on the list

@@acecrimson2393 I see this alot. It's not the damage they do when landing a blow that makes them "bad" it's simply the fact that landing any telling blow with a shortish blunt weapon against a nimble and fast opponent is just very very difficult. Ofcourse if you hit someone over the head with a mace he is going to die. But you need to get very close and put yourself in danger to do this. So yes the damage is there if you land a blow but the problem is that your blows are quite slow since you need a swing which is slower than a jab/thrust plus you need to put yourself in considerable danger because of the short range to be able to land this blow. This mistake is made mostly because the other way around it does mostly only revolves around damage. A cutting weapon just doesn't do damage to armor which is why its bad against armor. But it is not that a blunt weapon doesn't do damage to unarmored that it's bad against unarmored it that it is just really fucking hard to get a hit in with a short, slow, momentum based weapon against a fast and nimble opponent.

@@Glo0ze To put it simply, If your an armored Knight, going up against an "un armored nimble aponet" chances are you would be able to hit him without much fuss. You talk as if the warhammer weighs 50 pounds, which it did not. There are versions of the warhammer that have long shafts like a polearm for powerful and longer reach. I don't see your point..

I'm with you on this. Have trained with lots of different weapons, including pikes. It isn't that difficult to get past ONE pike ... unfortunately, pikes allow close formation, which means you are going to get skewered before reaching the holder of the one you dealt with. But 1 vs 1 ... yeah, you're toast. In the SCA, I mastered the fine art of parrying and spinning in with a polearm against both spears and pikes ... unless they had backup, it was essentially game over.

Imagine having a duel inside a castle with pikes...

@@mielivalta It'd quickly turn into wrestling.

The eternal question, can you stab him before he stabs you?

PIkes could be, and historically were, customizable in length by cutting the bottom end to the length you wanted so there you go. :)

u r confusing video games with reality ..

@@Bizasbusiness Was a joke my dude, I know you can't thrust with a mace.

you can thrust with a mace and that shit would hurt if unarmored. it would basically be a pomel strike.

You can, not as well as with a sword or spear though, unless the mace has a spike on its top, which at least some did.

Or just have a spike on top of the mace.

The halberd is merely ornamental, it was spear that was generally used in battle, all those youtube videos about using halberds are a sham, it merely denoted modern technology not necessarily effectivity.

​@@magatism It appears in way too many historical paintings to not have been used in battle.

@@meyes1098 It was not widely used but those paintings were meant to impress people. Like we showcase tanks, while M-18's and RPG's do most of the fighting.

The Halberts problem: in a surprise encounter on the road, you would likely not carry it. That's where the swords come in: they were much more likely to be available, since they are easier to carry.

@@vast634 and lighter than a mace with a better defence and better offense to unarmoured opponents but if someone shows up perfectly armoured you're dead

Maces look great and are fun to swing, but once you've had to detangle clothing, skin, womens' hair, guard dogs, harps, venetian blinds, bicycle tires, extension cords, saltwater taffy and the innards of VCR tapes from the head of one, you realize that they're just such a hassle.

@@crazylegoman Nah maces and warhammers should be at the top of the list.

...who brings VCR tapes with them onto the battlefield??? Near the battlefield to record the battlefields to record the fight maybe...

@@matthewwriter9539 My thoughts exactly.

Bruh the locater in Rattay killed me with a goddam flanged mace

GNAPPO REDZ ad mortem

Pole arm, the most versitale weapon is used by overpowered/overtuned turtle. Ad morten shobe on red

Ilari Hiltunen how on earth is the law bro op? We have no opener at all and can only turtle and/or parry.

@@tanks608 because he is super safe, over tuned and has huge turtle potential and over all, very unhealthy for the game. Just because he has no super viable opener, dosen't mean hero is weak. Especialy in game where defence is more powerful/rewarding that offencive. Overtuned parry punishes: parrying is one of the easiest mechanics in the game( both l and h parry). Crutchbringer has 50dmg l parry which is around ~42% of most heroes health pool. Heavy parry is 40dmg (10impale+30 heavy) if there is wall in front (usualy is because thats how maps are designed). Basicly lawbringer gets over reward for simple action. Sobe on red" from shove on block to shove on red. Shove has super low recovery means he can punish players that try to punish his punish (only certain heroes like tiandi or shaman can punish sobe on prediction. Hell, lb can parry most dodge attacks that are used against sobe (50-40dmg). Sobe had also early hyper armor (like pre nerfed hito ) meaning it can be used most chain based offencive with litle risk. Safest chain offecive: lb may not have viable opener but he has one of the safest chain offecive in the game. options are top 400ms light that can be delayed, side enhanced lights or unpunishable 500ms shove. Strongest 4v4 hero: lb is the strongest 4v4 hero by multipe reasons. He is the king of mid lane which is the most important point (both renown gain and objective point gains are incorrect (b is actualy around 1.5 score per s and unboosted zone is 0.8, boosted one is 1.6 not 2.) Because low recovery zone, high health pool and really strong feat/perk combinations. Lb is also strong ganker (long arm, impale) and can hold zones long long time. Lb is also top 3 strongest duel/brawl heroes. And cheery at the top, lb health pool is highest in the game (+30hp more than most of the cast), meanig he can sobe trade his way to victory. 400ms top light from neutral is also strong shutdown tool and neutrals many heroes openers (kensei, valkyrie, nuxia ect).

Ilari Hiltunen ok parry is literally what the class is designed around so he should have a strong parry punish since that is the one thing he is designed to do. I would also say the large health pool makes up for the extremely low amount of hyper armor on anything but the shove. I will admit the shove on block was cheesy as hell and was happy to see it go. Our chain offense might be safe but it is also super predictable as well.

Pretty much what I'm thinking, maces will deal a lot of blunt damage, if that energy can go through an armored/padded opponent it will be efficient vs someone unarmored. Though I agree that it is less forgiving if you miss anything.

I think the idea is how well it would be in the given scenario. If an opponent had a pole axe and was unarmored (therefore free to move quickly) a mace is almost as good as holding a stick.

@@guyguy7953 Yeah, even a good club can kill someone with the right hit. The problem is delivering the hit. The warhammer is a devastating weapon, but it's also short and unbalanced.

Thing is, most hits where glancing blows.

Guys you don't get the point, clubs and maces are not only have less range than the arming sword(yes, I checked) and slowet due to being head-heavy, even with a handguard, people would be swinging and redelivering that same slash at you mulitple times before you get to attack. You will get decapited or cut and get some major infections, broken bones and inbleeding is definitely serious but unless it's the ribs or the head, which to be honest is the hardest thing to strike on the enemy (except when you're using a polearm), decapitation and/or open wounds are much more lethal

Lawgiver laughs in incendiary, high ex, stun, tracer, rapid fire ect ect.

@@firelordsusan555 different reference.

Kensei 😠👊

Lawdaddy gang

laughs in a inbalanced weapon.

You watched that video about why knights fight snails didn't you?

I think those might be one of the first memes of history!

@@SrMikicas Humanity: shitposters springing eternal.

underrated comment

Rakshasa were real! :) hands swapped shape-shifters are among us !

Won’t cause instant incapacitating effects, eh? I think that’s a bit subjective

Nah, generally cut weapons vs light armor are much better cut hand, throat, aven detach limbs. Blunt damage have to be aimed right to the skull to work.

Hydrostatic shock is a very dubious theory, moreover, I've seen an article on this subject in which it argued that pistols would also be capable of causing hydrostatic shock. However, the effectiveness of the rifles does not come from the hydrostatic shock, but rather from the effect of the temporary cavity and the elastic limit of the tissues, so it seems when a projectile reaches around 2000 FPS (it is certainly known that this phenomenon occurs when the projectile has a speed of at least 2200 FPS) the temporary cavity expansion is so fast that make the tissues break causing even greater damage (no wonder rifles usually have an exit hole larger than the entry hole, even though they not usually use hollow point ammo).

Come on Metatron when we going to get that Top 10 Pommel video

ye we have to disliek this videobecasue he completely disregarded the range advantage pommels give you even over the longest mentioned here dependign on the shape of the pommel you can choose between extreme speed, mass or a bleeding condition applier on hit to finish off your opponent ..also.. why hasnt he mentioned crossbows? honestly category range.. yep... medieval?.. sure works against armored and unarmored.. yea.. kinda.. not a guaranteed one shot kill but.. it is an medieval weapon after all^^

Irish ring pommel is the best. It’s hollow so you can put smaller pommels inside it for extra stopping power

You cant end him rightly otherwise.

1. Holy hand Grenade

Also, you can stab them in the back!

But what if they don’t want to be friends and stab you

@@legendaryplayz394 You hug first and hold them until they starve.

Do you mean diplomacy?

@@fullmetalboomer8089 Not clingy enough!

As well as just using it as a giant lever can get though armor due to how long it is

I mean, most polearms have a spike on the end at least. Halberd and pollaxe come to mind

yep, right

Absolutely agree with this. Rush in, control the tip, and the pike is useless. That's a strategy that all the other weapons can do, so the pike would lose and doesn't belong on this 1v1 list imo. Especially if the person rushing has armor.

Getting past the tip is not that easy unless you have a shield. The pike pack alot of thrust so knocking it to the side is far from easy, and even if you succeed an experienced polearm user will retract his weapon before you're in a position to push any advantage. The speed that you can circle the tip at is really fast and varying between high and low thrust will keep any sword or axeman on constant defence. The dynamic changes greatly is you throw in a shield tho. Basically any competent swordsman/axeman will beat a pole user 1v1 with a shield. But they would get slaughtered in a group fight. The shield is the real mvp in a 1v1.

shooting a pellet and wait 5 minutes for recharging is VERY INEFECTIVE against a axe with a shield

I'm using the code myself to get myself more of their rings so 1 I do love bronze 2 the shop is really cool

@@metatronyt cool can't wait to see it later if you show it off

@Rex Francorum Ahahah he does indeed :)

I agree. All the broken knuckles, or ribs, or collarbones, or knees... Worst come to worst, shattered bones stabs you from within your own body. Imagine that.

@@ITBEurgava internal bleeding indeed, plus even a light tap with a mace can be painful. I have a bronze spiked mace head from Tod's workshop that I mounted. I let it once gently fall from a few inches onto the top of my gloved hand, hurt like a mother fucker, can't imagine getting hit with it in anger.

unlike blade, mace won't turn you into a river of blood ending the fight in seconds.

@@jackvernian7779 Depends where the cut/stab lands. People can continue fighting while wounded after all.

@@jackvernian7779 true enough, but there exists period artwork depicting sword fights where both parties often have several cuts all over them

there are no pole axes in ds :(

He is like the gaming nerd great teacher.

@@gabredoro2 dont worry, the developer definetely gonna add it after watching this.

Crescent axe is exactly that isnt it?

Lothric longsword is all you need

a loaded crossbow from midrange willnot give an armored opponet reaction time to dodge n can defeat armor or stun with a head shot and if you miss can be effective as a club and bolts are still effective against armor when you have tackled them and are on top of them as they act like a dagger getting through gaps sad that metatron did not include ranged weapons but did include pikes. silly actually as the weight of a 3 to 6 meter pike gives such littler control and they still only have an actual 1 meter thrust range ie I can stand just with a pikes range paryy it and essentially walk or jog downthe length of the weapon with no fear of it after I have parried the point or grabbed the shaft . ie the pike is a horrible weapon for a duel .

@@markberlanga6375 crossbow bolts can't really go through armour all that well

Better trick a scorpion with a halberd loaded into it

Musket beats all!

@@deimos7784 *musket misses its only bulet* oh fuck

I'm a fan of the Chinese halberd (ji), the one that combines a spear with a dagger axe.

Der kriegshammer auch

Cringe is a timeless weapon.

@@borgue Saying Do you have a problem with something I said?

Politics is a massive red herring.

The point of my OP was the swords are more important.

@@londiniumarmoury7037 Let me guess, something about the British general elections 🙃?

Nah - spears lost out to both polearms and pikes. Spears *generally* require formations; in a 1-v-1 against polearms, they tend to lose. Pikes pretty much *require* formations, in which setting they trump both spears and polearms, due to the reach advantage. While the spear is teh dominant battlefield weapons throughout most of history, polearms & pikes beat them during the eras they co-existed.

@@LeslieMRichardson spears typically ARE polearms.

@Rex Francorum I like your analogy. Spears are the bog-basic weapon. Bills are poor man's halberds (but still very good). Lucern hammers / bec de corbins were the ultimate refinements, being made for (rich) men wearing heavy armor, to be used against men wearing heavy armor.

@@skystorm569 Nope. A spear is primarily thrusting, with the option of slashing. Polearms - glaive, halberd, etc - have both thrusting and slashing, but also have a much heavier head, allowing for impact swings (similar to axes, hammers and maces).

@@LeslieMRichardson Well it generally agreed that a person using a sword needs to be much more skilled than a spear user based purely on the advantage that reach gives. So in this case with two equally skilled opponents if you don't know your opponents arms or armor a spear would be a safe bet.

Everything changed when the firecracker nation attacked.

isn't that the armoured poleaxe vs poleaxe system? What prevents you from using it in a halberd framework if facing someone who doesn't have a polearm/is unarmored?

Jack Vernian good point. I imagine the baiting technique works quite well too (both armored or not) - you swing it over your shoulder while within striking range of your opponent, suggesting him to take advantage of your vulnerability. If he commits, you move our of range with footwork and swing down your pollaxe, which should just reach him because you are holding it like an axe.

Your mom gives me a quarterstaff

@Colin Cleveland different strokes for different folks

fight with a poleaxe: just stab with both hands and swing a mace with a VERY LARGE pole. DONT USE WHIT LEVERAGE. For that case, use a Halberd

#Wedgie

Depends on the type of axe

And if you miss or don't kill you've disarmed yourself.

@@tristinanderson6320 Very risky strat for sure

That's only if you can do it well. And it's not your only weapon.

False! It all depends on your skills in throwing pommels.

Oh man if you hit 20 guys with pikes... pikes flying everywhere. Hitting people as they fly off. Bodies smashing into each other. That formation doesnt work very well to shouts

@misota -chan :D

@The crazy weeb You, however, may shout "Shinra Tensei"

In a formation yes, terrible 1vs 1 though. I like swiss pikes too!

@Rex Francorum Going against a pike formation while using a zweihänder is suicide.

thats very cool actually, I love how they show two parts of the scene like a proto comic book haha

Yeah I'm not going into a duel without a shield, and I hate shields.

Just upgrade dex and you'll be fine

Exactly, against Matt Easton only the power of The Pommel can help us. :)

Polearms generally have a counterweight on the bottom of the pole to counterbalance the head, making it easier to use. Now, I don't know about you, but I'm fairly sure a nice counterweight is pretty similar to an ULTRA POMMEL, meaning a polearm is more effective than a standard pommel.

A pommel will pay for your child's college education.

*Halberdier

Did Morningstarstars with the chains in em exists back then cause they would fit here well

So no spears?

The best thing to do to your army back then was to treat them right and good And your people or kingdom too Because your armys Loyalty Was the most important thing Some times armies switch sides Or kill they own leaders

How do you wield a halberd and hold the reins of a horse?

fellow appreciator of long hammers I see

Lucerne Hammer - my Dark Souls reflex intensifies! :-D

i mean its hard to kill someone in armor with a blade, while its still easy to kill a guy with a metal stick.

Two reasons I would say the pollaxe still beats it: the spike/hammer on the striking ends of the lucerne hammer or bec-de-corbin are both primarily anti-armor weapons, while the axe/hammer on the pollaxe are alternately good against unarmored and armor, so it has better versatility. Second, the pollaxe tends to be made a bit shorter than most polearms, so while they're specialized for fighting in formation and clumsier in single combat, it's specialized to a maneuverable length for dueling a single opponent like in this scenario. There's still some variation depending on whether you and/or your opponent are armored, of course (perhaps if you're unarmored [and thus need to keep your opponent at distance] and your opponent is armored, the hammer is better), but I think the pollaxe is better in a larger range of scenarios.

Those two are classed as the same weapon. A pollaxe doesn't need an axe blade to be a pollaxe. Medieval fight manuals didn't differentiate between then.

What about Shugoki's club?

Dont forget the peacekeeper guy

EG RYFF YKKUR I BITTA

How about nuxia weapon lol

what about shinobi's weap-hahahah alright i'll stop

Whilst being able to use the weapon for a long period of time gives you advantage during a drawn out duel, if you pick a longsword or esker intending a long, drawn out duel, and they come along with a poleaxe (pollaxe for some) intending to crush your skull within the first five minutes, you're at a huge disadvantage. Or, if you pick the same weapons and the opponent simply has more stamina than you, when you're exhausted, he'll be less exhausted and able to press the advantage more.

Reminds me of that old video Metatron did on longsword vs sword and shield. If I remember right, he said when he spars with sword and shield against longsword, he usually does better. That was a while ago though.

The poleaxe can outnimble a sword with its queue.