How many two handed weapons are there?

[hrotha]

The reason being that they're too long to use in one hand...thus a pike is a longer spear. Lol.

Duh. The point is, pikes are a specialized kind of polearm. You don't use pikes without it drastically affecting the way you fight.

The explanation of which came down to "we don't know if they had them or not so we're just going to assume they didn't." Which itself is an inference. 

Of course it's an inference, I said that much myself.

They based that inference on data which I haven't seen seriously challenged yet.

 

[Grimes]

Duh. The point is, pikes are a specialized kind of polearm. You don't use pikes without it drastically affecting the way you fight.

"pikes aren't just a longer spear"
"ok, they are just a longer spear, but it means you have to use it differently"


i think this is called moving the goalposts

They based that inference on data which I haven't seen seriously challenged yet.

absence of evidence =/= evidence of absence. it's a simple enough concept that it makes sense that some people probably would've had longer-hafted axes, which would've existed anyways for things like woodcutting. the idea that NOBODY IN HISTORY EVER PUT AN AXEHEAD ON A LONG SHAFT BEFORE THE DANE AXE BECAME POPULAR is frankly much more far-fetched than the alternative. which is essentially the same sort of logic used for gambesons, like i already said...your point essentially amounts to "the devs decided not to do it and since they're the devs that makes it ok."

 

[Richard of longbottom]

I always heard there were arguments about vikings wearing gambesons under there mail or not

 

[Grimes]

I always heard there were arguments about vikings wearing gambesons under there mail or not

it's up there with whether or not there were trolls with giant clubs defending bridges in the great debates of the viking age in our time

 

[Richard of longbottom]

I always heard there were arguments about vikings wearing gambesons under there mail or not

it's up there with whether or not there were trolls with giant clubs defending bridges in the great debates of the viking age in our time

maybe the troll is making two handed axes but we killed him so no more two handed axes also I kinda hope sweden will be added or the coast of France and brittany

 

[kalarhan]

hey, I heard about dragons and sea monsters back them. Its on the balads and poems. And in Hollywood movies.

So why cant I find a full set of dragon armour in the game? They could make it rare and only for the player. Right?

And they should have events that a strange monster can show up and sink ships. No too hard, right?

 

[hrotha]

"pikes aren't just a longer spear"
"ok, they are just a longer spear, but it means you have to use it differently"


i think this is called moving the goalposts

I didn't call them "spears", I called them "polearms", thankyouverymuch.

absence of evidence =/= evidence of absence. it's a simple enough concept that it makes sense that some people probably would've had longer-hafted axes, which would've existed anyways for things like woodcutting. the idea that NOBODY IN HISTORY EVER PUT AN AXEHEAD ON A LONG SHAFT BEFORE THE DANE AXE BECAME POPULAR is frankly much more far-fetched than the alternative. which is essentially the same sort of logic used for gambesons, like i already said...your point essentially amounts to "the devs decided not to do it and since they're the devs that makes it ok."

Nobody has ever disagreed that absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence. My point amounts to "the devs decided not to do it because of this reason, and so far no one has managed to refute that reason". Your points about woodcutting and the like have already been addressed by the devs elsewhere.

 

[krisvk]

c'mon I seriously doubt the reason there's such a small amount of two handed weapons and other gear is because of historical accuracy, it's more likely that they just didn't have the time to make all those things from scratch (the vanilla M&B things would be out of place, and they couldn't use anything from mods)

 

[Richard of longbottom]

hey, I heard about dragons and sea monsters back them. Its on the balads and poems. And in Hollywood movies.

So why cant I find a full set of dragon armour in the game? They could make it rare and only for the player. Right?

And they should have events that a strange monster can show up and sink ships. No too hard, right?

we have lots of evidence that trolls were alive back then they moved to America after the troll dragon genocide of the 19th century

 

[rapier17]

They're dismissing the possibility entirely out of a lack of evidence, which is ridiculous since evidence of it wouldn't even be likely to survive.

Welcome to the world of academia - no evidence, no show. We have finds for axe heads spanning all the way back to the C6th AD, swords too like the two Germanic Migration swords dated from about 550-600AD. Seax and spear heads too as well as smaller throwing axe heads, but no obvious 2 handed axe heads apart from the Wheeler Type VI (or Dane axe). It may be that they were rather limited and it took another 150 years (from 850AD) to really take off as a weapon - maybe the precursor to the Dane axe didn't really start to appear until the 900's? Maybe it was felt such a weapon was too inefficient and that the hand axe/spear was better suited for dealing with the majority of the opposition who would be unlikely to afford a maille coat.

"pikes aren't just a longer spear"
"ok, they are just a longer spear, but it means you have to use it differently

You can fight effectively 1:1 or in small groups with a spear, you need to be in a large group of pike wielders for them to be effective.

 

[Richard of longbottom]

"pikes aren't just a longer spear"
"ok, they are just a longer spear, but it means you have to use it differently"


i think this is called moving the goalposts

I didn't call them "spears", I called them "polearms", thankyouverymuch.

absence of evidence =/= evidence of absence. it's a simple enough concept that it makes sense that some people probably would've had longer-hafted axes, which would've existed anyways for things like woodcutting. the idea that NOBODY IN HISTORY EVER PUT AN AXEHEAD ON A LONG SHAFT BEFORE THE DANE AXE BECAME POPULAR is frankly much more far-fetched than the alternative. which is essentially the same sort of logic used for gambesons, like i already said...your point essentially amounts to "the devs decided not to do it and since they're the devs that makes it ok."

Nobody has ever disagreed that absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence. My point amounts to "the devs decided not to do it because of this reason, and so far no one has managed to refute that reason". Your points about woodcutting and the like have already been addressed by the devs elsewhere.

I thought the vikings used some kind if pike I mean it wasn't as big as most but it was still kind of a pike

 

[Grimes]

I didn't call them "spears", I called them "polearms", thankyouverymuch.

A pike is more than a long spear.

-you

Nobody has ever disagreed that absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence. My point amounts to "the devs decided not to do it because of this reason, and so far no one has managed to refute that reason".

you're saying it RIGHT NOW by saying that the devs are justified in not including them because they haven't been "refuted." how am i supposed to refute the logic of "we don't know if they had them so we're just going to assume they didn't?" should i go to denmark and start digging? maybe an axeshaft is frozen in a block of ice somewhere, along with their bridge troll and his club

Your points about woodcutting and the like have already been addressed by the devs elsewhere.

poorly. i'm not going to go dig it up but iirc his argument essentially said "yes, peasants would've used them to defend their homes in raids, they just wouldn't have been used by the better equipped viking raiders" which...means to me that they should've been included? don't we have pitchforks anyways?

 

[hrotha]

Implying that a pike is a kind of spear is the opposite of what I meant with that. My wording was meant to emphasize what sets them apart as two distinct types of polearm.

I thought the vikings used some kind if pike I mean it wasn't as big as most but it was still kind of a pike

You're probably thinking of the atgeirr.

a bill or halberd, undoubtedly a foreign weapon, rarely mentioned in the Sagas, but famous as the favourite weapon of Gunnar of Hlíðarendi; mentioned besides in Sks. 392, Landn. 163, Eb. 120, Fms. iii. l00, v. 249, Fas. iii. 462, but esp. Nj. 44, 45, 84, 95, 97, 108, 114, 119: in the Nj. used generally of thrusting, but also of hewing; Högni hjó í sundr spiót skaptið með atgeirinum, en rekr atgeirinn i gegnum hann, H. hewed in sunder the spearshaft with the bill, and drives the bill through him

 

[Grimes]

a pike is LITERALLY a spear with a longer pole, lol. there's literally no other difference between the two. the way that they're used does not change what the object actually -is-. that you're trying to argue this just makes you seem completely daft

 

[hrotha]

a pike is LITERALLY a spear with a longer pole, lol. there's literally no other difference between the two. the way that they're used does not change what the object actually -is-. that you're trying to argue this just makes you seem completely daft

Then I guess a sword is just a long dagger.

Weapon terminology is very intricate for a reason: distinguishing between different weapons is important, because differences in the way they're used is crucial.

 

[Grimes]

Then I guess a sword is just a long dagger.

again with the terrible analogies

Weapon terminology is very intricate for a reason: distinguishing different between weapons is important, because differences in the way they're used is crucial.

it isn't very "crucial" when we're talking about archaeological evidence. what formations they were used in, what enemies they were used to deal with, everything is completely irrelevant to this discussion but the length of the weapon's shaft. but it's quickly becoming clear to me that you're just hear to defend the dev team by any means necessary, not actually try to argue any serious kind of point, which means bothering to reply to you is a waste of my time. so this is my last reply to you itt.

 

[Leifr Eiríksson]

In other news, I am here to call you a ****.

 

[Tovias]

Then I guess a sword is just a long dagger.

It's not?

 

[hrotha]

I'm not defending the devs, I'm defending history as a serious discipline. I've posted plenty of complaints about the state of the DLC elsewhere.

I don't see how the use of a particular weapon is irrelevant to this discussion, when my point from the beginning was that just because two-handed axes were easy to imagine that doesn't mean they'd have been needed, due to the military circumstances at the time. In other words, there wasn't a use for them, until there was, and then they were developed. Surely you'll agree with this, whether you think that need was felt around 850, 900 or 950.

 

[rapier17]

Then I guess a sword is just a long dagger.

It's not?

Two edges, hilt, intended solely to be used as a weapon. Sounds like a sword to me if we're going by the above about spears/pikes.