One or Two Handed Mounted?

[Ibo]

I find myself using my primary weapon on horseback less and less lately, and just lance the crap out of everything (both thrust and coached).  It's odd, but it feels like I have land kills much more quickly this way than swinging a sword around, on top of being a lot harder to hit.  I think it's the fact I don't have to constantly swivel the camera around every time I want to hit something.  If that doesn't work out because of terrain or whatever reason, I tend to just get off my horse and start swinging.

 

[HolgerHardrada]

mace or morningstar with crush through block can be fun

 

[Phlegm]

I like 2hand man wit archer it kils all enemy's!!!! i like very lot to run wit horse at 110% sped (vary fasT_) and atak enemy wit big sword strong and it cuts of hed and hed fly in strotosfer and in batle wen i cut lot of hed the cloud is rain blod from flying hed of enemy AHAHA 

 

[Lord Silvabane]

I do enjoy using a 2h sword, seems much more powerful and I seem like more of a noble. But 1h swords win all the way.

 

[ripple]

2-handed sword? Never. 2-haned blunt weapon that allows me to crush through shield blocks, a must for sieges. Otherwise, I prefer something that allows me to keep my shield.

 

[brognar]

Using the bastard sword one handed is blasphemy. It's the fastest two hander in the game and to waste it just so you can hide behind a shield is just stupid. I always keep a one handed sword (that nice little one the swadians get for free in MP looks cool and is pretty good) for horsey combat excursions.

 

[Gilwe]

1H: One-handed Battle Axe with a shield for chopping fast through enemy troops.

2H: Heavy Great Long Axe for its long range and massive damage. I only use it to oneshot heavy cavalry. I switch to the 1H for troops on foot.

 

[Derkylos]

Not that fussed, as long as it has the crush through ability. Looters blocking my perfectly aimed, ridiculously fast, mounted swings makes me so annoyed that I end up letting the horse kill them...

 

[JosieJ]

I'm playing a horse archer character now, so with my bow and 2 bags of arrows, I only have 1 slot left over.  Right now, I'm using a 2h saber; once I get my STR up high enough, I'll switch over to the heavy morningstar I've got stashed away.  I mostly use my bow in the field, though; I only carry the backup weapon for sieges and in case I get dismounted in the field and trapped among enemies, as happens sometimes.

 

[Vangar]

I'd go with shield & 1H or pole while mounted. On foot, I like a great axe or 2H mace

 

[Quixote]

Agreed with the one handers, especially if you don't have good armor. I used to be 2h, but went 1h because having that defense against archers was too good to pass up. My loss was only weapon reach, which could be easily remedied by just moving closer to the enemy for a swipe kill; and damage, which didn't bother me because I was using a bastard sword 

Another thing too is when you are in a swarm of enemies and are like GOGOGOGOGO its magnificent to have a shield, or if you have a several horsemen ganging up on you when you hit a tree 

 

[Zerilius]

I prefer two handed because I am too bad in using a shield and it affects my timing of shots.

 

[Soyama]

I'm always using a 2handed, but I play on easy settings.

In native, a balanced/tempered shortned military scyte, With my current build I pretty much one-hit-kill everything, and that is preferable to having my soldiers kill everything, cause I do it way faster. I always wear heavy armors.

This tactic probably is not viable at harder difficulty settings.

I have been looking at other options, with a big 2hander, you cant really hit anything if you get grouped up and crowded.
I tried axe/dirk with shield in sieges, but overall, it seemed the same as if i used a 2hander.

in original mount and blade, i used heavy warhorse and lance, and just plowed down entire armies.

I should probably play on hard difficulties, but that tells me the only difference would be how much time I had to invest before I could actually achieve the things I do atm.

Getting high level takes way longer, cause you can not be that much in the middle of combat. You need to train more soldiers, cause they die more often.
And already, its taking forever to get strong. I'm not good at keep playing games like this for too long, so I want to get some out of it before the interest fades.
Though i tend to come back for more

(All other games i start on hardest difficulty, but they often end after a certain time-amount put into it, this one doesnt end! )

 

[Nicolas Giordano]

It all depends, really.

For my Horse Archer character, I use one-handed with a shield. Since my bow and arrow takes up two spaces and I, for the most part, always carry a shield, I can only really use a 1h.

For more melee characters, I have a 2h or swing-able polearm usually. Those are so much fun, it's like you're praticing your polo swing. 

 

[Vermin]

My favourite is an elite scimitar
proper length, speed and damage

 

[Salocin]

one handed for me
i have been killed by arrows, javelins and axes too many times in my early M&B days to continue riding with a two handed weapon. i have an sarranid battle axe if i ever need it, but thats mostly for sieges.

 

[tsuki]

129% Difficulty.
With my most advanced character I usually take all of the weapons (lance, 2h axe, sword+shield), but mostly use only the sword and occasionally lance. I use axe only on foot.

After hours of playing my conclusion is: the reach of 2-handers isn't worth it. Close combat is all about speed and damage per hit because you're fast on horseback and can escape quickly. For fighting cav the lance is best as the reach is really important here.

 

[Areze]

If I'm lancing, then I use a shield.

But for non-polearms, two-handed. I rarely use my shield, so I might as well get as much damage output I can.

 

[XSevSpreeX]

But for non-polearms, two-handed. I rarely use my shield, so I might as well get as much damage output I can.

But using a two-handed weapon mounted gives you a 35% reduction in damage. In most cases a good one-handed weapon would do more damage then.

 

[wrc]

But for non-polearms, two-handed. I rarely use my shield, so I might as well get as much damage output I can.

But using a two-handed weapon mounted gives you a 35% reduction in damage.

And reduction in speed as well!