In my experience, wielding the spear on its own is the best option of the lot in a duel. It's ridiculously fast, hits very hard, and you just need to spam thrusts like a loon while watching your measure.
Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)
- Thread starter Kniggit
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
NovaTitan said:
How do you achieved such conclusion? I'm curious
I can't help much on that in pratical terms because I never handled a battleaxe, just hatchets to chop wood.
But I dunno if it would be a good combination for three reasons:
1- First and foremost: It doesn't thrust. The advantage of the dagger is that it can be used into quick thrust attacks, without exposing the attacker to a counter - whilst while using an axe, the weapon need to gain momentum to hit effectively, or else: he/she need to do an arch with his weapon for the attack, something not much intelligent to do with an offhand weapon;
2- Even the battleaxe being comparably lighter and more balanced than a hatchet, I doubt it has the balance to be really effective in the offhand - say, superior to a dagger or even the bare hand in speed and ease of handling;
3- Its slowish and no thrusting traits would be compensated somehow if it had any other advantage, such adding range to the attacks or if it was good for parrying, but that's absolutely not the case.
**
My conclusion: doesn't thrust, doesn't add range, it's not good for parrying, it's unbalanced, leaving your guard open.
Yeah, it can somehow hook shields. But that alone doesn't make it a good offhand weapon.
You have to try it sometime and research more to be sure of it, but I doubt dual wielding with an axe is an intelligent thing to do.
NovaTitan
Veteran
Night Ninja said:
I agree. And you'll win almost all your spar fights this way. You got range, you got speed (fast feints, multiple thrusts), and it has a lower learning curve, but a high skill ceiling. In the 21st century, you'll rarely, if ever, find anyone who trained with the longsword from childhood and I'm sure that the spear and polearm will outwin the sword as it has in the past. After all, the sword was mostly a sidearm come the High Middle Ages, while the polearm reigned supreme.
However, I'm choosing based on fun and my strengths. This is why I prefer the arming sword instead of the halberd, which will almost always defeat me unless I markedly outskill my opponent.
SacredStoneHead said:How do you achieved such conclusion? I'm curious
I can't help much on that in pratical terms because I never handled a battleaxe, just hatchets to chop wood.
But I dunno if it would be a good combination for three reasons:
1- First and foremost: It doesn't thrust. The advantage of the dagger is that it can be used into quick thrust attacks, without exposing the attacker to a counter - whilst while using an axe, the weapon need to gain momentum to hit effectively, or else: he/she need to do an arch with his weapon for the attack, something not much intelligent to do with an offhand weapon;
2- Even the battleaxe being comparably lighter and more balanced than a hatchet, I doubt it has the balance to be really effective in the offhand - say, superior to a dagger or even the bare hand in speed and ease of handling;
3- Its slowish and no thrusting traits would be compensated somehow if it had any other advantage, such adding range to the attacks or if it was good for parrying, but that's absolutely not the case.
**
My conclusion: doesn't thrust, doesn't add range, it's not good for parrying, it's unbalanced, leaving your guard open.
Yeah, it can somehow hook shields. But that alone doesn't make it a good offhand weapon.
You have to try it sometime and research more to be sure of it, but I doubt dual wielding with an axe is an intelligent thing to do.
I took note of this and hopefully, I'll practice and spar enough to see if it is more of a hindrance than if I had a dagger (which would also lose to a shield).
1) This is completely true. It's not even close to the speed of a dagger and it's heavier weight and unbalanced lends itself to slower recovery and higher learning curve. However, I think it can serve well as a trapping tool against staves and sword blades.
From what I've seen, the bearded Viking and Nordic axes are the best for trapping and prying off shields in the offensive. But, I don't know how they'd fare for parrying in the defense in sparring.
2) Lighter than an arming sword at less than 2 lb. Problem is the unbalanced nature of it, making for a completely different weapon from a balanced sword. There is a transference of martial knowledge from longsword -> staves, but it's quite different for axes.
You can parry on the defensive with it and weight allows momentum so that it can ward off attacks from arming swords, while pushing further for a counterattack, which wouldn't be as easy with a dagger. I think the effectiveness of an axe on the offhand vs. dagger comes down to the skill of the axeman. The best sword + axe would beat the best sword + dagger. At least, that's my impression so far.
3) It could add range by using a longer handaxe, like a short sword on the offhand. But to me, that's less effective. It's my personal preference, but it completely loses track of what you had the axe for in the first place-- to be used as a secondary weapon. I use the arming sword 36 inches overall with the axe, so I want it a lot shorter than that.
No range advantage, thrusting is only a heavy punch, and slower parrying. Yeah, it does have a lot against it, but it does have three main advantages: 1) trapping (most important and what separates from the dagger), 2) armor-piercing, shield-crushing, shield-prying (historically), and 3) momentum allowing you to push back one handed weapons on the primary hand.
I think you can trap light blades with the dagger, but it's not as effective from what I've seen. I will try it out more and see what I can find out.
Just have to interject a bit here. While the Norse did have bearded axes (we still do today, by the way), these were tool axes. The war axes that did have beards had very modest beards at that. And why would you want long beards for your axes? You don't need much of a beard to hook effectively, and too much beard means an increased risk that your axe will be hooked rather than the other way around.NovaTitan said:
As for axes and thrusting, of course you can thrust. Which is why viking axes had a longer edge pointing up away from the shaft rather than down along it. It won't thrust as well as a dedicated thruster like a spear, of course, but you certainly do not want to be on the receiving end of an axe thrust. They are very pointy and nasty.
NovaTitan
Veteran
Kissaki said:
Thanks for the information. We only have hatchets (woodaxes) in the states for woodcutting. I'm a noob at axes and thought I needed a long beard.
I look mainly at medieval weaponry and handaxes used during those times didn't have a point at the end, at least not to the extent of the vikings. Thanks again for your input. I wouldn't want to get a heavily bearded axe and regret it later.
No problem. Here is a decent site about viking axes. You'll see that the most heavily bearded axes, though not in excess of historical finds, are reproduction axes, whereas the bearded original axe has a very modest beard. The wiki page on viking axes has a picture of a very good reproduction of a Dane axe. Most interesting of all, though, is Jan Petersen's typology. I found a pdf in the following link:NovaTitan said:
http://forum.blankvaapen.org/showthread.php?p=6852#post6852
The thread is in Norwegian, but the pdf is in English. I'm not going to go through everything in the pdf, but it is worth noting that all bearded axes are one handed.
NovaTitan
Veteran
Wow, thanks again for all the info. Aaaah, Hurstwic. I remember this website when I happened upon viking shield combat when learning sword and shield. http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_sword_technique.htm I thought it was the pinnacle website for viking combat when it came to learning from photos. Definitely eye-opening to the use of shield to hide attacks.
There's probably a really good reason for why one-handed axes were bearded. This is starting to get interesting and fun. This was a lot more than what I expected in a great way. Much appreciated.
There's probably a really good reason for why one-handed axes were bearded.
This is starting to get interesting and fun. This was a lot more than what I expected in a great way. Much appreciated.
The fact this topic has gone on for seven years for a single sentence post with only the smallest semblance of grammar is sort of sad
It's not actually that sad. This thread has, in its life, thrown itself across many subjects of military history, it has roared its way through discussions of weapons, armour, various martial arts & medieval warfare. It contains elements to do with civilian swordsmanship, the Portuguese Empire & combat in the Dark Ages. That's all I can remember from it right this second (oh and round-house kicking dogs springs to mind) but the subjects we've discussed & commented on have been great. The whole dual-wielding thing provided the backdrop for what has been a fantastic thread on many different subjects... and a lot of crap about dual-wielding, but push that aside and you'll find the gems hidden within.
FrisianDude
Archduke
Like someone tried to hid a stash of gems by dumping a truckload of manure over it.
Yes he did:
Kniggit said:yes it seems it would degrade the game, im ashamed i posted this
I only liked 3 or 4 posters who frequent this thread, I am also amused by the guys who storm in not having read anything, and claim they can dual wield because they practice it with their fencing group or whatever.
Amman d Stazia
Master Knight
FrisianDude said:
more like a hundred people fell into a big vat of sewage, and five or six of them dropped some shiny jewels. One or two jewels got stuck on turds and floated to the top, the others sank slowly to the bottom.
only the most persistent of searcehrs - or the luckiest of random look-ins - was able to see and appreciate the jewels.
having said that, it's given me more laughs than any other thread on the forums.
You know I can dual wield, right? I'm actually amazingly good too, and would run rings round that mjusahi bloke. I get in about 90 or 100 strokes per minute, depending on how accurate I want to be. If I'm just spamming strokes, then I can probably get over 200, but I've never tried to count that for pure speed.
on the PC keyboard of course.
Are you using two keyboards, or two hands on one keyboard? The latter is definitely not dual-wielding (although it's more likely to have taken place on a Western medieval battlefield).
Amman d Stazia
Master Knight
I have 2 keyboards, 2 mice, 3 monitors and 1 Ipod.
What, no trackball?
Amman d Stazia
Master Knight
My feet aren't up to using a trackball.... Maybe I should get that Doberman to teach me....
You're not talking about the OP are you? That was...years ago.
