| Author |
Message |
Elling Polden
|
 Posted: Fri 15 May, 2009 7:22 am Post subject: |
 |
|
The sweihander is really more a polearm than a sword. Compared to other polearms the sweihander is 1)very short and 2) very compact and heavy.
As such, it is ideal for blocking and pushing away other polearms, like helbards or pikes; If you where to block a 3m+ long helbard (landsknech/pike square helbards where LONG compared to other helbards.) you want something with a two handed grip, plenty of mass, and the biggest crossguard you can get. Which happens to be a good description of a sweihander.
Cutting pike heads would probably be an exageration. It is not sure to be sucsessfull, and a dedicated strike leaves you very open. Pushing would probably be more effective. A constant pressure on a spear tires out the user quite quickly. However, my guess is that sweihanders wouldn't really spend a lot of time standing still in the line.
Reenactment experience sugersts that standing in the line with a longsword against a spear heavy line is a quick way to die. As the easiest target around, you will be cross-striked to death within seconds. IF the spearmen have the time to spot you as the lines close.
You are much better off emerging from the line, closing quickly, and hoping that your armour fends of the glancing hits as you move forward.
Sources also tell us that sweihander-men where often used in this fashion. As banner guards they would be standing right next to the comander, and could quickly be dispatched to reinforce a wavering flank, or prehaps even more effecively, push home victory where you where gaining the upper hand... (It is usually better to reinforce victory than defeat)
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
    |
 |
Daniel Staberg
|
| Posted: Fri 15 May, 2009 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nicholas A. Gaese wrote: | Greetings
yes M. that's the file, very nice isn't it? It's a shame they don't have an English translation but it lets me test my German. That is Interesting Daniel, where by chance have you gotten this info? It explains the armoured pike men in my pic and also the numbers for a typical Feahnlein and why there were only been 2 swordsmen up front. |
I use several sources, the "Trewer Rath" is "Trewer Rath und Bedencken eines Alten wol versuchten und Erfahrenen Kriegsmans", a text written in the 1520's by an annonymous author who may have been Georg von Frundsberg.
The war diary of the Danish commander Daniel Rantzau have been published in a Swedish translation "Daniel Rantzaus Dagbok" (1986) Junghans and Wintzenberg are quoted in Gerhard Quaas "Das Handwerk der Landsknechte" (1997)
The 1570 regulation is found in "Artikel auf die Fussknecht von 1570" which is reprinted in von Fraunenholz "Das Heerwesen in der Zeit Des Freien Söldnertums" (Vol 2:2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robin Palmer
Location: herne bay Kent UK Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 138
|
| Posted: Mon 25 May, 2009 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi all
apiologies for late post I have been a little busy and only noticed it a couple of days ago.
On the matter of chopping pike heads off any one who has cleared woodland will tell you the best way to cut through a piece of timber is to cut into it at an angle so you are cutting along the grain. The cut is longer but much easyier given the blade length you would be able to cut well behind the head.
On the matter of langets the original two pike I have seen had very short ones given the length of the pike keeping the weight of head down is important.
One other point some time ago there was a program on British TV which showed a demonstration of short bill against pike. The one feature which became obvious was that while they didn't try to chop through pike as such the blow to the head end caused the shaft to flex as already mentioned. What hasn't been mentioned is the effect of the whip of a 14-16ft shaft on the man holding it a heavy strike to head makes the pike almost impossible to hold the whip amplified at the other end. especially as a pike held in charge is held as far back as possible to maximize length.
I hope this may be of value yours Bob palmer
|
|
 |
|
Mikko Kuusirati
|
| Posted: Mon 25 May, 2009 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Werner Stiegler wrote: | | As far as I remember, our ancestors praised the twohanders capability to hold many assilants at bay on its own. Somebody recommended them as guardians to the banners. |
DiGrassi, perhaps? From his True Arte of Defense:
"The two hand Sword, as it is used now a days being four handfuls in the handle, or more, having also the great cross, was found out, to the end it should be handled one to one at an equal match, as other weapons, of which I have entreated. But because one may with it (as a galleon among many galleys) resist many Swords, or other weapons: Therefore in the wars, it is used to be place near unto the Ensign or Ancient, for the defense thereof, because, being of itself able to contend with many, it may the better safeguard the same. And it is accustomed to be carried in the City, aswell by night as by day, when it so chances that a few are constrained to withstand a great many. And because his weight and bigness, requires great strength, therefore those only are allotted to the handling thereof, which are mighty and big to behold, great and strong in body, of stout and valiant courage. Who (forasmuch as they are to encounter many, and to the end they may strike the more safely, and amaze them with the fury of the Sword) do altogether use to deliver great edge blows, down right and reversed, fetching a full circle, or compass therein, staying themselves sometimes upon one foot, sometimes on the other, utterly neglecting to thrust, and persuading them-selves, that the thrust serves to amaze one man only, but those edge blows are of force to encounter many. The which manner of skirmishing, besides that, it is most gallant to behold, being accompanied with exceeding swiftness in delivery, (for otherwise it works no such effect) it also most profitable, not properly of itself, because men considering the fury of the sword, which greatly amazes them, are not so resolute to do that, which otherwise they could not choose but do. That is, either to encounter the sword in the middle towards the handle, when it carries small force, or else to stand far off, watching whilst the sword goes, and is carried compassing in his great circle, being of the compass of ten arms, or more, and then to run under it, and deliver a thrust. And these two ways are effectual, when such men are met withal, who are exercised to enter nimbly and strike, or such as dare, and have the spirit and courage, to set, and oppose themselves single against the two hand sword, even as the single two hand sword adventures to oppose itself against many. Neither is this thing to be marveled at, for in these our days, there be things performed of greater activity and danger. And there be some which dare do this with the sword and round Target, but yet they are not resolute to strike first, but will receive and sustain the blow, with the round Target, and then enter and thrust, this truly betokens great courage and activity, although not such is required in this behalf."
"And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
— Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Tue 29 Nov, 2011 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dmitry Uvarov wrote: | Greetings everyone. Decided to share my research on the subject.
First of all, it is definitely possible to cut an unprotected pole even with typical falchion, and it is trivial with much more heavy zweihander/bidenhander/doppelhander. It's been tested up to firm conclusion.
Second, it is virtually impossible to cut a pole protected with langets and false langets from all four sides. But it is perfectly possible to move one or even several pikes away for a few seconds. Pikes are very unwieldy weapons, prone to inertia, thus it takes some time to return them back to battle position. And no one have that much time.
Third, two-handed sword in general may seem to be unsuitable to be used in close-quarters, and that is true. But we are speaking about germanic type zweihander with noticeable ricasso and false guard, two things that make halfsword techniques very viable. Zweihander can be easily converted to kind of shorter „polearm“ by wielding it at ricasso, very viable for tight quarters.
Fourth, no matter what third says, on battlefield zweihanders seemed to be weapons mostly for guardians and flanking „special force“ soldiers. True, this weapon shines in hands of dedicated solo warrior against either one opponent or small crowd. Front line soldiers who supported pikemen usually wielded some sort of polearm like halberd. Actually good cutting polearm provides most of the benefits of two-handed sword. Not all, but most. And it is way cheaper.
Fifth, it is interesting to note that while everyone seemed to understand necessity of breaking „phalanx-like“ pikemen formations, different ways were used to do it. My personal favourite (from style point) is Spanish way, employing sword-and-shield rodeleros, who pushed enemy pikes by their shields and swords, rushing their way into close quarters and quickly destroying those who stand in the way. Zweihanders/halberds is probably more famous style of dealing with the same problem, because zweihanders are oh so cool weapons 
In conclusion: pushing, not breaking. Breaking is atypical, probably only for damaged and/or cheap unprotected poles. And halberds did the same job.
Hope this helped. |
maybe thats the way, maybe use the sword like a giant bar, forcing aside a heap of pikes, creating a gap for other man to exploit with THEIR pikes, i can imagine two men with zweihanders standing side by side, pushing the pikes to the outside of them then rushing down the length of the shafts , knocking pike heads away successively and trying to gut the formation from the inside.
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent C
Location: Northern VA Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 84
|
| Posted: Tue 29 Nov, 2011 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are interesting forms in the Figueyredo transcript that detail methods of pike fighting, specifically rules 14s and 14c.
14s describes a downward beat knocking the pike downward, followed by a lunge turn the body with the montante (causing a strange, but really really quick spin during the lunge) as you come back around you do another downward strike, stepping forward in the process.
Although this exposes your back, the other week at NoVA assalto we were practicing it against a line of three, and it proved effective. It's actually a lot quicker doing the spin than if you didn't do the spin for the lunge, you basically role yourself past the pikes following the sword. The people holding the pike substitutes were saying that they couldn't do much after the beat because it wrenches their arms.
In 14c he gives an alternative, after the initial strike to ground, you bring the sword back in front of you with the point forward, and thrust forward taking two really quick passing steps.
Haven't actually practiced this one, but it may work for the more wary.
In a variation of both, he has the initial beat followed by a beat to the other side "according to which side the opposing weapon is aimed"
The montante wasn't really a "forelorn hope" sword, they had a different slightly heavier sword for that. But when you came up against pikes, you had to do something or die.
My 2 cents, as it were.
Honor, compassion, knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Tue 29 Nov, 2011 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vincent C wrote: |
Although this exposes your back, the other week at NoVA assalto we were practicing it against a line of three, and it proved effective. It's actually a lot quicker doing the spin than if you didn't do the spin for the lunge, you basically role yourself past the pikes following the sword. |
Spins (can) work quite well against pikes, spears, and other polearms. They appear in a lot of Chinese sword forms/patterns, as an anti-spear method. Rolling along the haft with the spin lets you maintain pressure against the weapon, reducing its mobility, and letting you know where it is. Also, as you note, not slow.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Timo Nieminen wrote: | | Vincent C wrote: |
Although this exposes your back, the other week at NoVA assalto we were practicing it against a line of three, and it proved effective. It's actually a lot quicker doing the spin than if you didn't do the spin for the lunge, you basically role yourself past the pikes following the sword. |
Spins (can) work quite well against pikes, spears, and other polearms. They appear in a lot of Chinese sword forms/patterns, as an anti-spear method. Rolling along the haft with the spin lets you maintain pressure against the weapon, reducing its mobility, and letting you know where it is. Also, as you note, not slow. |
I would imagine that one counter to the spin would be dropping the useless pike and drawing a long dagger or a short(er) sword/Katzbalger backup weapon, but one would have to react very quickly or have anticipated the deflection and spin and dropped the pike before or just after contact ? Knowing what to expect would help with this. 
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent C
Location: Northern VA Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 84
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I would imagine that one counter to the spin would be dropping the useless pike and drawing a long dagger or a short(er) sword/Katzbalger backup weapon, but one would have to react very quickly or have anticipated the deflection and spin and dropped the pike before or just after contact ? Knowing what to expect would help with this. Wink |
That's one of the reasons this is so effective with the montante, the movement is really, really fast, and uses a very long sword.
When I finish that lunge/jump against the pike I don't have to draw my hands in, the pikeman is in my range. Apart from maybe a really long rapier the montante still outdistances most weapons. You may still be able to get that sword or dagger out in time, but not enough time to attack, just to defend, at which point I served my purpose of lessening the amount of pikes for anyone I'm with. Then there's the pikemen whose pikes I displaced but didn't attack, they'd have more than ample time to get their close-in weapons out, but again, no pikes holding that line together. An arming sword is way easier to deal with than a pike with a montante.
EDIT: This may be why in this picture from earlier there are a bunch of messers in front those with the two-handed swords.Maybe they did the beat but didn't close ground? Or maybe they were taught to just let the pike go if it got hit.
Knowing what to expect would certainly help, but you'll first have to notice that the pikes' been rendered useless and that the swordsman is still advancing. Then you have to draw, then defend/counter. During that whole time the montante is coming at you as quickly as it can.
You might have enough time if you anticipate the beat and drop the pike when you see the sword move, but that may be why 14s has you bring the point online instead of roll as an alternative, you'd still have to close the pike distance to reach my position, and you'd enter my effective range long before then (though I may be worrying about the other pikes, the initial beat can displace at least three at a time as we found out while messing around with this rule)
I'm not saying it can't be done, I just don't think the time you'd have to do it is enough. It worth trying out next practice though, could be very interesting
Honor, compassion, knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vincent: There doesn't seem to be anything much better to do than drop the pike and grab for the backup weapon even if the odds aren't very good without anticipating the blow on the pike.
One might be able to shorten the pike and have the Montante miss and then quickly extend the pike in a counter attack but this might not be practical in a tight pike square where there would be no free room behind one without hitting those behind with the butt of the pike(s).
Single pike or a more manageable and much shorter spear or halberd outiming and voiding the Montante might be possible but then this is very different in a one on one fight rather than formation fighting.
Not saying that the above is what one should do but just throwing ideas out there, and curious about your opinion(s) on them.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nicholas A. Gaese
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
The last year or so has been interesting in the study of two handed sword usage. Before I was under the impression that such swordsmen placed up front opposing ranks of pikemen was not practical. For the most part, I still think its not a great idea, but after seeing many opinions raised from the relitively newly translated montante material, its become much more plaudable. While the German tradition differs from that of the Iberian, it wouldn't surprise me that they might had a similar method of dealing with pikes. Even if one one was packed into the first rank of pikemen, vertical sword movements would be enough to beat down, lunge and strike opposing pikemen. The important thing would be to not stand out and to make sure that after striking one immidiatly retreats back into file, armour too of course would be immensly important.
Important to note is that the term doppelsoldner meant armoured, experianced, and otherwise trained men who took to the more dangerous roles. Some formations had schlachtschwerters designated as doppelsoldners and other formations who didn't. Those who did might have been the ones more inclined to use swordsmen this way, while the others may had kept them strictly to guard the ensign. In general those who are trained in the two handed sword know well its ability to oppose many, but not many would have the experiance necessary to oppose pikemen in formation and not get themselves killed or be in the way, in my opinion.
In the scene I originally posted, a similar situation to what Jean and Vincent were discribing might have been whats unfolding. I'm going to try and interpret. Two swordsmen proceeded and had beaten down the pikes that were held by the opposing swordsmen. Seeing this they dropped their pikes and drew swords and seem to be on the offensive, of course now though they are open to attack from the landsknecht pikemen. However, they wouldn't of had a choice but to draw, because if they didn't they would have risk being attacked directly by the two handers.
Is this a good interpretation you think? Jean, I'm in full agreement of your points, don't think there would be much better one could do in that situation.
Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | As such, it is ideal for blocking and pushing away other polearms, like helbards or pikes; If you where to block a 3m+ long helbard (landsknech/pike square helbards where LONG compared to other helbards.) you want something with a two handed grip, plenty of mass, and the biggest crossguard you can get. Which happens to be a good description of a sweihander. |
Perhaps they were used effectively to ward the pikes, then close with the enemy, and use in halfsword fashion against pikes which would be far less wieldy in close combat?
Not the idea way to go against a pike formation, but the best way of using the 2 handed sword against them I can think of.
Kind of like the shortswordsmen who occasionally had sucess if able to get in close with the pikemen (easier said then done). But at least doing it this way, you have the two handed sword's ability to ward combined with a more effective close combat weapon.
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent C
Location: Northern VA Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 84
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that fighting single pike is very different than fighting the pike line.
The roll/lunge doesn't work against single for one, since they can just move to the side and poke you. It's generally better to keep the point online and very occasionally beat.
One of the things with the form I had been wondering about was that with the initial downward beat you don't step (form starts in a discordant position). When we were messing around with the pike line, we experimented with this by doing feints occasionally, the discordant start allows you to use your hips to quickly power a beat with a step if your initial one misses. From there you can do the second movement recommended in 14s (double step thrust). So a double feint may work better for the pikeman. But it depends on how quickly the swordsman can piece together what he was taught from the forms.
I didn't actually get a turn in the pike line, so I didn't feel the beat. It was my impression that the shock of it may confuse you for a bit, but a more experienced person would probably just let go.
Out timing the montante is a reasonable tactic, I don't know enough about pikes to judge how fast they are in comparison. But a reversion of the montante user to 5c helps defend against a very pokey opponent. If you know what you're doing with the montante it's actually quite quick.
Against a shorter spear I'd have to go with the alternative double-step thrust in 14c, the roll would send you a little too close to your opponent for comfort. Against a halberd I got nothing.
In the end I guess it all comes down to experience.
Honor, compassion, knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent C
Location: Northern VA Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 84
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | In the scene I originally posted, a similar situation to what Jean and Vincent were discribing might have been whats unfolding. I'm going to try and interpret. Two swordsmen proceeded and had beaten down the pikes that were held by the opposing swordsmen. Seeing this they dropped their pikes and drew swords and seem to be on the offensive, of course now though they are open to attack from the landsknecht pikemen. However, they wouldn't of had a choice but to draw, because if they didn't they would have risk being attacked directly by the two handers. |
That sounds completely reasonable to me, considering one of the previous illustrations shows something that looks precisely like that.
Something like, knock the pikes, move to the side (or back) to let the pikers behind you close?
There's a montante rule that I haven't practiced that deals with breaking shield wall, eventually going into the middle of the first line and attacking adjacent foes. Maybe something like this could be done by a pair of dopplesoldners against pikemen?
Break the first line and attack the next guy to your left while the other guy goes right, your pikemen move into your old positions while you continue along the enemy line?
Or maybe they didn't weigh in close, opting to just continued beating pikes down the line to make openings...
Honor, compassion, knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vincent C wrote: |
Break the first line and attack the next guy to your left while the other guy goes right, your pikemen move into your old positions while you continue along the enemy line?
|
I would see that as flanking the enemy formation from the inside rather than a more traditional flanking of the outside " sides " of a formation.
Would be very risky but the element of surprise and the tightly packed and disordered formation should let you act without effective interference at least for a short time, but if one lingered too long one would end up exposing one's side to close range dagger work.
As a stand alone strategy it would rapidly turn suicidal but if one's side exploited the confusing and the disordered and tangled up formation by rushing into the gap.  sort of like getting past the quills of the porcupine and getting at the soft and juicy centre.  Once the tip of the wedge is in a strong blow will spilt the log !
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2011 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nicholas A. Gaese wrote: |
Is this a good interpretation you think? Jean, I'm in full agreement of your points, don't think there would be much better one could do in that situation.
Regards. |
Sounds good to me.  
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Clarke
Location: Melbourne Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Sat 03 Dec, 2011 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting discussion.
With regards to Rodeleros, I believe the Italians eventually developed a similar form of arms, called a rotella if I remember rightly. Apparently the troop name is all about the round shield they carried.
One problem I see with Zweihanderen among the pikes' front ranks is, when beating aside/down the enemy's pikes, it may be common to beat down the pikes of one's comrades, owing to how close together everyone is. Or, are people suggesting that the men bearing the Zweihanderen would rush forward a little (but perhaps not past the points of the pikes of their own army) and then beating aside the enemy pikes?
With no experience whatsoever, and no evidence to support my idea, I'd say that if I were to position Zweihander armed troops in the front rank of a pike block, it would be to counder the threat of any enemy troops who tried to get past the pike points to poke holes in the pikemen. Another interpretation of that print that was posted is that the guys with falchion/messer on the right are seeking to advance past the points (at least one of them has a rodella/rotella), and the Zweihander men are waiting for them to give them a bit of what-for.
But then, another issue - it wasn't just one row of pike points that One had to get past, was it? I was under the impression that it was the first few ranks of pikemen that had their pikes lowered.
Does anyone know of a batallion or two of keen infantry? What we need is 4-800 drilled volunteers who'd be willing to experiment for a few days.
That link to the pdf doesn't work anymore. Is there a workaround for that?
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Dec, 2011 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.art-wallpaper.com/21693/Schoen+Erh...eight=1050
heres an image of men with zweihanders and halberds, and also pike heads poking from the right hand side, on the pikes we can see a series of bumps, which i think refer to the rivets on the langets
and just as interestingly, the swords are depicted as being rounded tipped which is odd if its meant to have a quasi polearm use...
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent C
Location: Northern VA Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 84
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Dec, 2011 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | and just as interestingly, the swords are depicted as being rounded tipped which is odd if its meant to have a quasi polearm use... |
It depends, the montante rules for guarding people/objects involve mostly using rather broad slashes to keep the foes at distance and on the defense, typically thrusts are used in these rules when turning around or changing side, if they appear at all. So essentially, the stiffness and mass would be used for crowd control, and would still function on controlling pikes. Thrusting on one guy while engaging a mob would be a poor choice, especially if you're their primary target.
It all depends on what you were after, I guess. Just because the tips are rounded doesn't mean you can't thrust, it's just not the priority. Pointy swords can still slash, just not as well, and it's true for the opposite. They also may have been pointy once, but have dulled from use.
If the lines on the blades in the picture are any indication, these swords had hexagonal cross sections, so they'd still be relatively stiff for the thrust, if thickness allows.
Hope this helps with your question William.
Honor, compassion, knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Gallo
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Dec, 2011 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure if it was on this forum or another, but I made a thread about the same thing a long while ago. I've seen the interpretations of manuscripts and whatnot, and I've read the theories about the instability of wood used back then on pike and spear shafts, but I'm still not sold, even on those without langlets.
I've yet to cause anything but superficial damage to a pikeshaft with my enormous man-sized zweihander unless a friend is holding it on their shoulder with the head laying on a rock. Not exactly "battlefield" conditions, where it would be prodding you in the face with 10 others, all several feet off the ground. Could it be that "breaking" the pikes was occasionally an allusion to knocking them out of the pikeman's hands with a downward blow? Not that, especially on a cold day, is relatively easy with a heavy enough sword.
In fighting conditions it takes an enormous amount of self-risk and energy just to bat them away, much less lop the heads clean off with any consistency like they were balsawood.
Dmitry Uvarov used the term "special forces" and I agree more with that. It's a weapon that could cause utter chaos at the FLANKS of a pike formation for example, but I'd rather have nearly anything else for a frontal assault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic