Comments by "DynamicWorlds" (@dynamicworlds1) on "Why Are Swords So Popular?" video.

(Not that I disagree at all with any of that but) To me, a sword is the most balanced and flexible weapon. You can use a sword as well in offense or defense, and in war or civilian conflicts. It is great against unarmored targets, as well as being able to be used against armored targets. All other arms have much more limited styles and usages based on their traits, but the sword, through balance and the wide range of things you can do with it, leaves how it's used almost entirely up to the one holding it. At the same time each good sword I've ever held has ways it "wants" to move due to nuances in its balance and inertia in different dirrections. This can even make the idea of a sword having a will seem almost reasonable if one sets aside their sensibilities. To top it off, look at when swords were used. They were used in civilian contexts when violent conflict was not expected. They were also used in military contexts when lines were broken and people had to fall back on sidearms to save the day. Times like those are when heroes are born.
3
Early plate armor still often used a shield, but this period saw the shield shrink from a large kite shield, to a smaller and smaller (& thicker and stronger) heater shield. This was only really needed to help protect from lances and to cover the face (should it be exposed) and weaker parts of the torso from arrow fire. As armor improved, even this was largely phased out to give full use of the left hand. Of course, the shield remained for less well equipped soldiers until the pike and shot era (and if you count the buckler, long after that)
2
Totally a spear guy myself, and they had the best, longest run of any weapon type in history...but... To me, a sword is the most balanced and flexible weapon. You can use a sword as well in offense or defense, and in war or civilian conflicts. It is great against unarmored targets, as well as being able to be used against armored targets. All other arms have much more limited styles and usages based on their traits, but the sword, through balance and the wide range of things you can do with it, leaves how it's used almost entirely up to the one holding it. At the same time each good sword I've ever held has ways it "wants" to move due to nuances in its balance and inertia in different dirrections. This can even make the idea of a sword having a will seem almost reasonable if one sets aside their sensibilities. To top it off, look at when swords were used. They were used in civilian contexts when violent conflict was not expected. They were also used in military contexts when lines were broken and people had to fall back on sidearms to save the day. Times like those are when heroes are born.
2
Scholagladitoria on sword costs: https://youtu.be/dy1fcRG0A3g
2
If you can afford plate armor, a plain but solid and functional sword is not particularly expensive. As for use against armor, once you move away from viking age blade heavy swords, you move into swords suited for half-swording and reversing to use the hilt as a striking & grappling/hooking tool (& once someone's on the ground, they're done, either by a friend with a heavy weapon, or a well placed dagger). If you have enough armor to use it 2-handed, you effectively have a 2(or even 3)-in-1 weapon depending on how you're holding it. ...& who cares if you break your sword by chance? Your life's worth more and so is the gear/ransom of the guy you just brought down, and for the short term, there's bound to be weapons lying around a battlefield (including whatever your opponent was just using) (Side note: contrary to popular belief, falchions were not blade heavy weapons. Shadversity has a great series on them you should check out if you haven't seen it)
2
-Aegon Targarian
1
To me, a sword is the most balanced and flexible weapon. You can use a sword as well in offense or defense, and in war or civilian conflicts. It is great against unarmored targets, as well as being able to be used against armored targets. All other arms have much more limited styles and usages based on their traits, but the sword, through balance and the wide range of things you can do with it, leaves how it's used almost entirely up to the one holding it. At the same time each good sword I've ever held has ways it "wants" to move due to nuances in its balance and inertia in different dirrections. This can even make the idea of a sword having a will seem almost reasonable if one sets aside their sensibilities. To top it off, look at when swords were used. They were used in civilian contexts when violent conflict was not expected. They were also used in military contexts when lines were broken and people had to fall back on sidearms to save the day. Times like those are when heroes are born.
1
Neutral Fellow most sieges did not end with storming the fortifications, though. That was a tiny minority. Most ended with one side giving up.
1
Bastard swords, shamshirs, and tulwars for me
1
TheBeastWithin unrelated to the main discussion going on here, but yes, daggers were more common, because nearly EVERYONE in any culture that armed themselves with anything would have a dagger as a final backup weapon, and because they're unmatched for close grappling. Most styles can even be carried in leu of a knife to use as a tool as well. Also, with their low cost and how easy it is to wear one, there's no reason not to have one on you.
1
Well there are whip swords...and those are terrifying to anyone not in mail (& if you have any sense, that includes to the person holding it)
1