Why do I hate swords with thin blades so much...

Why do I hate swords with thin blades so much? God I hate these needle dick pieces of shit and I want to melt them all down.

Attached: Rapiere-Morges-kitsch.jpg (1913x1917, 210K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=IVPLaPvW10Q
youtube.com/watch?v=nyAc5HbUuqw
youtube.com/watch?v=SY_GYDq-nJY
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Because you're a faggot

>an elegant weapon of a more civilized age

I think you simply lack class OP

I guess they don't look as big and powerful. This is an illusion however. Thinner blades came about in part because metallurgy got better, so you didn't need the extra bulk to prevent the sword from getting damaged.

If I remember correctly, thinner swords became a custom to denote nobility status and usually wouldn't be used in actual combat. Maybe a duel at the most. This came about after the Renaissance I think. This may have just been a Spanish thing or something.
Anyone with a better grasp on this custom, feel free to make corrections.

Totally wrong

Narrow, not thin. The typical rapier has a 8-12mm thick ricasso, so they're still plenty thick.

You remember completely wrong. Rapiers were commonly carried by people of all ranks in society and commonly used by soldiers on the battlefield. Nobody used them as primary weapons, but nobody used medieval arming swords as primary weapons either.

>"hurr no class"
>quotes star wars

Attached: 1395282995_bik.jpg (600x450, 57K)

>Nobody used them as primary weapons, but nobody used medieval arming swords as primary weapons either.
Yeah sure, it's almost as if rodeleros never existed.
This "primary weapon" nonsense is really poisoning medieval and modern period melee weapons understanding.

Attached: Combate en las trincheras de Hulst - combate cerrado con espada y rodela.jpg (981x1058, 553K)

>implying star wars isnt classy
dont be one of those "only true art" assholes

Because you're a fan of the medeval period sort of D&D tropes? And the newer technology shows up the long-sword? You probably also want to smash some looms.

Yep. Lighter and more maneuverable means more control means a better weapon. That was always offset by the thing breaking if they got too thin.

Bronze-age didn't have much choice, and had big fat blades, and there were still reports of them bending them back straight in the middle of combat.

Not... utter shit. You're talking about smallswords, even LATER than the rise of re rapier and such. These were dueling weapons. But it wasn't restricted to nobility, it's just that serfs couldn't afford such things.

I don't like the concept of thin swords either but if you know how to fence, they can actually be very accurate and lethal.

>this edge case invalidates the general rule
nobody cares moron. most soldiers only had one sword for both on and off battlefield carry, and in the first half of the 17th century that sword was generally a rapier of some kind.

Because you can't understand the elegance of the Baroque period. They are not battlefield weapons, they are a dedicated dueling weapon, for nobles to resolve their arguments with.
Except the smallsword. It sucks.

the "made for duelling" argument is true in the context of taza and other late era rapiers with square or flattened diamond cross section blades with narrow proportion.

It's certainly not true of all rapiers (and sideswords, which must be bundled with them) - many of which were indeed used on battlefields

>it's almost as if rodeleros never existed.
considering their minimal impact on the warfare of the time and the fact that everyone quickly decided that throwing off brand Roman legionnaires at off brand Macedonian phalanxes wasn’t working as well as the history books told them it should, yeah it is almost like they never existed

So the tercio of which the rodeleros was a main part had a "minimal impact on the warfare of the time"? You must out of your mind.
They were massively influencial for at least 150 years, from the early 16th c. to the mid-17th c. so no, it's not exactly as if "they never existed".

what planet are you from where rodoleros were the primary component of a terico instead of arquebusiers and pikemen?

I'm not saying they were the primary component, but a tercio without swordsmen isn't a tercio. Tercios were a half pikemen, a third arquebusiers and a sixth swordsmen but it worked because of its combined arms nature.

The best sword is a spear.

>but it worked because of its combined arms nature.
>rodoleros are the smallest percentage of the tercio
>didn’t work in Italy when fielded as large units against pikes
>didn’t work in Spain when fielded as large units against pikes
>admittedly worked pretty well as conquistadors, but didn’t have to go up against pikes in North America
>somehow an essential component of a tercio when fielded in tiny quantities
I’m not buying it, especially when half the easily accessible literature on them says they were dropped entirely by the time tercios were a thing.

A swordsman killed his gay lover with one. Show a little sensitivity man.

maybe cause you like cutting?
youtube.com/watch?v=IVPLaPvW10Q

Actually if lightsabers were real the fighting style with them would be more like fencing with a blade similar to op. The wide swings and fancy movements in the movie would get you killed against something that's tip can penetrate anything like butter then.

It would probably mirror smallsword fencing rather than rapier fencing, that is if you go with the weightless lightsabre's blades that is.

How thin is too thin for you, OP?

Attached: p1030715_med.jpg (743x557, 50K)

>Maybe a duel at the most.
Rapiers are the single best (wearable) weapon for the unarmored duel and were used in combat a lot.
To be fair, battlefield weapons would be often be more blade-heavy and cut-centric than civilian weapons, more something we'd call a sidesword now and less a rapier.

Attached: pic_vasa2.jpg (600x600, 32K)

Huh I always thought those were just fencing swords but the autists itt seem to think otherwise

Indeed.
>It could be argued that the King's rapier is a cut-and-thrust sword, and it is obvious that the sword is capable of both powerful thrusts and wicked cuts, unlike the more narrow-bladed rapiers a couple of generations later.

The main problem seems to be the definition of defining what a rapier is.
Based on peters research we could ignore the hilt-style and focus on the pivot points, which would give us a good indication of the style of fencing the swords were used for.

Attached: mecsmuslem.jpg (1024x768, 162K)

Attached: Dynamics4swords.png (579x456, 24K)

Complex hilt swords tend to be unknown to such a large extend that a straight bladed sword with elaborate hilt design could automatically fall into the category of "rapiers" as an alternative classification is not within the scope of the viewer.

Attached: 16thcenturylongswords_890.png (800x600, 735K)

>Long and stabby is a rapier
>Medium length and cutty-stabby is a sidesword
>Anything inbetween is something inbetween a rapier and sidesword
Think practical. People at the time would call it a "sword" most often and describe what it does when asked.

I have no idea what those pivotpoints are and wether they are a useful way to describe a swords weight distribution, but I can't help but notice that the cut-centric early medieval sword and the thrust-centric later medieval rapier are more similar in pivot point distribution than the cut-and-thrust arming sword...

>I have no idea what those pivotpoints are and wether they are a useful way to describe a swords weight distribution, but I can't help but notice that the cut-centric early medieval sword and the thrust-centric later medieval rapier are more similar in pivot point distribution than the cut-and-thrust arming sword...

Watch from about minute 45.
youtube.com/watch?v=nyAc5HbUuqw

minute 48 .. or from one hour and 11 minutes if you're in a hurry.

swiss sabers tended to have complex guards, the forth from the left sword in your pic could be classified as one

Attached: swiss saber.png (743x557, 372K)

It's actually the most famous one of the type (replica Made by A&A), I only used the image as example of complex hilted swords the general public is fairly unaware of.

Tods version:
youtube.com/watch?v=SY_GYDq-nJY

*cough*

Not only that but he's a size queen. Gotta get that big dick, he aint got time for no shrimp.

You must like clubs and hammers.

Attached: hahabutthatswrongyoufuckingmoron.png (551x1055, 1.54M)

Attached: thisshitagain.png (135x205, 77K)

you were always wrong and retarded