Then there's swords that were specifically designed to pierce through armor, like various "mail breakers". When it came to plate armor swords generally tended to be ineffective, but if you were going to use one against someone clad in plate you best bet was to either aim for the gaps and slits, or turn the sword around and hit them with the pommel/guard.Īlternatively, a strong enough hit could deliver enough force to cause damage through the plate and padding underneath, even if it failed to penetrate. Alternatively if you manage to get the tip into one of the rings there's a very high chance you can pierce through the armor. Swords pitted against chainmail can overwhelm the armor itself if enough force is put into the blow. Granted, there have also existed edge cases like the Roman Gladius.Įven the samurai, with all the memes about them and swords, used bows and polearms primarily when fighting in actual war.
Also, it needs to be mentioned that for most of history swords were not the primary weapon of any serious combatant, but a tertiary sidearm you used when you had nothing else. Click to expand.Are we talking about IRL swords?īecause claiming they were ineffective against armor is a big caveat, and depends wholly on the time period, type of sword and armor they are pitted against.
0 kommentar(er)
