|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:43 pm
Depends on the gun; a lot of bolt action rifles are actually pretty durable, moreso than people would think.
There's also a few martial arts surrounding the use of a rifle and bayonet as fairly efficient tools of war beyond "point and stab." What it lacks in reach, the bayoneted rifle makes up for by having multiple striking capabilities because whereas a spear is usually just a lightweight pole with something sharp on the end, a bayoneted rifle doubled as a bludgeon and a stabbing/slashing weapon. If someone gets past the bayonet, you can still fight them off using the rifle's stock.
That's why a bayoneted rifle is such a nasty weapon; if they're too close to stab, you can dash their skull to pieces with the stock of your rifle.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:50 pm
Well don't forget that the main use of a spear is to break bones... With large and fast sweeping motions it becomes almost impossible for someone to get in close due to the power of the shaft... One could say the blade at the end is simply a bonus...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:52 pm
A lot of tools also make great melee weapons.
Ever think of what a claw hammer can do to somebody...
...swung claw first?
Even large wrenches would make very sturdy bludgeoning instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 8:02 pm
The main purpose of the spear is to.. spear things, generally speaking. That's what the spearhead is for. That's why it has been - for more than three thousand years of human history - the primary weapon of war. We all think of the sword when we think of war in the ancient world, but the spear was really the king of the battlefield back in the day. It's easy to make, it's inexpensive and it serves its purpose perfectly - you point it, and then you jab it into someone's guts.
In Chinese martial arts, it has more uses than that, sure; there are several techniques where the purpose of the spear is a more branching hybrid of staff and spear techniques where the shaft is used as much as the point.
But the uses in a couple of Asian martial arts are really exceptions, not standard use. Traditionally speaking in just about every other culture or military in history, the spear's primary purpose has been to stab things. And by "things", I mean people. Mostly because, like I said, it's cheap, it's useful, and you can make them in bulk without much of an issue. s**t, you don't even need to fashion a spearhead if you're really cheap; just hack away at the end at the right angle and then char it and you've got a reasonably useful weapon, no metallurgy required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:08 pm
Absolute Virtue Any computer that was made after 1989 can run LoL. Wait you need 2.4 gigs of processor speed and a healthy amount of RAM along with compatible a video card. A 1994 computer would so not be able to handle it. Mine is not 94 though, so it might with a video card and the right version of direct X. But I'm not sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:19 pm
That's why they were used in Feudal Europe. The backbone of the European armies in the feudal era was actually the Pikeman, which was basically a peasant with a long sharp pole. They were fairly effective against the dominant mounted units of the time because of the reach of their weapons and a noble lord could easily recruit and equip them from a pool of serfs. Like you said, cheap but effective, and since serfs had little value as people in that time it was exceedingly cheap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:51 pm
It's why spears have been used for pretty much as long as mankind has been aware of its ability to manufacture tools.
You can go back to when mankind was still trying to figure out how to experiment with fire without burning himself, and chances are they were using spears. Even before the dawn of civilization, mankind generally relied on poking things to death with a long stick, and that didn't change after we developed writing and permanent settlements.
If you look at it, the spear has more or less dominated mankind's experiences in war for as long as we had a word for the concept, and that didn't change until the age of gunpowder. Sure there were exceptions, but by and large the spear has been our weapon of choice for the majority of human history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:37 am
Your point about the multipurpose use of a bayoneted rifle is well-taken, Vizzle, but I should point out that the effectiveness of said weapon is mostly based around the enemy being similarly equipped, or less so, with perhaps only a combat knife or something.
It's possible that if the person really knows what the hell they are doing they could go toe to toe with someone wielding a spear or a heavy sword, or possibly even a mace, but I think even the modern soldier would be cowed a little if they had no ammo and just a bayoneted rifle to deal with a guy charging at them with a spear or threatening to push their s**t in with a mace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:30 am
Or has a seven foot katana.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:57 am
That's a modern soldier in the real world. Who, while he may practice with a bayonet, no longer uses it as a standard practice or matter of fact. Who also isn't a fictional character from a fictional setting where modern and archaic weapons could easily coexist side by side on the battlefield. Just because a modern soldier might be put off by it doesn't mean a character would.
That being said, if you go back to WW II or WW I or earlier, and you not only have officers armed with swords, you have bayonets that are fashioned to function as short swords when not placed on the rifle. Japan was notorious for it, and in WW II up until Okinawa, massed infantry charges by the Japanese were common. And a sort of mace or bludgeon was a pretty common sight in the trenches of WW I. So depending on your era, a soldier might be pretty well used to seeing a sword or some sort of mace/truncheon getting swung at his face.
And saying the effectiveness of a weapon is determinant on what the opponent has on hand is true with ANY weapon, a sword or spear is no different in that regard, that notion doesn't apply any more or less to the bayoneted rifle. A bayoneted rifle is, objectively speaking, no less an effective melee weapon than a sword or axe simply because it's primary purpose is to act as a firearm. A sword might be more effective in certain situations, but situational effectiveness is applicable to every weapon every conceived by man.
Of course, like I said, a fictional character doesn't necessarily have to worry about those sort of constraints where they might not be familiar with archaic weapons. They're fictional; they can just as easily have fought wars in a world where sword and pike was common place beside a bolt action rifle and artillery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:05 am
I hope my opponent shows up...Did he even show up for roll call?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:09 am
Probably not.
You'll probably have the sort of luck I had in III where like three of my opponents disappeared or simply never showed up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:15 am
Scratch that, he answered roll call on the first page.
Dude is probably just busy or something. Work, school, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:33 am
Well yes, but we are also talking about a specific set of circumstances here, in which I would argue that the use of melee weapons primarily designed for melee have a distinct advantage, and that's not even addressing the fact that a rifle isn't balanced for parrying blows with... one has to have a hand on each side of the weapon to absorb a blow without it being swatted aside, severely limiting one's mobility. And then there's the aspect of the rifle falling apart from such a blow, because it is a relatively complex piece of equipment pieced together from many parts (some of which are hollow or are moving), and therefore weaker than a weapon made of one or possibly two parts.
That said, I understand that this is a fictional 'verse with fictional characters and the guy is free to do whatever he wants, I just think that he's putting himself at a disadvantage, is all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:21 am
Or the guy that is fighting bare handed? And wow, It seems like it's been a lot longer than two days O.O I was thinking "Huh, looks like it's about time for the next rou... What!?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
