Board Thread:Speculation House/@comment-27404492-20170511131216/@comment-25936766-20170605044736

73.Anon.52 wrote: 1-I meant upgrade in the way that a spear made for stabbing(not slashing)

2-is an improvement over other weapons... range increment.

3-It is an improvement on those weapons because you increase your range exponentially...

4-and while a gun will never replace a slashing spear...

5-that isn't the kind of spear you put on a halberd...

6-why would anyone be expected to put a bayonet on an AXE? 1-There are spears made for Slashing? First time in my whole life I ever heard such a thing. I've heard of POLEARMS made for slashing, but not Spears specifically.

2-Except that since Spears are pretty much blades on a stick, anything that is too close instantly makes the Spear useless since they are too long to swing effectively at close range, the pole part is easily broken, and if it is broken the spear becomes almost useless.

Plus, next-to-no spear ever had a blade that was actually good at slashing. Spears were all meant for stabbing, piercing, thrusting. Slashing with one is like slashing with a needle. An oversized needle. A needle whose entire body minus the tip could easily break if you tried to do that.

So, no, it has good reach but said reach is only really effective when thrusting. Hence why things like Swords, Axes and Hammers were still frequently used. Hell, even a cheap hammer could break a spear easily in a single blow.

3-Except guns are not MELEE weapons, never were, and most attempts at making guns that were worth something in melee (beyond adding a bayonet) were too impractical to be used generally (generally, even heavier than usual guns, making them much harder to aim, and those guns weren't accurate to begin with).

Hell, I think the only decent example of one that did not use bayonets, were revolvers with knuckle-dusters for handles, and even then those easily got damaged, making it more likely for the gun to blow on your face if you fired it afterwards.

Stop comparing Guns and Spears, don't even try. Like I said, it's Apples and Cattle. They are completely different objects meant for completely different things and used in completely different ways. This is why I said it was so stupid that it's best not say it.

Hell, you could've at least compared them to Crossbows, which are the real predecessors of guns as RANGED weapons, and like guns, they were designed for ranged attacks, and like guns, their ammo was designed to pierce through thanks to their speed. Sure, it would've been irrelevant to the topic at the time, but at least you don't make yourself look like you know nothing.

4-Because they are completely different things meant for completely different things....

5-.....Obviously, since there's already an Axe head. Reason Number 1 why they used an actual spear head, meant for piercing via thrusts......and what the hell does that have to do with what you were previously saying in that same paragraph?

6-On a poleaxe, you mean. The idea of Axes with a spike (which is what a bayonet basically is) topping the axe-head was not rare at all.....And even on Poleaxes, that actually was done.

I seriously don't see what you're trying to say here. What's your point, that "it has a gun instead of a spearhead, so it's still a Halberd"? If that was your point, your arguments are too ignorant, and even then, the weapon would not be a Halberd, it would be a Gun-Axe the same way Ruby has a Gun-Scythe.

Let me ask you something, 73, regardless of how "harsh" it sounds: Do you have Fronto-temporal Dementia, or some other condition that messes up your ability to communicate?

Something that prevents you from speaking without getting tongue-tied, or ending up sounding too-vague, or comparing things that aren't really similar, or at least making it hard for you to express yourself in an understandable way?

I know you can speak english well enough to be understood in that regard, so I doubt Language is the issue. It has to do more with how you fail to get your point across.