Why are swords more popular in vidya than spears when spears are more effective in one on one combat irl?

Becuase they are associated with the noble/ruling class.
Spears are an efficient peasant weapons.

This

because rpg players are the most vanilla cookie cutter boring fags in vidya. look at how salty they got about being called out for playing as generic humans when you can play as a giant lizard or a skeleton or an orc. same thing applies to their weapon choices. you could give them a spear, a halberd, a morningstar, an axe, or anything else, and 75% of them will just pick sword

Attached: cs7y890ikfmz.jpg (588x407, 19.01K)

spears also cannot pierce armor
hell even maces and hammers could barely deal concussion damage against people with so much padding underneath their plates

WRONG. I'll pick a big sword.

why do you make this thread everyday?

To spite pseudo intellectual retards which lack brains to realize that spears are death sentence in any closed environment.

spears were not "more effective in battle"
battles have always been historically won or lost due to factors outside of "one side killed everyone on the other side" most soldiers never even got to use their weapons and armor and it wasn't uncommon for them to hit each other to wear their equipment out so that they got paid more.

hell, armor had some questionable designs, including nipples on male armor, if women wore armor to battle, you can 100% be sure boob armor would exist, because armorcrafting prioritized aesthetics and symbolism over functionality.

if you want to know where were weapons and armor truly tested, you have to look at tournament weapons and armor, the only place in which fights are fair and not dependent on external factors.
and if you start looking at tournament equipment you will start to see all sorts of things that contradict the gospel from those modern medieval youtube historians

Spears are a weapon used in formation and where the main weapon used by almost all infantry armies (with the notable exception being rome, but they used the gladius very similar to a spear, only stabbing and not slashing). The spear (and other polearms like pikes) are superior to swords or axes in a formation, the reasons beeing:

1. Its so much cheaper
2. Easier to train with
3. Easier to do coordinated movements
4. Gives you more reach
5. Easy to use with little space

The main problem with it is that its pretty much useless in a duel situation (which is why soldiers would still keep a sword as a sidearm). Most games apart from strategy games have you fight in duel type situation, where using a spear is retarded, which is why it is so rare.

Because swords are cool and spears are dull you retard

Who holds a spear like that lmao

you really think a spear could stand a chance against a katana?

Swords are cooler.

Because spears are boring as shit and have one effective combat style, swords can have whatever impractical, flashy style they want in video games.

>The main problem with it is that its pretty much useless in a duel situation
umm.. honey
youtu.be/afqhBODc_8U

Depends how many times the spear has been folded.

spears were always the peasants weapon primarily used in massive formations to give the peasants a sense of security and herd bravery

swords were more of a close and personal weapon, used by skilled and trained warriors.

if you're talking about realism: a guy with a sword and a shield is going to beat a guy with a spear 4/5 times. all he has to do is rush you and parry your spear with his shield... you're fucked at that point.

gam??

>falling for le real japanese steel meme
watch me as i murderstrike you to death with my superior guard

Attached: pjimage-5-1-1280x720.jpg (1280x720, 148.38K)

skyrim with mods

medieval chads fight with a spear AND a sword

Attached: De_Alte_Armatur_und_Ringkunst_Talhofer_176.jpg (834x549, 97.69K)

The truth is, Lords thought swords were really cool. They were like
>damn this double-sided gleaming pointy piece of metal gloriously fashioned into an elegant and yet murderous extension of my arm, sheathing it all sexy like a dick into pussy, dont have to carry it around like a fucking peasant, freeing my glorious lordly hands for leadership gestures on the battlefield and the stroking of my glorious golden locks, all fucking decked out at the hilt with all this fine-ass detailing and engravings this shit was more expensive than a castle and sexier than my 45 wives, we are now using this glorious metallic perfection for every metaphor involving combat or a struggle, and also duels will now use this so if you're a fashionable lord like me you better learn before you get embarrassed. im going to practice for 50,000 hours until im the best swordsman in anime history because i dont want to carry a polearm around
but yeah polearms are obviously better its just swords are cooler so they get all the glory despite being glorified sidearms. Master swordsmen compensate by spending their whole lives practicing but this just shows how hard it is to compensate for the disadvantage of using it.

>spears are more effective in one on one combat irl?
Wrong
Spears are more effective in formation. One on one, a sword is better. Especially if they have a shield or two-handed sword.

>that stance with a short spear
wew lad, that's really fucking stupid. yeah keep the pointy, deflective bit way from the enemy. he'll laugh when you hit him and it feels like getting hit with a plastic fisher price bat against his armor.

0/10 delete this

>Lindy
>Duel rules that don't account for problems with wounded opponent pushing into range or armor
It's stupid because fighting style there has spear users perform lightest hits possible or downright slashing motions as they just want to tag the guy out like 9:15 where tips just slashes the shoulder.

At least we have Nioh for fun spear gameplay.

Polearms still have the advantage in 1v1 combat. Sword+board has a better chance though but in armored combat the sword becomes far less useful which is why halberds and other polearms dominated the late medieval and early modern era

What about a short spear?

Cant use a shield with a spear, not comfortably. Shield makes spear redundant

>if you're talking about realism: a guy with a sword and a shield is going to beat a guy with a spear 4/5 times. all he has to do is rush you and parry your spear with his shield... you're fucked at that point.

youtube.com/watch?v=afqhBODc_8U

Attached: speared.png (960x542, 1010.72K)

Short or not you still have to lunge, sword guy steps aside and swings down through your skull

Thats just retarded

and decent armor makes swords redundant

Okay persian, lmao. Still mad about those stupid shield n spear boys killing 10,000 of your buds? Get over it bro lol its been 1600 years.

shield and sword is still more reliable to get close and stab the exposed area that even decent armor had

If youre not retarded youd understand that holding a stick with two hands makes it really easy to move the stick quickly. To, say, block a sword.