User blog comment:Deathblade 100/Season 2 opener: Horace Altman vs King Arthur/@comment-5232784-20150112180917

None shall pass...until they vote!

1. Short range!

Excalibur has often, if not always, been presented as a longsword. Longswords averaged 39-51 inches long, with a 35-43 inch blade. It is logical to assume that the bigger the person, the longer the sword would be. Since King Arthur here is listed as 6 feet 3 and Horace 5 feet 8, it could be concluded that Excalibur is longer, and thus the greater sword length, combined with longer arms, gives King Arthur greater a lead in the range factor. Having greater size, he can apply more force with the heavier blade than Horace can with his. Range and force are considerable factors.

If not, if both weapons are the same size, then King Arthur still has an advantage: being bigger, stronger, and crucially taller, he will be better able to wield such a blade. Horace will have to exert more force to lift and wield it, which could hamper speed. Being shorter, he is more likely to have the sword scrape something on the ground (a rock, a stump, a dead body in combat, etc) than King Arthur, who has a seven inch advantage.

If Horace's sword is bigger, then once again Arthur has the advantage; having a lighter weapon and more strength, he can move his sword even more quickly and efficiently, than if the swords were the same size. He will use even less force to wield it, while Horace will be encumbered with the heavier blade. Horace would have superior range, but since his arms are shorter, the range factor might not be that good. Thus Arthur has the advantage again.

EDGE: King Arthur

2. Mid range

A pike is a good weapon for a foot soldier fighting oncoming cavalry. Its a strategy used since ancient times against such forces: Sarissas were used effectively by the Macedonians against the war elephants of King Porus, and likewise medieval pikes were used efficiently against armored knights. However, this weapon wont do super well for someone on horseback: it is not designed for it. I guess you could, depending on the pike, but it wont have the superior grip, hand guard of the lance, and unlike the lance, it is not designed for horseback. These two are mounted foes, so I think that Horace has a major advantage here.

EDGE: Horace!

3. Long range

Horace's Composite crossbow lacks the accuracy of Arthur's steel crossbow, and accuracy is crucial here. Also, correct me if Im wrong, but one of the reasons it is called a steel crossbow is that it is made at least mostly out of steel. Steel is more durable than wood.

EDGE: Arthur

4. X Factors

Strength and leadership go to King arthur, while swordsmanship goes to Horace. However, as listed above, Horace will have some disadvantages in the sword department. Still, Horace's sword skill may compensate a lot for this.

Experience also goes to arthur, having fought for at least two decades more than Horace. With years comes not only experience but also intelligence, and Arthur may indeed therefore have superiority here. KIng Arthur has a major lead.

EDGE: Arthur!

Conclusion? Very difficult to surmise. Arthur has a major disadvantage with the pike, at least until he his on the ground. He could then use the pike to bring Horace's horse down, and unlike the pike, the lance is not a good weapon for ground combat. Yet this fight could be over with one joust, and we know who has the advantage there. Close range is difficult to surmise, for though arthur has weapon superiority, Horace is the better swordsman, so it could go either way at close quarters. Arthur has superiority in the crossbow and in x factors, and these will probably give him the win, but just BARELY.

KING ARTHUR TELLS HORACE "NONE SHAL PASS!"