User blog comment:El Alamein/Highlander vs. Huskarl/@comment-26074921-20120810223821

I've been meaning to vote for a while, but the wiki wouldn't let me comment. So here goes


 * Close-Huskarl-The longsword is more versatile and longer than the warhammer. The longsword offers more reach and options in combat. The blade is a massive advantage when put up against a weapon that lacks the same range and versatility.


 * Mid-Highlander The claymore offers more damage output, a longer blade and more options in combat (which really means, different swings XD). The Dane axe does not appear to be able to match the claymore in combat, and by the look of the design, it seems like it wouldn't be the best choice against the claymore.


 * Special-Huskarl-Again, I'm no historian, but it appears the greater length of the Seax would grant it more range. Thus a slight edge.


 * Armor-Even The two warriors are about even when you consider the various weapons of the two. The Huskarl comes in with a helmet that adds additional protection, while the highlander has a superior shield. But both sets will work similar in a protection role.

Deadliest warrior-Huskarl It should come as no surprise that the elite of the Saxon military will take this match. Not to mention the Huskarl takes the majority of edges. I think Las nailed it with the numbers here.