User blog comment:MilenHD/Norman vs Winged Hussar/@comment-17814994-20160302152226

Elgb's "Let's Play Horsey!" EDGES!!!

Short: These two weapons have their own strengths and weaknesses. The szabla is obviously better suited for cavalry due to its curved blade. The longsword is at best when used on foot. However, there were records that the broadsword was also effective on horseback (though not as effective as a saber). Still, the broadsword was longer and more versatile. Its straight blade is also useful in pinpointing unarmored parts. EDGE: Norman

Mid: The lance maybe longer but it was designed to be most effective on horseback. It's not that effective on foot. But the spear on the other hand, can be just as effective on foot and on horseback. It's lighter, can be thrown if needed, and can also dislodge enemy horses. EDGE: Norman

Long: The composite crossbow lacks the power to penetrate armor, especially the cuirasses worn by the Hussar. The pistol crossbow on the other, while it won't fair that better, does have a bayonet on it. Range by range both are the same. EDGE: Hussar

Special: This might sound crazy but I'm actually giving the edge to the Nadziak. The Kite shield will be an effective defensive, as well as offensive tool to keep the Hussar at bay. But a knife isn't the best partner for a shield that size, especially if your opponent has a more solid armor like the Hussar's. The Nadziak on the other hand, was actually designed to as a blunt force and spike weapon to deal with armor. It was effective in breaking shields, and that huge-ass pike can be used to also disarm shields and unhook people on horseback. EDGE: Hussar

X-Factors: In terms of training, I'm gonna give this one to the Hussars. These guys were born from nobility, giving them better training in some of the most prestigious military posts, as well as better logistics and resources. The Normans were great warriors, but they probably train the same way any other warriors of their time train (probably in their childhoods but meh). The Hussars were meant as shock troops that can deliver a suprising and fast death blow. EDGE: Hussars

Deadliest Warrior?

Funny as it is, I'm actually siding with the Winged Hussars. While they don't have the best and most balanced weapons here, they do make it up in their x-factors. I do respect that the Normans do defeat them in most weapon edges, but they are not on the same level as the legendary Winged Hussars. Hear me out. The common Norman cavalry was nothing special. They were just mounted infantry designed to ride into battle, get down from their horses, and fight. While the Normans did employ cavalry attacks/charges, they were not as refined as the tactics used by the Hussars. The Hussars were not only better trained and supplied, but they have a 200 year old lifespan of badassery. Hell, they were so effective that they were even hired by other countries as mercenaries. Simply put, w e are comparing an ordinary Norman cavalry against an armored heavy cavalry such as the Hussars. It's crazy I know, but the Hussars will win in my opinion.