User blog comment:Urbancommando77/King Arthur VS Attila the Hun/@comment-17814994-20150220143333

Elgb's "History vs Fantasy" EDGES!!!

Arthus vs Attila:

Main: An easy win for Arthur. The longer and lighter the blade, the better, and the excalibur delivers. Not only that, but its also blessed with magic. EDGE: Arthur

Ranged: Although the composite bow has the longer range and rate of fire, they are known to be ineffective against armors similar to that in the Middle Ages. The steel crossbow, which is designed to penetrate armor, no doubt would penetrate Attila's lamellar armor, while also offering the better accuracy. EDGE: Arthur

Special: Axe beats hammer any day. The axe can be a cutting and blunting weapon. The hammer is good weapon with its weight and penetrating spike, but the axe is just long enough to keep it at bay. EDGE: Attila

Forces:

Close: Again, Arthur's forces win in terms of balded weaponry. Longswords are longer, made up of better forged steel, well-balanced, and is designed primarily to pin-point at unarmored parts. The hunnic sword is just too old and has an obselete design. EDGE: Arthur

Medium. Although the javelin is a ranged weapon, it heavily lacks penetration power even if the enemy is unarmored. It is useless in this battle, due to the fact that it won't penetrate steel armor. Pike's are longer and is far more dangerous. EDGE: Arthur

Long: Same opinion still apllies. Composite bow cannot penetrate medieval armor, while steel crossbow can go through lamellar armor. EDGE: Arthur

Special: The synthian axe decimates the longer flail with its better killing potential. The flail lacks power and safety. EDGE: Attila

Armor: Plate armor all the way. Its designed primarily to stop crossbow bolts, swords, and spears. It also covers a  larger area than the lamellar armor. EDGE: Arthur

Deadliest Warrior: King Arthur

Arthur snags the victory quite easily with his more advanced weaponry, armor, and better tactics. He's more sane and more intelligence. Sorry Attila, but you're just outclassed.