User blog comment:Urbancommando77/Mongols VS Saxons/@comment-5795750-20140410042351

BG1's "Time to Kill during Uni" Edges:

Close - The seax and dagger are nearly the same thing so in this edge it all comes down to the swords and I would actually give this to the Turko-Mongol Sabre since it is more aerodynamic in its curvature allowing for a faster and more lethal kill with a tremendous amount of force

EDGE: Mongols

Medium: The boar spear is actually a spear more used for hunting which means that it is an improvised weapon which in turn means it pales in comparison to the more combat-oriented glaive; also the glaive is essentially a kind of polearm and polearms > spears due to their versatility and length (if you don't think I'm right about using the first point as a valid reason then look at the second point)

EDGE: Mongols

Long Range: While the crossbow has more range and is more lethal because of the forces involved, the Mongol Composite Bow gets this big time since it isn't as clunky to reload as the crossbow plus you can use the composite bow more effectively on the move which is what the Mongols were very good at

MAJOR EDGE: Mongols

Special: This is where the Saxon's gain a slight edge considering that the Dane Axe has a longer reach than the mace, has a sharp blade which deals more damage and it can sometimes be thrown to some effect

EDGE: Saxons

Armour: Despite the superior metallurgy of the chainmail over the lamellar, I have to give this to the lamellar since chainmail is just as likely to falter in the way the lamellar will (i.e. arrows can still penetrate it as much as the swords and polearms do) but what makes the chainmail lose out is that it is somewhat heavier than the lamellar and restricts movement

EDGE: Mongols (just)

Overall Winner: Gosh this is actually difficult to decide despite my edges because of the probability this will turn into the Comanche vs Mongol scenario so hmmm... I will have to barely give this to the Mongols because the one difference between these two warriors is that the Saxons are not particularly as well known as horseback fighters as much as the Mongols were and since the Mongols here take most of the weapon edges, obviously this means the Mongols have better weapons suited for long-term fighting - they managed to conquer all of Asia, Asia Minor, the Middle East and Eastern Europe for goodness sakes and against opponents not unlike the Saxons, how is a Saxon going to top that? (and this is what Uni life does to you... actually I'm typing this from inside uni when I have a break so at least I had time to make this)