User blog comment:ILoveBattles/ILoveBattles - Season 1 - William the Conquerer vs Richard the Lionheart/@comment-17814994-20160218141137

Elgb's "To Arms!!!" EDGES!!!

Close: The Longsword easily takes the edge It was designed to actually replace the broadsword (which was itself descended from the Vikings). The broadsword is good against light infantry but won't do much against armor. The longsword was designed to pinpoint unarmored parts. EDGE: Richard

Mid: Normally the longer the weapon the deadlier it becomes. But that's the only advantage a pike has. The billhook was designed to get through those lengthy weapons, and has other options of attack as well. EDGE: Richard

Long: For me the crossbow is the better weapon. It's more verasatile, easier to use, and can penetrate just as deep. It also needs less training and hassle too. And for people who'd say that Lionheart will have "bodkin" arrows, you're wrong, bodkins weren't yet invented during Richard's time. EDGE: William

X-Factors: I'm giving all too William here. He's a better and more experienced tactician. He's a master at both open adn siege battles. Richard is good too, but he stretches his resources too much, costing him his army (and eventually his life). SImply put, William successfully conquered Britain... but Ricahrd failed to conquer Jerusalem.

Deadliest Warrior?

Though William is the more cunning of the two, I'm gonna give this to Lionheart. He has the better and mroe versatile weapons. If this was a large scale war, William's intellect, strategies, and larger logistics would have given him the win. But in a small scale battle, Richard's deadlier weapons and armor will be too much for the Norman.