User blog comment:Elgb333/Badass with Disabilities: Baldwin the Leper vs Timur the Lame/@comment-4661256-20160331043646

El Alamein's Edges:

 Short Range; Longsword vs. Turko-Mongol Saber:  Although the Turko-Mongol saber is technically longer than the longsword, this difference is really negligible and they're practically the same size. The fact that it's single-edged means the saber will be deadly as a slashing weapon (especially when used in conjunction with a horse's momentum while the user is in the saddle), and it can parry effectively thanks to its design. With that being said, the longsword's double-edged blade means that while its primary design is for thrusting/stabbing attacks, it can still slash and parry decently enough. Add the fact that the pommel can be used like a club and the knights basically have a mini-mace attached to their primary weapon--it's the sword equivalent of pistol-whipping! The longsword's greater versatility is what gets it the edge here.

Edge: Baldwin the Leper

 Mid Range: Halberd vs. Glaive:  The glaive is a good anti-cavalry weapon and it's longer than the halberd, so it has more reach. The halberd still wins though, as its length is respectable while it boasts of superior anti-infantry capabilities in addition to decent anti-cavalry capabilities. The glaive's blade and hook can target a mount and its rider. The halberd's got a pikehead in addition to the blade and hook, which means the knights have more options than the Turko-Mongol soldiers.

Edge: Baldwin the Leper

 Long Range: Crossbow vs. Bow:  Normally the bow gets the edge because, duh, faster rate of fire, longer range, and usually better training. However, Baldwin and his men have the advantage of a castle and its ramparts for cover, while Timur and his men... don't. They have to assault the castle, so if they take to raining down arrows on the Crusaders then the knights can just take cover. Meanwhile, the knights are on an elevated position, which artificially increases the range of their weapon, while their cover protects them a little bit more, meaning they can take more time to aim, and they can reload behind cover, so speed isn't an issue. Yeah, some of the arrows being shot at the castle are fire-tipped, but it's not enough. The superior positioning of the knights enables the crossbow to be the superior weapon in this particular scenario.

Edge: Baldwin the Leper

 Cavalry: Knight Lance vs. Jida Lance:  They're pretty much the same weapon--the knight lance is probably a heavier weapon so it will hit harder while the Jida lance is more maneuverable and can be used on foot (although I'm pretty sure it's not as effective dismounted).

Edge: Even

 Siege: Springald vs. Trebuchet:  The springald is the defensive engine, the trebuchet is the offensive one. Makes sense. One interesting thing is that since the springald is a big giant crossbow, it's more accurate and can definitely target a cluster of soldiers moving around all at once--but also, it can target the trebuchet itself and disable it. The trebuchet is going to have a much harder time disabling the springald. However, that's not its purpose--it's supposed to rain death down on the castle, which is a much, much bigger and easier target. While I think the springald will take down the trebuchet, the damage the trebuchet will inflict on the castle will be severe (it might even breach a wall or collapse a tower section). Basically Timur can set up and move his siege engine at his leisure while the knights can only react to his movements.

Edge: Timur the Lame

 Armor: Mail vs. Lamellar:  Yes, the lamellar allows the Turko-Mongol troops under Timur to be more mobile and for horse archers that's important. The problem is, these highly mobile soldiers are bogging themselves down for a siege, which means eventually they'll have to confront the Crusaders inside their castle, where the better protection offered by their mail, stronger helmet and stronger shield will really help out. Remember too that some of the knights can take off their armor and rest if they're not directly fighting (that's the purpose of a defensive structure after all), so it's not like they're going to be instantly fatigued if it comes down to close quarters--the fatigue there will come from the situation of a protracted siege in general, not the armor. The stronger protective capabilities of Baldwin's armor gets him and his men the edge.

Edge: Baldwin the Leper

WINNER: BALDWIN THE LEPER

Yeah, I know he's probably going to lose anyway, but hear me out. Baldwin's got the majority of weapons edges and he has a huge advantage in holding the defensive position. That makes his crossbows and defensive siege equipment way deadlier than they'd normally be on an open field, so he can use his accuracy to his advantage. While I think Timur can eventually breach the castle wall, that won't guarantee his victory (if anything it seals his defeat in my mind). He'll already have sustained losses, and once he gets up close and starts engaging the Crusaders their superior swords, polearms, and armor will give them a significant leg up over their Turko-Mongol foes. Top it all off with the fact that Baldwin himself is capable of fighting and Timur isn't, and you have a commander who will inspire more confidence in his men and who can rally his men to defend--when they're defending the Crusaders have no choice but to fight or die. When Timur's men are attacking they can always turn back and the knights just might force them to do that.