User blog comment:Wassboss/Deadliest Warrior Rematch: Comanche vs Mongol/@comment-27358240-20181108013208/@comment-35680048-20181108024909

Kazzy,I apologize upfront since I'm a stickler for sound logic and I just can't ignore this. The reason the lance won't be effective on land is exactly because it is so long. If the Mongol gets inside that massive space (which he certainly will), what can the Comanche do? And don't forget the shield that he carries too, the Comanche will be forced to put it away, making him even more vulnerable. This is the same exact thing that you did with the whole Longsword vs Katana deal, except there I ould actually see your point about thrusting. The point here though isn't that the Lance can't function on land, it's that with size and lack of monementum on land, it makes it much harder to use effectively.

For Special I dont even know how to describe this. The mace is "overkill"? Are you even taking into consideration armor? A spike on a stick isn't going through lamellar as easy as you think and against the helmet, forget it. The mace may be heavier, but it's also shorter which helps out with mobility. And let's say that the Mongol does get screwed for a second and the War Hawk lands a hit. As I mentioned before there is no guarantee that it will even go through. You know what leaves you more vulnerable than bashing a guy head in and moving on to the next guy kind of slowly? Having your weapon get stuck in your enemy's armor while he's good and ready to again, bash your brains out.

Everything else you said is fine, it's just that I had a serious logic disconnet with those two weapons.

Tybalt