User blog comment:El Alamein/Count Roland vs. Harold Godwinson/@comment-3166030-20160116021851

"If you're gonna die! Die with your boots on! If you're gonna try, well, stick around! Gonna cry? Just move along! If you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" - Bruce Dickinson

Close Range: Both these blades are nearly identical, and both of their armors do great against slashing attacks (chainmail), which makes the ideal method of defeating them in their hacking and thrusting. While the Longsword is ideally a weapon I'd rather use, I think Durendal may be a tiny bit more effective, given their armor.

Edge: Roland

Mid Range: Never was a fan of the Pilum/Agnon, simply for it's one-time use mechanic. If he misses, it's a complete waste of his weapon. The Dane Axe is easily going to make mincemeat out of the opposition.

Edge: Godwinson

Long Range: I'm actually not too bad with a tomahawk, myself. A Fransisca, however, is not quite as practical of a thrown hand axe, but it can suffice. But, a bow will outrange and out perform a throwing axe every day but Sunday. It sports over eight times the effective range, and is a lot more reliable to hit your targets with.

Edge: Godwinson

Armor: Leather might help against the throwing axes, but, the Agnon and Durendal will hardly be effected. It's all about the chainmail here, and Roland is supporting more of it, protecting more vital areas

Edge: Roland

X-Factors:  Godwinson has better marks where it really matters, in his actual fighting experience. Tactics won't be as big of an issue when it's a one on one fight, in my honest opinion. Nor would their training, since Roland is just a small amount more sound in warfare than he is. His discipline may be an issue, but, in this scenario, he can just pressure Roland enough to catch him off guard.

Edge: Godwinson

Winner: Harold Godwinson. He's using more practical weaponry, and seems to be a more sound fighter. He can COUNT on a victory here around 530-470