User blog comment:Deathblade 100/Season 3 Finale: Hannibal Barca vs William Wallace/@comment-17814994-20160925065405

Elgb's "Freedom From Empires" EDGES!!!

Long: Easy edge to the soliferrum. Both aren't really that accurate at long range, but the ball and chain needs a lot of momentum to be flung as a projectile, making it the more diffucult weapon to use. And like all flail weapons, the user is risking himself getting hit by his own weapon if he uses the ball and chain for close-quarters. The soliferrum can also be used as a range and melee weapon, but unlike the ball and chain it is simpler to aim and doesn't need that much energy to use. EDGE: WW

Mid: It was hard to decide at first, but after making some research the falarica is the better weapon due to its versatility. The claymore is a great BFS that you can use against virtually anything from armor, pole weapons and even against horses. But the falarica not only has the reach advantage, but it can also be used as a javelin, making it both a ranged and melee weapon. That metal tip is pwoerful enough to pierce througha rmor, and there were also accounts of falaricas being used as an incendiary weapon by coating it with combustibles, and whatever it hits from shields, armor, wooden structures and even human will be set ablazed. EDGE: HB

Short: Crazy as it sounds but I'm actually giving the edge to the war hammer. While swords would always beat axes and blunt weapons any day of the week, the thing is, is that Hannibal's falcata would do squat against chainmail. It's heavy broad-tipped blade was designed to slash, which the chainmail ahs no problem defending against. Worse, is that its tip isn't slim enough to thrust through a chainmail either. These limitations would restrict the user to using the falcata in the enck or the face, which is also a disadvantage. The warhammer may not have the ability to slash, but at least it can be used against armored opponents, with its hammer being able to bash through shields, and spike which can puncture through armor like a can opener. EDGE: WW

Special: Ah yeah... throwing spear wins. Its easier to use, can be used for long range and clsoe range combat, and it is far more deadly that a simple sling. EDGE: WW

Armor: I'm giving the edge to the chainmail. While the musuclata is more solid, it's made of inferior steel. The only disadvantage that the chainmail has is that it doesn't have the same protection the musculata has for blunt force weapons. However, I don't think this would bother Wallace much seeing how Hannibal doesn't even have any blunt weapons to begin with. EDGE: WW

Deadliest Warrior?

I'm going to agree with LB and give the vote straight to William Wallace due to better tactics and weapons. Wallace just has the more balanced weapons for long range and close range, and many of his weapons double as armor-piercers as well. Besides the falarica, Hannibal lacks any weapons capable of combating against armor, and he'll have a hard time trying to get through Medieval armor in this battle.

Another thing why I give Wallace the vote here is that his tactics are the perfect counter for Hannibal Barca. Yes this may surprise you, but the Romans manage to strategically defeat Hannibal by using guerilla tactics that Wallace also used against the English. Hannibal is basically a god when it comes to a close confrontation style of warfare. Since the Romans can't defeat him in open ground, they resorted to what they call as "Fabian Strategy"; a strategy in which they decided not to fight Hannibal in a pitched battle, but instead harassing and causing chaos on his army through guerilla and inderect attacks. This is the same thing that Wallace used during his many skirmishes against the larger and better equipped English army. But what makes Wallace superior is that he is able to fight his enemies both in pitched battles and in guerilla style raids.