So, that means that the forward-balanced blades were so just to increase cutting power, not blunt impact, though it is a side effect. And also, that the straight blade was chosen for its versatility, not really its marginally increased impact.
Aleksei Sosnovski wrote: |
But ultimately I think that the question of hitting or not hitting armor with a sword is somewhat not related to real life. One can and should try to hit his opponent into places not covered with armor. And one should avoid needlessly dulling his sword. But when being hit, one's opponents will do their best to get hit in the least dangerous places, i.e. places covered with armor. So whether one wants to hit maille with his precious sword or not, he will most likely anyway do it if he faces maille-clad opponents. Same goes for helmets and other armor pieces. |
That's more or less what I was getting at, but I thought that the blunt impact through armour might have influenced the outcome of the fight, so that blades more capable of blunt impact were selected to fight when flexible armour was dominant. It seems not...
Regards,