Wow, that was a thoughtful answer. I guess the part of that that really sticks with me is that the leaf-blade and the falcata were thin blades. I pictured the falcata as thick in the spine and heavy. If it was thin in the cross section, then the forward curve would have compensated for that weakness, and made it more formidable.

In that case, the advent of the longer and more substantial two sided migration era sword would indeed have rendered the falcata's advantage almost obsolete. If they needed a shield, or helmet splitter, their sword could do the job as well as any falcata. And if not, the axe did the job much better.

I still imagine the falcata shape could be used in the role of the longseax. In that role it would still be useful, if not more versatile. (like the examples provided).

Grateful for all the insight.

Sirs-the germanic tribes did use a version of the falcata, the falchion,with its blsde weight forward. Mr Oakshott, in his Archaeology if Weapons points out that they (forward weighted blades )were in use by the 500's or so, and illostrates one or two from Kraghul bog I think it was, However, they were very simple, blades, weighted at the point.