Units with stupid weapon choices

[Agema]

Thx, but I'll still take the assault rifle with bayonet.

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Wrana

Also, I'd say that spears should have higher damage overall... Plus probably higher Defence. It's quite easy to fight with one against sword and d... difficult other way around!

Isn't that just the Repel mechanic instead of high Defense?

-Max

[Wrana]

Originally Posted by Ynglaur

Rifles can be surprisingly well balanced when it comes to bayonets. Then newer M4 carbines aren't that great, especially when you throw on combat optics, laser sights, flashlights, etc., much less a grenade launcher (M203). But even the now-venerable M16 can have a good combination of blunt and edged attacks, and can be surprisingly nimble.

The problem in trenches in terms of hand-to-hand combat is definitely one of lack of space. I, too, think the Agarthans' use of short swords makes a lot of sense thematically.

Agree, at least in case of Russian ones!
Actually, long rifles of WWI were well balanced - but they WERE long. And this was an advantage in open field hand-to-hand, but disadvantage in trenches (and after advent of machineguns, the prime reason for their long barrels also lost its necessity - Russian/Soviet army made its primary rifle a shorter "cavalry" version by the time of WWII). Actually, I think that the change from needle bayonets to bladed ones may also be due to that fact rather than humanitarian reasons often quoted...

[Wrana]

Originally Posted by MaxWilson

Isn't that just the Repel mechanic instead of high Defense?

-Max

Possibly, but spear also allows a wide range of parries. I mean 2-handed use, of course, and here it gets very high mobility. But even one-handed, it can be quite nimble. Vikings even used spear & sword as paired weapons!

[Agema]

Yeah, sword bayonets were replaced with knife bayonets chiefly because they were too cumbersome for trench warfare. And it's not like troops had to withstand cavalry charges by then either.

[Wrana]

I meant needle ones - such as Russian Mosin-Nagant rifle had. I don't remember any "sword" bayonets except French ones - and these were used in trench warfare quite handily - without affixing them to rifles!
An offtopic question:
Agema, how well current M-16/M-4 plastic details withstand rough handling and/or using them in hand-to-hand? And another one - what are you supposed to do in case when dirt/dust gets into the barrel of any of these? (these appeared in recent off-line discussion with friends)

[Burnsaber]

Originally Posted by Wrana

Vikings even used spear & sword as paired weapons!

But that's -5 to attack! How could they hit anything?

[Dragar]

+3 from their beserk

[Adept]

The glaive is a travesty. It should be fixed. The low damage of a spear is very strange as well.

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Dragar

+3 from their beserk

And the second attack has effectively +2 since your target is at -2 to defend per attack[1].

-Max

[1] It's actually more complicated than that, because if your first hit killed the unit you're not really at +2 for the second attack because your new target doesn't have the penalty. On the other hand, if you're swarming a large enemy 3:1, the third guy will have a net effective +5/+7 to hit (+10/+10 -5 for weapon length) vs. +4 if everybody was using only a single sword.