As you've probably realised the poll seems so wide open, and I realise that my question is so wide open but here's where my thought process is driven from:

1. The Mongolians Indians and Arabs had schimtars in its own varieties: Shamsirs, Pulwars, Kilijs (Redguards are of North African descent from what I see in skyrim, North Africa culturally considered Arab though this can be a sensitive issue to some. Redguards remind me of the moors)

2. The Japanese samurai had deadly Katanas (the blades armour looks almost identical like Samurai armor)

3. The Europeans had straight swords, and long swords. (Dwarves, Nords, and Elves seem to share this)

In battle, and taking history as an example, what type of weapon would prevail over the other?

But they are so heavy and not very aerodynamic - curved swords in general have a smooth slant which allows the air to cut through it, especially when angled downwards, force without effort in a sense. Straight swords you would have to hurl it down like a beast.

I know everyone hates these kinds of answers, but it depends.

The lightweight Katanas are the best swords for dueling or fighting in the ancient Japanese manner, as they have a balance between cutting power and speed.

The Arabians chose the scimitar as it's good for horseback-fighting which was their specialty, and it gives them a longer reach: that is, it's just as light as a straight sword of the same size, but it can reach farther due to the curve.

The long iron and steel weapons of Europe were excellent for the rank-and-file armies they had back then. Lining up, the armies would reflect the strategies of ancient Romans and Greeks by swinging and thrusting in unison or at least in general harmony.

They're old swords, all of them were made of the same stuff and were sharped. the difference was in the people who wielded them, so i really dont think there is much difference in terms of power. swords aren't complicated like guns.

However the Scimitars were light and sharp at the same time thus they were easily wielded. that's the only thing i can tell you.

This to me is a very subjective thread.

Straight swords are a simpler design and very effective.

Scimitars are normally a heavier sword and would seem to be at a disadvantage though they are extremely effective.

The steel for the Katana was created from a far more complex process which made a lighter and suppler yet stronger sword, coupled with the fightimg style of the Samurai is extremely efficient. Katana's though were not used against heavy armors but the wicker or laquered armors of Eastern Asia and japan.

Edge I would give to the long/straight sword due to its versatility as it could be used to thrust at a weak point or slash, the other two swords are essentially slash only.

Of course, none of that matters to a master who has personal preference in his particular sword. The katana or even the French dueling swords (in fencing) may be the best for duels in general, but if a master European-oriented bladesman went up against a master Katana-wielder, it's anyone's guess as to who the victor would be. Such a clash of skills and customs would have random results.

No, most scimitars can weigh the same as European straight swords. Scimitars just have a longer reach which doesn't change duels very much. Horseback-riding becomes much deadlier, though.

Katana's are powerful if and only if you have some serious skill, know how and talent. Katanas cut through armor easily (up to a point of course) but it takes years and years of perfection to to use it as it should be.

Scimitars are great but also require a certain skill much like the katana. Due to their light weight and shape they cut through air fast making them a quick and efficient.

Long swords are great since you don't require so.much skill and training to wield it effectively. They are powerful enough to take down an opponent in an efficient manner (no where near as clean as the first two but still).

As I said subjective. The Khopesh sword is based on a scimitar design and heavier.

Like you said however it depends on what you are using it for. A comparison of ancient swords did indeed show the curved blade scimitars to be more effective from horseback with more killing power. In straight up ground combat however it's a coin toss depending on period, fighting style and sword design.

As i said I give the edge to the straight sword due to versatility. It's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

If you're on the ground and you need a sword, I'd make a mixture of the katana's makings and slight girth with a European longsword. It would have thrusting power and better cutting power.

i agree

Yes. I agree. A well-made sword with versatility like you said would be ideal.

An important factor is what kind of armor your opponent is wearing. European straight swords were good for thrusting, and were designed to be able to stab at the joints in the armor or punch through the briastplate. I am skeptical as to how effective a slashing blade would be at penetrating a briastplate, but you may have luck dismembering the opponent and letting them bleed out by cutting at the joints.

I would opt for a warhammer for heavy armored opponents. IRL they used the hammer end to knock the enemy to the ground (It was hard to get back up in plate armor) and then turn the hammer around to drive the spike end through the helmet and into the skull.

Thing is I didn't want to delve into maces and hammers because its swords that interest me the most and the topic is wide enough as it is.

From the looks of the polls everyones either Katana or straight sword, but I've always been one for a schimtar. Probably cos of my love of prince of persia.

FYI it's spelt Scimitar. No H in there.

Katanas are sharp, fast and deadly weapons but they have only one sharp edge and are primarily used for slitting and so they are less effective against well armored foe than the two others.

Scimitars are weapons which fits well in mounted combat. Light and curved blade makes it possible to fast and easily slit at the both side of your mount.

Straight swords are two-edged swords and so very handy in battles where you are surrounded by enemies. They are are also better suited for thrusting than the two others and so they have the best change against armored foes.

So:

Katanas are the best if you are going in duel or in battle with non-armored enemies.

Scimitars are the best in mounted combat.

Straight swords are best in battlefields.