Yeah pretty much, which is why the axe was actually used and flails as we know them are fantasy weapons. The flail has the intimidation and cool factor but otherwise I'd rather have an axe.
The flail might have more reach, but the longer the chain the slower the weapon and more skill required to land a blow.
The haft with a long chain and ball on the end is fantasy. However, I fought with one for a couple of years as a combat actor/choreographer and ren-faire reenactor and would say that the flail is a duelist's weapon only. And in a duel its chief function is to remove your opponent's shield.
A well placed flail strike will go around the guard of your opponent and potentially break fingers, hand, wrist, or arm.
You can also try to use it to disarm their primary weapon but it's less reliable in this regard as it becomes a tug of war strength contest.
Use your flail to break their hand and make them drop their shield and then drop the flail and draw your side sword or whatever else you happen to have.
Too slow and clumsy of a weapon to fight against a group or near allies.
Who is the "he" approving things in this scenario of yours?
You're entitled to your hill, but as linguistically correct as you may be, linguistics take a back seat to common usage and national variance.
Nationalized and nationalised are both English terms. Nationalized is predominantly used in πΊπΈ American (US) English ( en-US ) while nationalised is predominantly used in π¬π§ British English (used in UK/AU/NZ) ( en-GB ).
It's a Z in American English. Both spellings are correct.
The fight isn't over because the castle retailated against 3 of the striking workers by refusing to bring them back on.
I used to work at one of these places, also as a knight, and the conditions/pay/treatment were deplorable.
I got fired for being unable to perform after being injured by one of our horses. Of course, I was young and more stupid at the time, not knowing my rights, and just moved on with my life. It was a fun 18 months though.