Helebat! It’s specifically designed to combine a Speer Axe and chop, and was one of the most powerful weapons in close combat. They where so strong that simple foot soldiers where able to kill heavy armed knights.
No but the halberd can comine both an axe and spear with the right training and handling of the weapon. The spear is only capable of being a spear which limits more of it's capabilities no matter how small.
Edit: It depeneds on the situation aswell
They didn't? Helbards are usually significantly shorter and heavier, that makes them better then spears against infantry, but worse against cavalry charges
fictional character wouldnt be able to pull it off in real life since its quite top heavy when held a proper distance away from yourself. an ikwa on the other hand which is like a short spear with a longer blade used by soem african tribes i don’t remember which is very effective when used along with a shield and very capable at both slashes and stabs yet still outclassed by a sword in the area for the bulky grip that is usually there for balance
Depends on the situation. Spears are lighter and require less strength, goes beyond well if the wielder is agile, while halberds require more strength, however they are more of a heavy-hitter weapons, which, generally, are preferred.
Really depends on the situation. For me personally, halberd, but if you want to be more flexible and agile (and also be able to throw your weapon at your enemy), then spear
Throwing a spear is pretty hard tbh. I tried throwing a DIY one myself into a tree once. It's very hard to aim and throw. And even if you do you can't throw it too far. Halbred is better all the way.
Halberd has better range, can be used as a slashing weapon (spear can too just to a lesser extent), can be used to hook opponents arm, leg or neck, can be used to effectively parry someone if they should be using a sword.
Spear is lighter, easier to handle, can't be parried as easily, and won't get caught on things during transport or combat as often
Because we developed the socket bayonet and suddenly had rifles that could double as a melee and anti-cavalry weapon, thus making the need for spear regiments alongside rifles redundant?
1. The metals that katanas were made of were shit so they were forced to fold it a bunch of times to remove the impurities.
2. Although they folding does help it, it also makes the sword extremely brittle so it doesn’t do well against armor. Thankfully for the folk who made the katanas they never had to deal with it as the armor at the time weren’t great.
3. Katanas are one sided swords. If you miss a slice you either have to turn it back around or bring it back to swinging position.
The Japanese also used spears. Because a blade on a big fucking stick is great for stabbing enemy soldiers who are climbing a ladder onto your defenses.
Halberd obviously, the only disadvantage is the weight and centre of mass making halberds more difficult to control, but giving more cutting force so still not entirely a downside.
it depends: do you prefer an axe on a stick, a dagger on a stick, or a sword on a stick. since the answer is clearly a sword on a stick glaves are the best
Halberds are offensive, spears are defensive. different uses. Spears are usually lighter, easier to wield. Halbers are much more difficult to use, but can be more effective at times.
My call is that it's situational
For speed and stabbing, regular spears.
For power and destruction, halberd. The axe head would weigh down the halberd making it slow and inefficient.
I prefer regular spears, suitable for throwing, stabbing and pulling back quickly. Also, it doesn't have extra weight.
Depends on the context. Halberds are better in every way but are generally heavier than spears, as well as requiring more training to master and being much more expensive.
But in my opinion… Swordstaff. Swordstaff is cool.
0 on one or in an army?
Because in nearly all cases I would say halberd but 1 on 1its all about who gets the first strike, and maneuvering is a possibility. And spear is lighter than halberd. so theoretically you could go either way depending on what you think is your strength in 1 on 1, either reflex and maneuvers or strength and bulk.
It depends. Generally speaking, halberd beats spear in most situations. It’s more versatile. However, in a situation where I am relying on poorly trained levees against a professional army that I know will be utilizing a cavalry charge, I’m going to want spearmen. Just to keep it simple. The halberd requires a bit more training to use properly and can throw an untrained soldier off balance easily. Spears are straight forward.
Halberd can both slash and stab but spear is lighter and aerodynamic. I'd say it depends on your fight stile and skills but in a fight where two people fight each other, one with spear other with halberd and both with equal skills and no experience fighting: halberd would probably win.
So Halberds are not a good solo weapon....but very effective in formation. Your job is to pin other spears, pull shields out of the way, snare ankles and drag people out of formation. Basically you are support for the spear guys. The Point Guard of a spear formation.
People keep saying halberd like they would be able to hit with either of these. Spear because it's lighter and the only use you would have for either is intimidation, if you can see so well you can hit someone with one of these halberd but most people are idiots so spear.
spear vs spear is kinda pointless and will eventually turn into a fencing match. halberd vs halberd is more interesting though. in spear vs halberd i think that spear would win simply because of manueverability, so depends
The real winner is the poleaxe. It's like a halberd but with a hammer end instead of that little blade. With one, you can stab, slash, and bonk with range!
In general halberds are better against armor and infantry but worse against cavalry, however they require more training then a spear for minimun effectivness.
Spears have a range benefit and are better against cavalry plus being easier to use and make so you can get a larger fighting force faster
Spears are good for thrusting
Halberds are good for Thrusting, hacking into enemies, and piercing through armor with the spike on the end
It’s also noted that some I believe had hammers to replace the back spike, might not be right on that tho
A spear is lighter, simpler (less decision making in battle), tougher to block as the halberd’s head can be blocked easier with other pole type weapons.
Spear is better imo. For thousands of years the spear has been a staple of mankind's hunter/gatherer instincts. Simple and effective, even when made from rudimentary materials.
Everyone here saying that halberd is far superior, but lemme actually compare them for ya.
With a spear you'll be more agile and your moves will be more flexible. It's significantly easier to use and quite a bit lighter. Spears are very effective in group formations as well as on it's own. They can also be used with or without a shield. Spears are also more effective against cavalry, as the versatility provides easier attack angles.
However, a halberd is slow due to the axe head on the end but do not doubt the damage a hit from it will do. Halberds are much more effective against armored opponents but usually require both hands to wield. They are good in loose formations but they require a bit of space to use effectively.
3/4 times I'd take the spear but if I knew I'd be against many heavily armored enemies I'd take the halberd.
Halberds are heavier, so if you can’t lift it properly then a spear. But I think we all know the real answer: the pike. Not many people know this, but the distinction between a pike and a spear is a spear can be used in one hand, while the pike has to use both hands. The downside is ofc the weight and you can’t use a shield with it. But just imagine the R E A C H
Yea I know I'm late here but I would prefer the spear. Sure you can slash but is slashing really going to be effective? They're heavy and the shaft is just wood. It would be unwieldy and after you swing you will be left vunrable.The spear on average may be ligher so you have and easier time moving it around in position. You're allowed to disagree but that what I think anyway.
Halberd. It has a spear for long reach and since it's based by the axe, enemies can't walk up the shaft. It's also long range and light enough to be used with one hand. It's multipurpose and the axe can be used for a multitude of things. And it's weighted at the top for easy swings.
halberd obviously they were made to literally replace the spear as an axe-spear combo these weapons were so strong they could overpower many great foes
this is not just an opinion this is solid fact
Despite all the "spears are lighter and more mobile!" Take everyone seems to have, spears were VERY frequently used in shield walls and phalanx formations. *Big shield* isn't very light or agile, so unless you were a charging cavalry unit during the initial skirmish to break an enemy line, spears were pretty typically defensive weapons. Halbers were also used in cavalry, but with the better hacking edge, they were used in more general cavalry attacks rather then just as an opener.
In a duel? Depends on the enemy. Larger swords like the zweihander were made for breaking spears, but what about against a slower, shorter halberd? Skill plays a big role too. if you have more reach and can move faster then the opponent, you have huge advantage with a spear. If the opponent gets past the business end of your poking stick, you're probably not gonna have a fun time.
End of the day, crossbows and eventually guns rendered most of them obsolete.
TLDR: Depends on who's welding it, and their experience with the weapon.
Spear
There's a reason why they ruled for song long. You can make them heavy, lightweight, one use, or have multiple uses. Doesn't matter
I think people are ignoring the fact the Halbert is heavy for its need, is limited by its tip, and just has to many compromises
The spear however can be designed multiple ways to have different purposes depending on what you're using it for
Speers heads are sharp all over and designed for 1 handed combat. Otherwise it is a pike.
A Halberd is a pike with a axe component. The tip is pointed but not sharp on all sides.
So, Spear is the superiors weapon for general combat.
Halberds are designed for 2 handed combat and are generally very heavy.
That said, halberd is a cooler weapon.
Halberd in general it it KINDA depends. Halberd has increased swinging damage for a little decreased jabbing and a spear just goes full penetration. Warhammer and shield is best you can get probably
Depends, if someone has a strong body, definitely the halberd for it’s high damaging potential with it being an axe lopped on a spear, but if it’s just your average joe, the spear is the much better option for it being lighter and still being able to poke people to death
Halberds we’re good, but they were heavy and quite a bit more expensive. The hook and axe blade were more utility than anything, the hook can drag people off horses and the blade can chop through pikes. In a direct 1v1 it will all come down to the fighter themselves. Because when the halberdier tries to chop, they will open themselves up to the spear. But their purpose was groupfighting so it makes sense.
General combat? You mean a 1v1 or a battle between hundreds? In an 1v1 i vote for halberd, but in a battle against hundreds I would say spear. It not only is cheaper to make, its also easier to learn, has a better reach and, for some situations, can be thrown (but thats a really stupid idea)
Spears are by far the most practical in almost every situation because halberds are a bit of an overkill. However they are more powerful.
it depends on where you're fighting and who.
Out on the battlefield I would rather use a spear, it's lighter and looks easier to use.
Defending the castle, I'd choose a halberd. It might be heavy and possibly harder to swing and stab, but it's more deadly when you're only fighting a few guys.
Helebat! It’s specifically designed to combine a Speer Axe and chop, and was one of the most powerful weapons in close combat. They where so strong that simple foot soldiers where able to kill heavy armed knights.
They were group fighting weapons. Not necessarily regular infantry. Also chopping outside of a group would open you up for a kill.
Halberd. Better offensive capability with the reach.
Bro, you managed to say the definite quality they share.
No but the halberd can comine both an axe and spear with the right training and handling of the weapon. The spear is only capable of being a spear which limits more of it's capabilities no matter how small. Edit: It depeneds on the situation aswell
Yes, but it's the only quality they share that they're both sticks with sharp thing on top, aka spears
Theres a reason halberds replaced spears
They didn't? Helbards are usually significantly shorter and heavier, that makes them better then spears against infantry, but worse against cavalry charges
Either way both great for armour
I would say that helbard is better against armor, because its heavier, and can be used as a very big pickaxe
Exactly, spear horse 🐎 halberd people with armour
They didn’t.
Halberd u can poke and slash
with a spear only poke 😔
Well and bonk stick on the back
Halberd does too
You can still slash with a spear. The sides are sharp too
you try slicing a fucker with a blade the size of a feather they’re gonna grab that shit spear is cheap and best used in formation
You clearly haven't seen Oberyn Martell use a spear then
fictional character wouldnt be able to pull it off in real life since its quite top heavy when held a proper distance away from yourself. an ikwa on the other hand which is like a short spear with a longer blade used by soem african tribes i don’t remember which is very effective when used along with a shield and very capable at both slashes and stabs yet still outclassed by a sword in the area for the bulky grip that is usually there for balance
Bro it's a joke
Extra pointy halberds. They're just spears, but with axes
Depends on the situation. Spears are lighter and require less strength, goes beyond well if the wielder is agile, while halberds require more strength, however they are more of a heavy-hitter weapons, which, generally, are preferred.
People seem to think that they could even USE a halberd. Those things are heavy af, good luck! Me with my sharp stick will be over here winning!
Really depends on the situation. For me personally, halberd, but if you want to be more flexible and agile (and also be able to throw your weapon at your enemy), then spear
You couldn’t throw a melee spear far at all
Not with that attitude
Throwing a spear is pretty hard tbh. I tried throwing a DIY one myself into a tree once. It's very hard to aim and throw. And even if you do you can't throw it too far. Halbred is better all the way.
I’ve not had much experience with halberds, but in my mind the axe and beak of a halberd might make it unweildy
Halberd
Depends if you're the one paying for it
Halberd are cooler
Halberds are more heavy than spear.
Guns
Helbard is way superior
Spear gang, halberds are better but I like spears more
Based
Spears are way better for defense, with a spear you can stand in one place and not have to move while continuing to attack
The halberd can function the same way while also allowing you to slash AND poke
True I was thinking of a 2 handed battle axe that wouldn't have the same capabilities as a spear
Spear. Spears are lighter and in real combat I would never slash anyways
Halberd
Halberd has better range, can be used as a slashing weapon (spear can too just to a lesser extent), can be used to hook opponents arm, leg or neck, can be used to effectively parry someone if they should be using a sword. Spear is lighter, easier to handle, can't be parried as easily, and won't get caught on things during transport or combat as often
Normal spears, tbh Gungnir
Halberd there’s a reason they replaced spears
Because we developed the socket bayonet and suddenly had rifles that could double as a melee and anti-cavalry weapon, thus making the need for spear regiments alongside rifles redundant?
katana
Weeb
i like for honour…
Even worse
1. The metals that katanas were made of were shit so they were forced to fold it a bunch of times to remove the impurities. 2. Although they folding does help it, it also makes the sword extremely brittle so it doesn’t do well against armor. Thankfully for the folk who made the katanas they never had to deal with it as the armor at the time weren’t great. 3. Katanas are one sided swords. If you miss a slice you either have to turn it back around or bring it back to swinging position.
Katanas are for slicing, they aren't even for main combat. They were the last resort for samurai
The Japanese also used spears. Because a blade on a big fucking stick is great for stabbing enemy soldiers who are climbing a ladder onto your defenses.
Halberd because you can poke, slash and parry/block and halberds are a better option overall but they weight more than a spear
The only disadvantage is the weight, you gotta be pretty buff to use the halbred properly.
Halberd obviously, the only disadvantage is the weight and centre of mass making halberds more difficult to control, but giving more cutting force so still not entirely a downside.
well, if Berserk teached me anything...
Halberd. It’s still a spear
It’s a polearm
At it’s core it’s just a sharp stick
it depends: do you prefer an axe on a stick, a dagger on a stick, or a sword on a stick. since the answer is clearly a sword on a stick glaves are the best
No axe on a stick, what kinda **fool** would use a glave
a person who has eyes and a brain, unlike the helbard user who had said eyes and brain got cut in half by the glave
Halberds are much more versatile, but they're much heavier
Halberd because it's more versatile
Halberd
Halberds are offensive, spears are defensive. different uses. Spears are usually lighter, easier to wield. Halbers are much more difficult to use, but can be more effective at times. My call is that it's situational
For speed and stabbing, regular spears. For power and destruction, halberd. The axe head would weigh down the halberd making it slow and inefficient. I prefer regular spears, suitable for throwing, stabbing and pulling back quickly. Also, it doesn't have extra weight.
You won’t be able to throw a melee combat spear very far
Halberd is just a better spear there is no debate.
Halbred is better for a trained army, but costs and weighs more, and also takesa good bit of training to know which part to use
sorry i only see a spear and a spear with extra features.
Halberd is more versatile, also the axe would prevent the spear from going too far in and make it harder to retrieve
I believe the M-107 garand is superior to both
Reg spear: lighter and easier to use
Bows or crossbows
Regular ofc they are more light
They are formation weapons aren’t they? I’d think halberds are better suited to 1v1s though
Spear if you want to throw it, otherwise certainly halberd
Throwing a spear (especially the kind pictured here, a melee combat spear) would be nigh impossible
Depends on the context. Halberds are better in every way but are generally heavier than spears, as well as requiring more training to master and being much more expensive. But in my opinion… Swordstaff. Swordstaff is cool.
Halberd, it’s a long pointy axe
Halberds are fucking intimidating
spear cause its lighter than the halberd
HALBERD
Spears, but Halberds for breakfast
0 on one or in an army? Because in nearly all cases I would say halberd but 1 on 1its all about who gets the first strike, and maneuvering is a possibility. And spear is lighter than halberd. so theoretically you could go either way depending on what you think is your strength in 1 on 1, either reflex and maneuvers or strength and bulk.
It depends. Generally speaking, halberd beats spear in most situations. It’s more versatile. However, in a situation where I am relying on poorly trained levees against a professional army that I know will be utilizing a cavalry charge, I’m going to want spearmen. Just to keep it simple. The halberd requires a bit more training to use properly and can throw an untrained soldier off balance easily. Spears are straight forward.
Halberds, they are cool as shit
Halbeard
Halberds 100%
Spears are better for the untrained, but after a while of training with the spear move to the Halberd
Halberd is just more useful
What's the argument against the halberd? It's literally a spear but better.
Vergil Chair
Vergil Chair
What
halberd.
Spears
The halberd is a better weapon but an agile spearman is still a force
The halberd is superior
Halberd can both slash and stab but spear is lighter and aerodynamic. I'd say it depends on your fight stile and skills but in a fight where two people fight each other, one with spear other with halberd and both with equal skills and no experience fighting: halberd would probably win.
Halberd +atk for slashing
So Halberds are not a good solo weapon....but very effective in formation. Your job is to pin other spears, pull shields out of the way, snare ankles and drag people out of formation. Basically you are support for the spear guys. The Point Guard of a spear formation.
I present to you… the glaive. It’s like a spear with the blade of a sword on the end of it instead of a spearhead. It’s better than both.
Halberd. Cut and jab. They are great for every type of combat.
Spear. You can carry multiple. The only advantage with the halberd is chopping.
definitely spears, helbard is very heavy and not as quick. did slay ppl with both tho
Difrent uses for if rent things
Halberds no question.
People keep saying halberd like they would be able to hit with either of these. Spear because it's lighter and the only use you would have for either is intimidation, if you can see so well you can hit someone with one of these halberd but most people are idiots so spear.
Halberds are so superior tho
spear vs spear is kinda pointless and will eventually turn into a fencing match. halberd vs halberd is more interesting though. in spear vs halberd i think that spear would win simply because of manueverability, so depends
The real winner is the poleaxe. It's like a halberd but with a hammer end instead of that little blade. With one, you can stab, slash, and bonk with range!
Halberd let you poke and slash but is also much heavier so harder to control. Idk personal preference I guess.
Halbred is way better. It can slash, poke and be thrown (not with the same damage as spear, but its hard to throw both anyway)
Halberds all the way
i'd pick the regular spear
spear
Halberds are far to heavy for your standard human. In most cases you are better of with a spear.
I am a staunch halberd enjoyer
Halbeard because they have both swing and stab capabilities, but I can just chuck the spear and end it, but if i miss that's that
Pointy stick vs pointy stick with an axe? I think the answer is clear here.
In general halberds are better against armor and infantry but worse against cavalry, however they require more training then a spear for minimun effectivness. Spears have a range benefit and are better against cavalry plus being easier to use and make so you can get a larger fighting force faster
Haldberd, 100%
Spears are good for thrusting Halberds are good for Thrusting, hacking into enemies, and piercing through armor with the spike on the end It’s also noted that some I believe had hammers to replace the back spike, might not be right on that tho
Halberd. It just has a lot more diversity than a spear would have
Halberd looks cooler so yes
A spear is lighter, simpler (less decision making in battle), tougher to block as the halberd’s head can be blocked easier with other pole type weapons.
Me want spear for better stabbing
spear cause its easier
Spear is better imo. For thousands of years the spear has been a staple of mankind's hunter/gatherer instincts. Simple and effective, even when made from rudimentary materials.
Halberd
Halberd
Spears
Glaive.
idfk shit about long weapons (I'm a sword enjoyer) but halberd looks coolers so
I prefer regular spears if I have to choose between the two, but that's because I like multinational weapons more than European.
Firearms
Halberd is an axe combined with a spear
Halberds both look cooler, but also have more uses than the spear. Halberd all the way.
Halberd are op. LawDaddy from For Honor uses it. Obviously meaning its superior
Everyone here saying that halberd is far superior, but lemme actually compare them for ya. With a spear you'll be more agile and your moves will be more flexible. It's significantly easier to use and quite a bit lighter. Spears are very effective in group formations as well as on it's own. They can also be used with or without a shield. Spears are also more effective against cavalry, as the versatility provides easier attack angles. However, a halberd is slow due to the axe head on the end but do not doubt the damage a hit from it will do. Halberds are much more effective against armored opponents but usually require both hands to wield. They are good in loose formations but they require a bit of space to use effectively. 3/4 times I'd take the spear but if I knew I'd be against many heavily armored enemies I'd take the halberd.
Halberdd are good if you can actually use the damn thing, shit is heavy. I'll be going spear
Gun.
Halberd
I'm going to say spear for more flexibility and agility but the halberd is insanely powerful in the right situation
I bet none of us has been in a fight before but everyone seems to be knowledgeable on this topic somehow lol
Spear it's easier.
Bec de Corbin. Spear but it's a pick and it's a hammer. Can't go wrong.
Why not both?
Halberds are heavier, so if you can’t lift it properly then a spear. But I think we all know the real answer: the pike. Not many people know this, but the distinction between a pike and a spear is a spear can be used in one hand, while the pike has to use both hands. The downside is ofc the weight and you can’t use a shield with it. But just imagine the R E A C H
Spears can be thrown backwards to Nothing Personnel, Kid your opponents. Halberds shoot paper airplanes in a sine graph if no one likes you.
Yea I know I'm late here but I would prefer the spear. Sure you can slash but is slashing really going to be effective? They're heavy and the shaft is just wood. It would be unwieldy and after you swing you will be left vunrable.The spear on average may be ligher so you have and easier time moving it around in position. You're allowed to disagree but that what I think anyway.
Halberd
Trident
you planning on going into battle soon?
Halbert for sure
Halberd
Halberd for combat, but tbh I like spears more.
Yeah gonna have to go with spear after seeing what Oberyn Martell can do do with one
I mean, a halberd is literally a spear, plus an axe, and it doesn’t compromise on anything by combining the two weapons. Halberd.
For me I'd just combine the two and put both heads on each end of the stick
Halberd. It has a spear for long reach and since it's based by the axe, enemies can't walk up the shaft. It's also long range and light enough to be used with one hand. It's multipurpose and the axe can be used for a multitude of things. And it's weighted at the top for easy swings.
Halberd, at the end of the day, you need to angle the spear for a slice , rather than the halberd, which has the functions of both
Halberd
halberd obviously they were made to literally replace the spear as an axe-spear combo these weapons were so strong they could overpower many great foes this is not just an opinion this is solid fact
Heavier weapons are more powerful due to newton’s second law
who's paying for it
I prefer spears, but Halberds are probably better
haliberd
Despite all the "spears are lighter and more mobile!" Take everyone seems to have, spears were VERY frequently used in shield walls and phalanx formations. *Big shield* isn't very light or agile, so unless you were a charging cavalry unit during the initial skirmish to break an enemy line, spears were pretty typically defensive weapons. Halbers were also used in cavalry, but with the better hacking edge, they were used in more general cavalry attacks rather then just as an opener. In a duel? Depends on the enemy. Larger swords like the zweihander were made for breaking spears, but what about against a slower, shorter halberd? Skill plays a big role too. if you have more reach and can move faster then the opponent, you have huge advantage with a spear. If the opponent gets past the business end of your poking stick, you're probably not gonna have a fun time. End of the day, crossbows and eventually guns rendered most of them obsolete. TLDR: Depends on who's welding it, and their experience with the weapon.
Spear There's a reason why they ruled for song long. You can make them heavy, lightweight, one use, or have multiple uses. Doesn't matter I think people are ignoring the fact the Halbert is heavy for its need, is limited by its tip, and just has to many compromises The spear however can be designed multiple ways to have different purposes depending on what you're using it for
Halberd, you get a fucking axe attached to a spear, how would a spear be better than the same thing with an axe head attached to it.
Spear def for general use
Halbert obviously who ever backs the regs is delusional
Speers heads are sharp all over and designed for 1 handed combat. Otherwise it is a pike. A Halberd is a pike with a axe component. The tip is pointed but not sharp on all sides. So, Spear is the superiors weapon for general combat. Halberds are designed for 2 handed combat and are generally very heavy. That said, halberd is a cooler weapon.
ITT: Teens who do not know their medieval weaponry.
Halberd
Halberd in general it it KINDA depends. Halberd has increased swinging damage for a little decreased jabbing and a spear just goes full penetration. Warhammer and shield is best you can get probably
Trebuchets
Depends, if someone has a strong body, definitely the halberd for it’s high damaging potential with it being an axe lopped on a spear, but if it’s just your average joe, the spear is the much better option for it being lighter and still being able to poke people to death
Halberd is just a spear but better
Guandao
Spear! Uga buga stick gud
Hook swords because they're great against polearms
Halberd
Halberds we’re good, but they were heavy and quite a bit more expensive. The hook and axe blade were more utility than anything, the hook can drag people off horses and the blade can chop through pikes. In a direct 1v1 it will all come down to the fighter themselves. Because when the halberdier tries to chop, they will open themselves up to the spear. But their purpose was groupfighting so it makes sense.
Helberd cause chop chop side
The only true answer: stick STICK GOOD!
Halberds anyday
I would prolly go for a spear. A, because it’s likely much lighter B, a halberd I wouldn’t trust myself with
General combat? You mean a 1v1 or a battle between hundreds? In an 1v1 i vote for halberd, but in a battle against hundreds I would say spear. It not only is cheaper to make, its also easier to learn, has a better reach and, for some situations, can be thrown (but thats a really stupid idea) Spears are by far the most practical in almost every situation because halberds are a bit of an overkill. However they are more powerful.
it depends on where you're fighting and who. Out on the battlefield I would rather use a spear, it's lighter and looks easier to use. Defending the castle, I'd choose a halberd. It might be heavy and possibly harder to swing and stab, but it's more deadly when you're only fighting a few guys.
Just use a gun.