People can say over and over that halberd are inferior to pikes, but I am still not convinced.

In 5 tests of pike/halberds vs a common cavalry unit (chivalric knights), Sicilian halberd militia handily outperformed pike militia. (the halbs lost about 5 fewer men per engagement on avg, plus lost the battle less frequently)

In 5 tests of pike/halberds vs a common infantry unit with swords (DFK), halberds handily outperformed the pike militia. (the halbs lost 3/5, the pikes 5/5 and the halbs killed, on average, more DFKs)

In 5 tests of pikes vs halbs, the halbs win each time, with an avg of 43 survivors.

These are my test results, using 1.2. I still wonder why anybody would not use pikes, when superior halbs are available earlier.

The only reasons I can imagine are as follows:

-- if pikes, while being inferior fighters, may hold the line longer vs infantry that outclasses them
-- that pikes benefit disproportionately from the swordsmith upgrade (I tested this and the halbs also gain from the upgrade. It did not affect my results)

I think that since halbs also get the very long spears, any benefit that accrues to the pikes from upgrades, multiple ranks, etc also accrues to halbs, who also get AP. The long spears benefit is greater for pikes, but it is less than the AP benefit, at least in my tests.

Have you guys actually tested halbs vs pikes in 1.2? If anyone has, let me know your results. For me, the halbs are holding up to be superior to the pikes.