You can view this as a future-analog of knights wearing armor, and it that context it really depends on the circumstances of the fight, but traditionally the best melee weapons against hard-armor have been maces and mauls.

Blades are designed to cut flesh and other soft material, and do not preform well against hard armor. They will simply blunt or become 'caught' (bind) in the armor as the surface contact area grows with more penetration. At longer sword ranges its also not going to be the easiest to thrust into a weak point on an enemy with all the dodging and movement both parties are going to be preforming. Against a mired opponent where you have mobility, a blade/dagger in a chink of armor can be effective, but in a stand up fight, you generally are not going to be able to get that close to someone without them able to take a swing with their full sized weapon.

I don't know if most other melee weapons are applicable; it's hard to imagine a phalanx of mechs walking around with halberds. Guns and Cruise missiles take the place of arrows and siege weapons respectively.

A mace, maul, or other blunt weapon functions by damaging the armor itself, denting and deforming it. This is effective because one is destroying whats under the armor without having to pierce the armor. This is particularly bad because hard armors will STAY dented and deformed, regardless of the mushy bits inside them that get deformed. In humans this is flesh, in mechs this could be any number of things.

You can view this as a future-analog of knights wearing armor, and it that context it really depends on the circumstances of the fight, but traditionally the best melee weapons against hard-armor have been maces and mauls.

Blades are designed to cut flesh and other soft material, and do not preform well against hard armor. They will simply blunt or become 'caught' (bind) in the armor as the surface contact area grows with more penetration. At longer sword ranges its also not going to be the easiest to thrust into a weak point on an enemy with all the dodging and movement both parties are going to be preforming. Against a mired opponent where you have mobility, a blade/dagger in a chink of armor can be effective, but in a stand up fight, you generally are not going to be able to get that close to someone without them able to take a swing with their full sized weapon.

I don't know if most other melee weapons are applicable; it's hard to imagine a phalanx of mechs walking around with halberds. Guns and Cruise missiles take the place of arrows and siege weapons respectively.

A mace, maul, or other blunt weapon functions by damaging the armor itself, denting and deforming it. This is effective because one is destroying what's under the armor without having to pierce the armor. This is particularly bad because hard armors will STAY dented and deformed, regardless of the mushy bits inside them that get deformed. In humans this is flesh, in mechs this could be any number of things.

You can view this as a future-analog of knights wearing armor, and it that context it really depends on the circumstances of the fight, but traditionally the best melee weapons against hard-armor have been maces and mauls.

Blades are designed to cut flesh and other soft material, and do not preform well against hard armor. They will simply blunt or become 'caught' (bind) in the armor as the surface contact area grows with more penetration. At longer sword ranges its also not going to be the easiest to thrust into a weak point on an enemy with all the dodging and movement both parties are going to be preforming. Against a mired opponent where you have mobility, a blade/dagger in a chink of armor can be effective, but it a stand up fight, you generally are not going to be able to get that close to someone without them able to take a swing with their full sized weapon.

A mace, maul, or other blunt weapon functions by damaging the armor itself, denting and deforming it. This is effective because one is destroying whats under the armor without having to pierce the armor. This is particularly bad because hard armors will STAY dented and deformed, regardless of the mushy bits inside them that get deformed. In humans this is flesh, in mechs this could be any number of things.

You can view this as a future-analog of knights wearing armor, and it that context it really depends on the circumstances of the fight, but traditionally the best melee weapons against hard-armor have been maces and mauls.

Blades are designed to cut flesh and other soft material, and do not preform well against hard armor. They will simply blunt or become 'caught' (bind) in the armor as the surface contact area grows with more penetration. At longer sword ranges its also not going to be the easiest to thrust into a weak point on an enemy with all the dodging and movement both parties are going to be preforming. Against a mired opponent where you have mobility, a blade/dagger in a chink of armor can be effective, but in a stand up fight, you generally are not going to be able to get that close to someone without them able to take a swing with their full sized weapon.

I don't know if most other melee weapons are applicable; it's hard to imagine a phalanx of mechs walking around with halberds. Guns and Cruise missiles take the place of arrows and siege weapons respectively.

A mace, maul, or other blunt weapon functions by damaging the armor itself, denting and deforming it. This is effective because one is destroying whats under the armor without having to pierce the armor. This is particularly bad because hard armors will STAY dented and deformed, regardless of the mushy bits inside them that get deformed. In humans this is flesh, in mechs this could be any number of things.