How might we subvert the plate armour trope?
>>47063708
Attack Deflection purely through the power of Faith, acting like literal personal shields from a sci-fi setting.
>>47063731
Someone give this man a medal.
>>47063708
Extreme magnetic fields render ferrous weapons and armor useless, thus all warfare is done with stone and bronze.
>>47063708
>Plate armour trope
What the fuck are you talking about
Is wearing heavy armour actually a good idea when you are not part of large formation? It still carries impact and I don't think being incapacitated with broken ribs is much different from being just plain dead if you are fighting a monster and there's nobody to cover you as you lying on the ground in pain.
>salty water world
>>47063894
If you're not in formation, its even better. Plate armor is damn hard to kill someone in, not that you'd want to, since anyone who can afford it is better off ransomed.
>>47063708
>Plate armor
>trope
????
>>47063708
How do we subvert the "weapons" trope?
>>47063924
I didn't ask if it's any good at keeping me alive. But will it help me stay combat effective?
>plate armour trope
>tfw you like impractical/form-over-function armor designs as much as practical/historical designs
>tfw spergs make too big a deal over boobplate
>>47063955
It renders you nigh immune to swords and arrows. Not getting stabbed certainly keeps you more combat effective than 'skirmishing' in leather or whatever.
>>47063894
Plate over textile padding provides incredible resistance to (relatively) low speed kinetic weaponry. An enormous amount of the energy is dispersed into the armor, and even that which CAN pierce it will normally be slowed down enough that the padding stops any considerable force from reaching the man inside. There are accounts of knights in plate walking around the battlefield looking like pincushions from the arrows which had managed to breach their armor but failed to maintain the energy to get through what was essentially just clothing underneath. Even with weapons specifically designed to hurt people in rigid armor, that is, picks, warhammers and the like, you're better off getting hit with the armor than without.
>>47063708
>plate armor
>a fucking trope
How do we subvert the "trope" trope?
>>47063708
>plate armour trope
>>47063977
>>47063874
I think he's trying to bait us by pretending to be stupid, but he's too stupid to do it effectively.
>>47063986
>arrows
Genuinely curious, what about an arrow with a narrow head fired from a longbow? Would that have enough clout to punch through, assuming it hit square in the breastplate?
![icon128-2x[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/KvgubH5.jpg "icon128-2x[1].png")
>>47064005
Wethrowthese at people
It's a decorative status symbol, but the weapons of the time has made each suit more art, than armor.
>>47064029
Depends. Arrows are generally a better option than swords, if only because they can put out a lot of force from a good distance
>>47064005
>How do we subvert the "trope" trope?
Realize that everything is a trope.
Subvert everything.
>>47064029
Depends on the weight of the bow, the length of the archer's draw, the armor itself, and perhaps most importantly the range.
Historically, heavy draw bows could be used to pierce plate armor. However, the act of doing so eliminates so much of the kinetic energy that it can do no real damage to the person inside.
>>47064029
>narrow head
It breaks
>>47064029
It'll go through the breastplate, but that takes so much energy that the padding underneath is enough to stop it from harming you. It was not unheard of for fully armed knights to have 20 or more arrows lodged in their breastplate after a day's battle.
>>47063758
Nothing stops you making a set of bronze plate armour other than cost.
>>47064029
When plate armour was mature even a point blank shot dead straight on the chest won't cause injury even if it penetrates because it just gets stopped by the padding underneath.
Knights who were killed/injured in battles like Agincourt just fell victim to statistics. Thousands of arrows fired at hundreds of men, something finds a gap or a weak point eventually.
I think OP is trying to get at the fact what, whenever armor appears in fantasy or pseudo-historical settings, it's so often this mess of plates, when true plate armor was only used for two centuries or so, which is roughly the same amount of time that chainmail was the main type of armor around.
We're talking warcraft-type armor here, I think.
>>47064029
At very close range, it will possibly penetrate the breastplate, but it is unlikely to cause harm or even penetrate the padding underneath. What is much more dangerous is hitting thinner parts on the limbs and joints or the arrow finding purchase on some surface on your visor or, God help you, going through an eye slit if it's wide enough. This is unlikely if it's one asshole shooting at you, but if a bunch of people are, the odds start to become unpleasant.
There's a good interview with Tobias Capwell, curator of the Arms and Armor collection at the Wallace Collection on YouTube about this stuff.
>>47064063
>>47064077
>>47064079
>>47064081
>>47064086
>>47064113
Thanks very much for the information guys!
>>47064029
There was at least one late 1400s veteran commander who suggested dropping the crossbows for guns in that function in units that were supposed to ride up to lanciers and shoot them in the chest and head from maybe four meters away.
Bows aren't even in that race.
>>47064086
Yeah, but I think Bronze full-plate sounds like a cool twist on it.
Besides, wouldn't it be quite heavy compared to steel plate?
>>47064121
I would strongly recommend fact checking everything posted at you.
>>47064121
No trouble. It is often hard to believe just how good full-plate was at the not-dying thing.
>>47063945
People just bitch on the internet. If you're trolled online, you are killed.
>>47064143
How flexible was full plate for movement and dodging?
>>47064168
Surprisingly good. It depends on the exact variety, but it tends to be about 50 pounds distributed over your body.
There are videos of people doing cartwheels and stuff in it, and while that's a bit silly, they certainly weren't the bulky things everyone imagines them to be.
>>47064168
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUrd7d1Q
I wish people would link this video around more like they used to.
>Fantastic material that is better at cutting then to holding shape (Not sure how it supposed to work)
>Overabundance of mages whose attacks you should be dodging
>Game set before invention of plate armour
>>47064168
Knights pretty much had full range on movement in everything but their fingers (because armor and fine motor control will never mesh).
That said the added weight distributed across your body is going to make you slower and tire you out quicker. Not 'walking glacier' type slow, but with less fine control of your movement since your dealing with the added inertia of the armor.
>>47064132
Many of the french were using shitty armor
They walked through a swamp while getting hit over and over again, maximizing the odds of taking a serious wound
A huge number of them still made it through to the melee, to exhausted to win the fight but more or less unharmed until that point
>>47064109
Mail was the 'main' armour for much longer than plate.
>>47064125
The Greeks had plates for every body part but it was so expensive and heavy that it was very rarely actually seen in battle.
You would need more weight for the same protection as a mature hardened steel plate harness yes. But then, this all depends on if bronze plate is common enough to force the development of anti-armour weapons which is unlikely. If all you have are spears and swords it does not have to be so thick.
>>47064168
You can run, climb ladders and do cartwheels and is usually just as flexible as the man inside it. It seriously increases how fast you tire out though.
>>47064203
>>47064214
>>47064242
>>47064263
I love you guys, plate is much more noisy than what I expected though.
How did knights fight cold terrain in full plate? Are capes enough for that?
>>47063986
>>47063992
OK, I get this. But would it really help against something adventurers tend to deal with, like bears?
>>47064296
>How did knights fight cold terrain in full plate?
Typically they just didn't. Wars were often put on hold during the winter because running an army in the cold seasons is a pain in the fucking ass for everyone involved.
>>47064296
Well you have full body padding underneath so none of your skin is touching metal and they would also have a cloak/cape.
In a battle it can actually help you, overheating is one of the biggest problems with plate. On occasion during a long battle people actually passed out with heat exhaustion even while snow was falling.
>>47064296
Padding
>>47063955
>>47064029
>>47063894
>>47064121
A lot of people severely underestimate how effective plate armour was towards the end. If we're assuming top of the line plate armour from the peak of the armorer's art, you're more or less invulnerable to anything below grossly powerful crossbows (we're talking around 4 digit draw weight here, at medium to short range, and assuming you get a clean, centre mass hit that doesn't skid off). When it comes to melee weapons, you can shrug off anything anyone can throw at you one-handed, which leaves high-impact two handed weapons like pollaxes or the fluke side of halberds.
Forensic anthropological examination of remains of people killed in battle who are assumed to have worn a lot of armour very often show signs of damage mostly to the head/face and nowhere else. Why? Because killing a guy in late medieval full plate was most easily accomplished by knocking him over and pulling his helmet off or stabbing him through the visor.
Actually killing him by making holes in the armour was very difficult to accomplish with anything short of a gun.
Even a very high-poundage warbow is very unlikely to accomplish anything at all, and any penetration of the plate armour is unlikely to be deep enough to actually cause a significant injury.
Keep in mind that plate armour is rigid, this means that as long as it's not deformed by the impact of a blow, the force of the blow is transferred to the load bearing points of the armour, not into the body. Getting a heavy hit on the breastplate is like getting shoved, not getting punched. (chain mail, as an example, is flexible, so a strong enough blow might still break bones or cause heavy bruising even through the padding) Also, top of the line armour had compression joints, meaning a lot of the "weak points" eventually ended up being protected by plate as well.
>>47064296
Full-plate tends to get rather warm, as you're talking about a person in an enclosed space wearing a lot of thick padding exercising. The real worry is overheating when its too hot.
>>47064345
>>47064363
>>47064381
Time for me to learn some actual facts about armor and warfare. Thanks for the tips
>>47064296
>How did knights fight cold terrain in full plate?
The padding, armor, collections of large groups, and effort of fighting would typically keep you warm enough (not that it would nullify the cold).
If it's cold enough that you and yours would suffer for it the same goes for the enemy, so then it becomes a matter of picking your battles rather than bundling up against the cold.
Summer's actually far more of a problem for full armor suits.
>>47064109
>fantasy or pseudo-historical settings, it's so often this mess of plates
Armor was also historically a mess of plates though?
Usually riveted to fabric or leather, which gives us the "studded leather" trope.
>>47064132
The fact is that none but the English bothered with bows even when English longbowmen could make a good living as mercenaries, and that serious money was being thrown at replacing crossbows with guns. /tg/ might be all over the place with details, but plate armor was a pretty big deal and remained a pretty big deal until shifts in military doctrines made it uneconomical.
Also, before anyone mentions Crecy or Agincourt again, the French were utter morons and generally kept with that tradition in later battles. At Verneuil the French opened with their cavalry fucking the longbowmen into the ground without even losing momentum, but then their mercenaries rode off to plunder and the French managed to lose the pitched battle against John of Bedford, his old mum and whatever English infantry hadn't fled the field.
>>47064332
Probably less, but still not useless. Assuming we're talking a large bear, it gas enough raw strength that it could Stoll probably cause severe injury, though the plate armor would certainly help at dispersing some of the blows. Not having to worry about its claws is helpful as well.
>>47063894
The issue with plate armour isn't it's protective ability, it's pretty fucking awesome at that, the problem is the upkeep. Travelling in plate is impractical without support. An adventurer in plate would absolutely need a horse and someone to help them put it on and take it off. They would also need to maintain it and they would need somewhere to keep it when they're not using it because it stores like a bitch.
For an adventurer plate would be a specialized tool. It would be really hard to sneak with it in dungeons. While it does allow for a decent range of physical movement it's restrictive and heavy. It would probably suck against traps and other hindrances. However in a straight fight against physical, human sized enemies it would be fucking awesome.
Full-plate is a lot like polearms: boss at fighting but inconvient for doing anything else.
Unfortunately for fans of simulationism and plate, a lot of ttrpg adventuring parties tend not to engage in organised battles. Most adventures are more along the lines of small skirmishes, investigations and commando missions. All but the most murderhobo of murderhobo groups will be spending at least half the session not fighting.
>>47064465
Mercenaries are notoriously unreliable. That's why Machiavelli despised them.
>>47064469
>Travelling in plate is impractical without support
Similarly, tanks cannot operate without an adequate support train. Logistics is everything senpai.
>>47064469
This is why followers, henchmen, and hirelings were so great. I'm saddened by how they've diminished so much as a game element.
>>47064512
>Mercenaries are notoriously unreliable
If you pay them on time, everything will be fine.
>>47064468
Is it really a good tradeoff for agility?
We established that plate armour is not restrictive, but it is still some extra weight. And Newton is a cunt.
>>47064529
They'll switch sides if you offer them more money than the other guys, won't fight other mercenaries(Condottieri), and are harmful to populations during peacetime.
>>47064386
More from the same armour set as the legs.
>>47064431
Proofed plate.
Sure, we really could use more Renaissance-era fantasy, but you'll need pretty developed firearms if you want people to give up on tin suits, and then you'll just have everyone carrying two rapiers and three braces of pistols on their person at all times. And that one asshole with grenades.
>>47064553
And might abandon you if your money aren't worth it.
>>47064554
Who said that armors can't be both sexy and protective?
>>47064422
You misunderstand.
We're talking big bulky plates with massive gaps in between that fails the basic purpose of armor: to deflect.
Remember that when armor is struck, the weapon either slides off, or penetrates. Striking the chest plate here will have the blade sliding off and under the plates on the shoulder. Many of the plates on this armor in fact is guiding the initially deflected weapon into points where there is no plate.
Look at the good examples of plate posted in this thread. The armor is designed to have the blade slip off the armor without catching on anything.
>>47064541
The bear is faster than you. The bear can climb trees.
What are you going to use that agility for?
Not getting your head smacked off or getting disemboweled is really useful when fighting wild animals.
>>47064541
Against a bear? Probably. Bears are pretty fast to begin with when you get them pissed. Certainly faster than most people.
>>47064541
>agility
Have you seen a bear charging?
>>47064557
Massed fire.
But yeah, in a 1v1, the guy shooting pointblank at a man in plate won't have such a good time. But that guy holding pounds of black powder could go up in flames if he's not careful.
>>47064580
I dunno man, smooth curved surfaces for deflection are a rather late development.
Hell, we thought the flat-topped Great Helm was a good idea at one point.
>>47064580
Everything's covered up here
>>47064580
You could at least use a picture from something other than the highly cartoonized HotS game.
Though I feel the need to make the point that the armor Arthas uses while he's the Lich King was primarily made to hold the soul of Nehr'zhul while he was dormant in Icecrown Glacier. It's more for ceremony than protection.
If you're around here still and you've got the ideas in your head of how plate works from video games and traditional games, here's an analogy to help you get your thinking more on track with reality. Plate armor in the 1400s and later is like a modern day tank where the only ways to stop it in combat are either to climb into the hatch and kill the crew, ram it with another tank, or use a full-on cruise missile.
Shooting it with cannons or rockets won't work. They bounce off like arrows off plate.
>>47064580
>Remember that when armor is struck, the weapon either slides off, or penetrates
You're kinda forgetting the most common option here, hitting but not causing significant damage to armour or it's wearer.
Actually penetrating the armour requires massive amounts of force. Yes, armour deflects blows by having hard, curved surfaces that can make weapons "skid off" rather than transfer the full force of the blow to the armour, BUT, for the majority of history, the weapons had harder edges than the material of the armour they faced (most armour was not hardened to the same degree as the contemporary weapons) so even edged weapons could "bite" into the material so to speak. But even then, actually deforming or penetrating the armour was massively difficult.
Even purpose made weapons like maces or warhammers were mostly effective because they let you ring the other guys bell hard enough to wear him down and knock him over, not by actually smashing holes in the armour.
The only place where attacks either miss or penetrate is D&D.
>>47064529
And when you no longer need them, they become and army of extremely well armed bandits that will pillage your lands on their way to their new employer. And if they can't find new employment, they'll just go back to pillaging until you re-hire them or wage another war to stomp them out.
>>47064647
The greathelm was not intended to be worn in general combat. You always had a very curved skullcap or similar helmet beneath it. The greathelm was used solely for charging into melee on horseback, and discarded once you were stuck in. It's extra armor until you get into melee.
>>47064767
They should have made it self-discard using explosives, so you can greet the first Saracen you run into by blowing his head off with your explosively discarding helmet.
>>47064296
We have records of knights in plate fighting in the snow who died of heat exhaustion. I don't remember which gravesite. Plate is extremely stifling, between it, the mail, and the padding.
>>47063708
Scale\, lamellar, breastplates, half-plate...there are a lot of different ways you can have armor that it's about as good, but doesn't need to be the full suit of plate armor.
>>47064512
>mercenaries are notoriously unreliable
>machiavelli as a source
Good one.
Machiavelli despised mercenaries because they were opposite to his theories about the state. His account of the battle of Anghiara is contradicted by various modern accounts based on uncovered documents including personal accounts and other period authors that state a numerically inferior force of Swiss mercenaries decided to go and honor their contract against the invading French, and suffered some 8000 - 9000 casualties.
This was a force of 12000 - 15000 Swiss mercenaries against 30,000 men under the French. Of those 30,000, 21,000 where German mercenaries.
Before the battle, the Swiss defenders where offered 1 million ecus by the French to break their contract and desert.
Here's the deal:
even in to the great centralization of Prussia and then the Absolutism of France, mercenaries where still core. Yes, the mercenaries of the Prussians were integrated into the formal Prussian military, but at times a full 90% of their army was in fact foreigners fighting for pay rather than national reasons.
This was also true in the wars fought by Sweden.
All the shittalking mercenaries get comes from state leaders who wanted their countrymen to join the formal state army rather than leave and fight in foreign wars under a mercenary colonel.
Sources:
http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/history/european-history-after-1450/renaissance-warrior-and-patron-reign-francis-i
http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/history/european-history-after-1450/business-war-military-enterprise-and-military-revolution-early-modern-europe
>>47064736
That's basically most medieval armies though.
A lot of knights and men at arms were more or less glorified highwaymen when there wasn't an actual war on.
A lot of the first free cities were founded to protect people from local nobility.
>>47064767
A bit of an exaggeration. It happened, but keeping the helmet on was not a bad idea all of the time. Remember that the greathelm evolved from forms that covered just as much of the face without having a separate helmet underneath. Before the Cervelliere+ Greathelm combo people had mail coifs and helmets that slowly started to extend over more and more of the face until they reached the bucket stage.
>>47064386
>compression joints
Jesus Christ that's far beyond what I was expecting
>>47064736
that's every professional soldier, even going back to the greeks. This is not a negative statement. Behavior of soldiers varies over time, based on the conduct of the period.
they will be off fighting, or otherwise looking for a fight. This is not limited to physical combat. Many greek soldiers would go on to become statesmen.
>>47064943
Yeah it's pretty crazy.
Back in 62 Garre AiResearch, one of the firms trying to solve NASA's space suit problems were directed to the Tower Of London museum by the NY Met museum, to study Henry's armour. Since it was designed for foot combat, not riding, it was fully covered everywhere, including the ass and groin etc.
The Tower sent photos and data on the armour and diagrams on how the steel plates fitted together to give full coverage while staying mobile.
NASA thanked the Tower in the 70s by sending them a replica Apollo space suit to be photographed next to Henry's armour.
>>47064992
That's partially because for the Greeks serving as a hoplite was a civic duty. Societal pressure was half of what always kept them so tightly locked and kept them from breaking and fleeing. So they'd take off the armor after the battle's done and go back to being civilians again.
>>47063708
How might we subvert the humans breath trope?
>>47064805
>TACTICAL EXPLOSIVE HEADBUTT
>mfw Saracen dogs wish they were this holy
>>47065115
Gills?
>>47065058
>>47064943
>>47064805
My wizard has just found a new application or two for his magic. Finding my sides, and making this a thing.
>>47065190
I'm not going to lie, I kind of wish NASA gave this particular Astronaut suit a larger codpiece than the armor. Just because it's totally in character and hilarious.
>>47064943
A good reminder that even though people hundreds of years ago didn't know as much as us and had some strange customs, they weren't any less intelligent.
>>47065291
They got pretty tired of dealing with the groin while they were still testing skin-tight elastic suits.
>>47063731
This was actually why some celtic warriors fought naked.
>>47065726
They lost tho
>>47065819
big shocker, right?
>>47065819
To be fair, it was not like they choose being naked instead of being armored.
>>47064465
There are reasons why the longbow was only used predominantly by the English that have nothing to do with it's efficacy in war. See the attached for more details if you're interested.
Longbows weren't worse than crossbows. Used correctly they were better.
>>47065868
So are you going to attach something or what?
How's this pseudo-Renaissance armor look for a post-cataclysmic sheriff? I wanted something that wasn't too heavy armored, but still provides enough protection and intimidation value for a semi-independent law officer.
The setting is far enough along for some city-states and confederacies to re-establish, but with seriously localized supply line and resource issues (not to mention problems with new alien ecosystems and post-humans.)
>>47065819
Well they were led by women.
>>47063985
It's a self-esteem thing, not unlike a lot of the whiners over chainkinis
>>47064465
>The fact is that none but the English bothered with bows
It's not that bows were bad, it's just that the Plantagenets only shaped one nation into a realm tightly controlled enough to comandeer a whole lot of people into training with bows regularily which mean that their realm yielded enough of them for them to actually matter in battle. That sort of political clout didn't exist anywhere else in Europe.
I mean, the shit the Tyrolians put the fricking Emperor through when they and him agreed that they'd be outfitting and training arquebusiers for his armies was plain ridic and denied him to actually call upon those for anything but the defence of Tyrole.
>>47065868
>>47065953
Fuuuck.
>>47065990
Looks neato, but consider the immediate needs for their armor first, and the aesthetic second.
You can work almost any need into a aesthetic from the past.
>>47065990
If time has passed enough things have gone around to a semi-Renissance period, why does the gun look so modern?
It could look a little more blunderbuss-y, or like a matchlock. Even just a different shape to the barrel might make help.
As for armor, little to complain about. It's really a matter of taste and what you think would be easiest to make. Maybe make it look more demi-lancer instead of gothic?
>>47065868
>Used correctly they were better.
This is kind of weird statement. Crossbows were far more practical in situations like sieges and fighting around fixed defences, which was way, way more important than field battles.
The paper you linked also states that as armor became better, longbows couldn't keep up with crossbows any more.
>>47065990
Define the breastplate more. How is it clasped together on the side? How does the armpit area work?
Same for the upper arm, shoulder, and legs.
With the way you've got the upper arms, it looks like you're after 14th century armor, but the helmet is 15th century. Cuisse and tasset for 15th, or just the tasset with mail for 14th.
Mind you, for a sheriff you'd probably want mobility over protection. He'd be going after bandits rather than static defense of a town, yes? Likely while mounted, but almost certainly unmounting at times. Considering cutting the armor doing and perhaps going for a later period look where he's got a breastplate and jackboots making up most of his armor.
If you're going older instead, use more mail. Consider a brigandine as well.
>>47066136
>pseudo-Renaissance armor
>post-cataclysmic sheriff
Or did you not see the flashlight?
>>47066288
I'll be honest - I had no idea what he meant by psuedo-Renaissance, and assumed it was like that one book series where technology and guns stop working so the Washington area turns into a bunch of kingdoms that grew more and more medieval over time.
>>47063708
Armored plates and cutlery.
>>47066246
different anon, but he's likely referring at least in part to the Battle of Crecy, where mercenary crossbowmen under the French were defeated by the english longbowmen. This was before many of the advancements later crossbows had.
There were also many contributing causes, like the longbowmen being able to destring their bows during the rain, and the crossbowmen not having their pavises.
Personally, I find the bow versus crossbow debate tiresome, much like the edged versus blunt or spiked weapons debate. There's no real answer to it, because the reasons for the rise and fall of one system for another usually had more reasons than just combat effectiveness.
>>47066246
Maybe I should have said "within the right context?"
The post I was replying too implied that only the English "bothered" with longbows because they were inferior to crossbows. That was not the case. At the time, longbows could be more effective against plate due to their much higher rate of fire. When you're raining down that many arrows one of them is going to hit a weak point.
>>47064386
what the hell is a compression joint?
>>47066136
>If time has passed enough things have gone around to a semi-Renissance period,
Sorry, should have specified, I'm mostly borrowing aesthetics from the Renaissance knights, a lot of their technology is close to WWI stuff (they have irreplaceably advanced shit locked away in the hands of nobility or monastic orders.)
The gun is basically modern (pump shotguns are the crossbow stand-in for this relatively advanced faction) much of the armor is also crafted from some repetitively modern materials, but several components are likely to be salvaged or inherited.
>>47066087
>consider the immediate needs for their armor first, and the aesthetic second. You can work almost any need into a aesthetic from the past.
The half cloak was a bit of a nod to looking authoritarian and regal as one of he few legal representatives of the 'Dwellers' (vault noblility) in an outlying hamlet. The bulk of the chestpiece is likely plastics with lightly magnetized metal plates embedded (relatively lightweight will stop a knife, sword or axe, and the magnetism serves a minor warding against some of the more terrible fates awaiting in the wilds.
>>47066279
>Define the breastplate more.
Can do, admittedly it is a bit mix and match, but the boots were rolled up pirate/fencer do to the local environment being unpleasantly swampy. Transpiration is likely mounted on either a beast of sorts, or in rarer cases a motorcycle or airboat for special situations.
Here's a more average city guard by comparison (wide helmet likely has some embedded communication equipment or HUD but it mostly serves to prevent unpleasent chemical rains splashing into your face on posting) Looser quilted look with more embedded plates of cheaper manufacture.
>>47066560
hey
dumbass
you know what a spring looks like, right?
>>47065819
>Lost
After a few thousand years yeah, that's a pretty good run
>>47066405
The battle of crecy was also a perfect example of how the efficiency of the longbow was not really the major factor, the difference in attitude between the english and french was.
The french sends their mercenaries out to shoot at the peasant with the bows before the "real" event begins despite the crossbowmen being rendered useless by weather and a logistical screwup, and then they cock it up completely by stubbornly charging across muddy ground and the corpses of the previous failed charges, over and over. After they attack their own crossbowmen for running away from a one-sided exchange with the english archers.
>>47066452
There has basically never been an experiment that conclusively proved that longbows reliably inflicted deep penetration on plate armour, it would most certainly have murderfucked the horses though.
>>47066560
The thing in the picture? The joint is protected by plates that move to allow the joint to be compressed, but still cover it completely when the joint it stretched.
>>47065726
>"Didn't work? His faith wasn't strong enough"
>>47065819
European knights also lost
Romans lost
Assyrians lost
Everyone loses eventually Anon.
Nothing beside remains
round the decay of that colossal wreck
boundless and bare
the lone and level sands
stretch far away
>>47066590
there is no such thing as a "compression joint" shitlord
>>47065991
>>47066670
>shitlord
That's all I needed to hear. Back to tumblr you go.
>>47066670
Jesus fuck how dense are you? It's the thing in the picture in the post you replied to, with a reference to the specific suit of armour the picture is from.
>>47066669
only an european can defeat an european
t. european
>>47066797
>Crusades
>>47066797
>Russo-Japanese War
>>47066587
Found what I was looking for. Boots and breastplate may be dead on.
>>47066797
>laughing_russians.jpg
>>47066054
>>47066055
Fuck me, that makes too much sense. And the references are solid. Saved.
>>47066670
>>47066590
Instead of covering the joint with mail, it's covered by bands of plate that are riveted together in such a way that there's a perfect balance between enough slack for the leg or arm to move smoothly, and enough tension and tight fit that there are no gaps. They're layered like so:
I
I
I
l
l
so that the upper layers have room to slide down and the lower layers have room to slide up, without catching each other.
>>47066992
This is pretty common knowledge. The weakness of the bow is not that it's bad, it's that it's impractical to recruit archers unless they're already there. You can train a 14 year old girl or a man past his prime to be lethal with a crossbow in a short period of time, as long as it's one that uses a cocking device.
If you want a good archer that can pull a bow that's relevant on a battlefield though? You'll have to start with a his grandfather. Training with heavy warbows is something you almost need to grow into, not something you can pick up later. You need it to be part of your culture, like it was for the English, or the Mongols.
That said, even the Longbow was ineffective against late medieval plate. The late medieval crossbows on the other hand, with steel prods, could put out way more oomph than the crossbows in use during the longbow's golden years. Even when you account for the differences in power stroke, the increased friction and the heavier projectile, a crossbow that you span with a windlass can be 1000+pounds of draw weight.
>>47067128
you meant
|
|
|
|
|
didn't you?newfags can't triforce
>>47064109
>two centuries or so, which is roughly the same amount of time that chainmail was the main type of armor around. (and image)
Chainmail was commonplace from about ~300/200BC until renaissance times. The Roman armor in that image that people imagine as "standard" was never more common than chainmail.
>>47067163
well fuck me
did they remove nb spacing?
>>47063985
I've learned to appreciate fantasy armour as long as it doesn't go full-retard.
>>47067177
Yeah, I felt pretty stupid too.
>>47066055
>Edward the Third literally forbade fun and games because 'gotta get more longbow archers'.
>Edward the Fourth 'required' all merchants bringing foreign goods to additionally import a minimum of yew bowstaves.
Here I thought Dwarf Fortress nobility demands were even slightly unreasonable.
>>47067128
The how of longbow fading from use is common knowledge, but not the why of it's exclusive use by the English. I've done a fair bit of researched on both medieval warfare and economy and I've never run into anything even hinting at the subject of that paper. It was easy to assume the English just didn't have as much money as they'd like, so they trained longbowmen rather than slashing the cannon budget in order to buy crossbow.
>ITT
>>47065291
fun fact, NASA relabeled their "regular" sized condoms as "large" because all the astronauts kept picking actual large sized condoms (which need to be worn in your space suit to contain urine) and thus prevented their suit waste collection from working correctly.
>>47065726
is that fucking Wayne Reynolds?
>>47067865
It's nice to know that even actual paragons of humanity do childish shit to make someone in requisitions think they have a big penis.
>>47068124
>tfw thick
>normal condoms really don't fit
>have to use large condoms even if I'm not that long
Life is suffering
>>47068124
other fun anecdote about condoms and the government. During WWII America would air drop supplies to needy countries occupied by enemy combatants including large condoms labeled as "regular" to demoralize enemy troops.
>>47064029
Evidence suggests that from the mid-15th century onwards, arrows couldn't generally penetrate plate armor unless they hit certain spots on the helmet or gaps in the armor. The combination of plate and quilted gambeson beneath were essentially proof to arrows. However, an arrow from a warbow could still dent such armor, and potentially dozens of arrows hitting an armored man may still have some effect. Repeated mention is made in some sources of knights fearing that they would be hit in the sides of their helmets, which had weak points that could be defeated by an arrow. Probably the hinge of the visor or something.
>>47068375
Did it work?
>>47068410
There's a reason they mainly just supply weapons to terrorists now.
>>47068410
Then won, didn't they?
>>47068375
Related: NASA originally had three catheter sizes labeled Small, Medium, and Large. The problem was that no matter what, every astronaut would use the Large size. After noticing this problem, NASA now labels its catheters as Large, Huge, and Enormous. Sizes are the same.
>>47068647
And then they were hired by the Starbucks marketing division!
>>47064086
I thought the Knights in Agincourt were screwed over by their horses being shot from under them then being trampled to death in the resulting confusion?
>>47068124
Some astronauts were really childish.
Amazingly good at what they did, and competent in general, but still childish, doing shit like sneaking aboard sandwiches aboard flights and describing their farts to mission control
>>47068124
>buying large condoms is childish
>>47069332
>bringing snacks is childish
>trying to bother the nerds on earth is childish
>>47069376
Yeah, that snack got a congressional hearing called, for potentially jeopardising the mission
>>47063708
>trope
Anyways, maybe set it in a hot climate where the heat makes covering most of your body in searing hot metal isnt advisable?
>>47063874
He probably means the fact that plate armor wasn't that common until guns
>>47069485
Other way around anon.
Same way horses weren't commonly domesticated until carts got large enough to require them.
>>47069511
Wait shit was it plate armor for crossbows?
>>47063894
>is armor any use at all when you're fighting?
>I mean you get stabbed in the face and you're still dead
>nobody aims for the chest full of vital organs anyways
>>47069332
>some
I think "most" would be a more fitting word. I imagine knowing full well you are in the top percentile of humanity in intelligence AND fitness makes you start caring about professionalism a lot less.
They are pretty much always the people you want to be in such a high stress situation for when the shit hits the fan though. Have you ever found a story of an astronaut panicing? They all have nerves of steel, even when dealing with situations they couldn't possibly have experience with, like that one guy in the early days who re-entered the atmosphere after most his instruments failed using star-charts and his radio.
>>47067164
>chainmail
That's the trope that needs to die.
>>47069672
'mail' is and was an ambiguous term. If you say chainmail, everyone immediately knows what you're talking about, you pedantic autismail.
>>47064214
>dat roll
lol Dark Souls
>>47067886
Proof that he can in fact draw wrists, and chooses not to.
>>47063894
Most plate would hold up to firearms there is a reason steel armour was used all the way up until WW1.
Even today spring steel plate armour will hold up to most modern fire arms at the right distance.
For knights armor turned warfare into a sport for rich kids. A young noble would learn swordmanship stride out onto the battlefield and carve his way through peasants armed with pointy sticks.
If he was good at it, he'd be seen as having earned his title and his father would have paid his knight tax. If he was bad at it he'd be captured and ransomed back to his family because anyone who can afford a suit of armor can pay a ransom and that ransom would be enough to set a peasant up for life.
Or better yet for said peasant to buy his own suit of armor and maybe actually live through the war.
>>47064332
Yes for fucks sake being immune to slashing weapons is fucking useful. The bear pretty much had to sit on you until you starve.
>>47063708
Fashion Souls!
>>47066655
>they cock it up completely by stubbornly charging across muddy ground
And unsurprisingly, THIS particular French tactic was the one that survived till the Somme.
>>47069332
Well that's what happens when a third of em were Marines. Frank Borman goes to my church, and he told me that Jon Glenn was the most viciously inventive prankster he'd ever met. For example
>spiking Frank's coffee with laxatives.
>The day of a test flight.
>>47070711
kek
So what you're saying is that space marines are a serious prank risk?
>>47070909
The inter-chapter pranking that goes on the in the Death Watch is nasty, are you kidding?
Some of the guys have built up such a reputation they had to go MIA and return as a Black Shield just so they could fill out their tenure.
>>47067193
That pic is about as full retard as it gets, m8.
>>47071114
could be spikier.
>>47071162
Fair enough.
>>47068124
>It's nice to know that even actual paragons of humanity do childish shit to make someone in requisitions think they have a big penis.
Remember several years ago when one of them got arrested for trying to kidnap her ex boyfriend's new girlfriend whom she had been stalking for weeks?
>>47064109
>plate armor was only used for two centuries
Full plate armor existed from 1350 or so till the 1600's.
>>47068647
>Related: NASA originally had three catheter sizes labeled Small, Medium, and Large. The problem was that no matter what, every astronaut would use the Large size. After noticing this problem, NASA now labels its catheters as Large, Huge, and Enormous. Sizes are the same.
Catheters go INTO the eurethra, not around the penis. Anyone who picks the largest option possible to jam into their dick is either really fucking kinky or not as smart as they think.
>>47069568
>Have you ever found a story of an astronaut panicing? They all have nerves of steel, even when dealing with situations they couldn't possibly have experience with, like that one guy in the early days who re-entered the atmosphere after most his instruments failed using star-charts and his radio.
A good chunk are pulled from the airforce, especially among experimental pilots, so they have to be used to disasters.
Experimental aircraft aren't even covered under FAA regulations. It's like, "If you're fucking ballsy enough to try it, we're not going to bother with you how to do it safely."
>>47071478
Well, if you want to get really pedantic, they wore 3/4 plate in the 17th century. So he's not really wrong.
>>47071508
Not all of them. Lots of people who have to wear restricting uniforms for long periods of time have to be catheterized. I guarantee you that there would be far fewer EOD techs if they had to shove a tube up their cock every time they suited up. You can buy the over-the-willy variety at truck stops even, there's some folksy name for them here in Texas but I can't for the life of me remember what it is.
>>47064029
You'd need a lozenge shaped head to even think about it working.
None of this real-world stuff matters for games, tho.
>>47074278
fuck off rollplayer
>>47064214
He needs to up his endurance, fatrolling will get you killed.
Just a reminder that the only known cases of people with proper hardened plate armor being wounded by arrows was in the face, as in when they had their visors up.
>>47064226
>>Fantastic material that is better at cutting then to holding shape (Not sure how it supposed to work)
A very hard material holds an edge well, but is brittle against repeat strikes. Folding like glorious nippon steel can overcome this for swords, but the material is too scarce for full plate armor
>>47074687
Folding is done to burn out some impurities and spreading the rest, the ones that can't burn, evenly so it doesn't have a weak points.
Hardness is modified in katanas by quenching at different speeds by using different amounts of clay on the blade.
Armor was hardened by heating again until it glowed blue
>>47067531
In that case you simply haven't been looking very well. On top of being in every longbow thread here since forever, it's trickled into literature and been on the discovery channel.
Are you saying that you hadn't heard the whole "longbowmen needed to train from childhood and were hella strong" thing before?
How feasible is this armor? Too fantasy? Would it work?
>>47075773
It's decorated to the point where you have to wonder why they don't just buy a suit of plate, but it's wearable, yeah.
>>47066797
>What is the Battle of Liegnitz
>>47071508
It's not cathether, it's the condoms that are the end fittings for space toilet.
I saw a documentary where the guy who was in charge of this was discussing that size issue. His nickname at work was "Dr Flush".
>>47067531
Probably because of the Yew tree - Yew was abundant in England and the best bows were made from Yew.
>>47063708
>plate armour trope
easy, kys
>>47066811
Victories all round, especially in the fourth crusade where we beat the shit out of those European saracens in the middle east(ern Europe).
>>47066859
No Europeans involved.
>>47066973
Literally fiction. Hitler won that fight with captain america fair and square.
>>47066978
Snow is a European invention stolen by the Russians. Without our technology they would be nothing.
>>47075867
European infighting.
>>47075939
>European Infighting
The Mongols are Europeans now?
>>47075535
And France didn't have children or didn't have lifelong hunters or what?
>>47075970
Oh sorry, in Europe we call that war "the war of Mongolian aggression". Which we won, by the way.
>>47067128
>You can train a 14 year old girl or a man past his prime to be lethal with a crossbow in a short period of time, as long as it's one that uses a cocking device.
Nah, it's exactly the same problem as with bows. Crossbow mercs were hired from a handful of cities which had the social and political means to get people to train with them.
In comparison, the french king's attempts to create a unit of mounted crossbowmen from scratches and without that sort of system backing them up failed pretty spectacularily.
>>47075888
Plenty of that yew was imported from the HRE.
>>47063708
Invent effective firearms
>>47069537
Yes, Arrows have always punched through plate. So the only defence against ranged has always been heavy shields (not suited for melee) and more importantly, cavalry.
When crossbows were invented, because you didn't have to train for years like a bowmen, bows fell out of favour, because now a peasant with a gun could kill a knight. But a crossbow has less power than a bow so plate proved some protection. That's when weapons shifted in favour of war hammers, battle axes and twohanded swords, and away from sword and shield.
Then gunpowder came along, and we arrive in the Renaissance where armour moved towards peasant meat shields instead.
>>47075773
Why jeans and the little skirt?
>>47066954
That breastplate is only for protection against shrapnel and maybe swords and bayonets. But really only shrapnel. Officer armour.
>>47063758
Armor made of stone is pretty badass
>>47076123
The leggings are chainmail. The skirt is for decoration.
>>47076193
Also impossible.
>>47075773
It's feasible. Chainmail has been used throughout history because it's the best at defending against stabbing and slashing attacks, while not hindering the wearer too much. The chest, shoulders and hands are the most likely parts to get hit in a sword and shield melee, that's why they are reinforced with plate. Realistically, the neck is also part of the shoulder, which is why you will see armour sets that provide a neck guard as part of the shoulder armour, to prevent a high slash slipping under the helmet. This set doesn't seem to have that. Another thing this set doesn't have is leggings. Your legs don't need to be flexible, and usually you would use plate on at least the front of your tights and shins. But I guess chain leggings work too. Not as good against piercing and blunt hits.
>>47075773
Looks like cavalry armour, except for the helmet. That's a sword fighters helmet.
>>47066954
You know you're doing bad, when you have to trim your boots.
>>47076109
You need to actually go do some research, arrows are awful against plate. Even at point blank range a heavy longbow is extremely unlikely to injure someone in plate. And the weaker bows most people used before crossbows would have no chance.
Crossbows became more powerful against plate than bows could ever be.
>>47063992
> ...what was essentially just clothing underneath.
To be fair, a gambeson (along with other forms of padding used under armor) isn't "essentially just clothing", it's incredibly thick and quilted for extra strength (I know that sounds like a toilet paper commercial, but it's a real thing). A gambeson alone is a surprisingly effective bit of armor, and far more protective than anything that would be worn as normal clothing.
>>47076253
One issue is that the mail on the inside of the elbow joint appears be layered underneath the green arming coat, which is not ideal. Unless of course they are just voiders.
>>47063985
That armor was literally reinforced by the love of a goddess, it doesn't count. Those arms on the front aren't ornamental, they're a representation of the goddess's embrace, keeping the armor's wearer safe.
I mean, it didn't do much to keep him safe from getting his ass kicked off a cliff (pre-emptive strikes are the best kind of strikes), but that's beside the point.
>>47076414
Allegedly reinforced by the love of his goddess.
It's also stated that said goddess favour is a fickle as the weather.
>>47075939
This man clearly isn't European.
He's showing nationalism after all, they hate that stuff over there.
>>47076109
>mqdefault.jpg
>Breastplate Vs Warbows
>comments are disabled for this video
>>47074385
dude that armor is basically Havel's, did you see the damage the sword didn't do?
>>47075773
It's stripped down (not a full suit) and looks more like it would be ceremonial armor but I'd much rather wear it than nothing. That breastplate will protect the wearers vital organs from most piercing and cutting weapons, gauntlets protect the fingers and tendons of the hand from being sliced, the helmet will prevent the wearer from loosing his head. The obvious issue is that he's going to spend a lot of time protecting his legs which don't appear to have any form of increased protection.
>>47063708
Make it so that it was actually invented in response to the development of fire arms a-la RL.
AKA: Play it straight for once, since VANISHINGLY few settings actually do.
>>47076142
Which when shrapnel is far more likely to kill you than a bullet, is a pretty big advantage.
>>47076109
>crossbow has less power than a bow
Yeah, because bow that you have to draw with your whole body is way weaker than bow you can draw with your bare hands
>peasant with a gun could kill a knight
Yeah, because steel plate armor cannot protect from blackpowder guns, no sir.
>>47077603
That is a complete myth, firearms had nothing to do with the invention of plate.
Plate was used as soon as technology and economics allowed it to be practical because its just outright better than mail at protecting against arrows and melee weapons.
>>47071467
I wonder if she bought large diapers for her cross-country road trip just so the cashier would think she had big labia
>>47077638
>Yeah, because bow that you have to draw with your whole body is way weaker than bow you can draw with your bare hands
You... don't know how winches and pulleys work, do you anon.
>>47063731
Doesn't work for muslims, though.
>>47063985
Just tell 'em to fuck off given we live in a time and age where plate mail doesn't matter any more as a form of protection. Also, don't watch movies with those type of people either.
>>47078192
Oh, right, they reduce the power of shot too, thanks for reminder.
>>47076206
Ah, they just used a totally different size of ring on the leggings versus the voiders.
>Artist just drew a pair of trousers, complete with fly
>>47077638
Crossbows can start out with greater power than even a longbow, depending on how they're made, the problem is that what power they have is lost pretty quickly once the bolt leaves the crossbow, because the bolts themselves don't have as much mass as an arrow.
Crossbows tend to be more powerful at close range, but they lose power and accuracy much more quickly over longer ranges. Like most weapons, bows and crossbows each have specific situations in which they excel, and specific situations in which they're lacking. There really is no "one true weapon" for all situations, there are always various trade-offs that need to be taken into account.
>>47078362
>bolts themselves don't have as much mass as an arrow.
Um, what?
>>47078543
They're like half the length of a traditional warbow arrow.
>>47068170
I heard women like an average, but girthy penis more than an average girth, but more lengthy penis.
>>47078543
Arrows are a lot longer than bolts, they have more mass.
Also he did not mention that crossbows are less efficient so you need a lot of draw weight to beat a longbow, this in turn means they became slower and slower to fire as they got more powerful.
Medieval crossbows are relatively weak. Because of the materials they had to work with, they have a tiny draw distance, and strike with less power than a long or composite bow. If they had made them with long draw distances and high power, they would have destroyed themselves upon firing.
I don't know much about them, but I'd guess those ancient chinese crossbows were even weaker.
>>47078623
>I don't know much about them
Pretty generous with yourself aren't ya, dumbass?
>>47078645
Great post.
Yes, I'd assume a repeating crossbow that is crank operated by a 4 and a half foot Chinaman is a weak weapon.
Did you have information otherwise?
>>47078610
while I'm fairly certain this is true practically speaking women still want to see a long penis, for the same reasons men often like to see big boobrs
>>47063708
>plate armour
>trope
?????????? ???????????? ???? ????????????? ?
>>47078675
Let's start from the top:
>Medieval crossbows are relatively weak. Because of the materials they had to work with, they have a tiny draw distance, and strike with less power than a long or composite bow.
Prods were composite, wood backed with sinew. I think The Book of the Crossbow, which should be reasonably easily available as a pdf, even has test results.
>I don't know much about them, but I'd guess those ancient chinese crossbows were even weaker.
We got one example of a bronze age repeating crossbow and that one was clearly a home defence weapon.
Concerning the regular military single-shot ones - they documented their draw weight and the type of bow staff used. In general, it were the same sort of composite recurve types used in bow construction while the repeating ones made use of multi-slab-type prods. You could look this shit up, if you gave a damn.
>>47064687
>>47064655
>people will defend warcraft armor
joj
>>47079012
It's bad because it's ugly, not for being high fantasy
>>47071575
> What do you mean, "safety regulations".
> Nothing about this is safe. Fucks sake, dying instantly from the crash is the best scenario here.
But seriously safety is a huge concern for test flights. Unless you're the Russians. Top Pilots are both expensive and rare, not to mention the equipment.
>>47076208
Ceramics are kinda like stone?
>>47078256
Oh, so you don't know how winches and pullies work then.
>>47066669
Nurgle pls go
>>47070469
Isn't that partially because modern rounds are 1) smaller and 2) designed to tumble for better terminal ballistics and thus increase the chance of spinning off?
>>47079952
Smaller rounds need smaller holes to go through, so they have an easier time to punch through. Longer ones get more mass behind that small frontal area. Spherical bullets are crap.
You do NOT want your round to tumble in the air. It absolutely badgers the accuracy.
Some modern rounds are mroe or less designed to tumble after they've hit. But it's mostly just something that happens naturally. The pointy nature of rifle bullets makes them ass-heavy, and when facing serious resistance, shit wants to lead with the centre of mass. So it flips over.
>>47079952
Its not as simple as that.
5.56 will actually go through some steel ballistic plates better than 7.62 NATO and similar full size rifle rounds because the latter round is wider and slower.
But if the 5.56 is not fast enough to zip right through it can basically not do anything while the 7.62 causes more damage to the steel plate which causes it to fail and be penetrated.
>>47079092
Kill yourself, friend.
>>47079717
No, they are not.
>>47080120
>5.56 will actually go through some steel ballistic plates better than 7.62 NATO
That completely depends on the bullet and powder load.
>>47064386
>Even a very high-poundage warbow is very unlikely to accomplish anything at all
But what about a modern compound with the same poundage?
It has a lot less parasitic weight so the arrow will go faster.
>>47078362
> is lost pretty quickly once the bolt leaves the crossbow
This is 100% bullshit
>>47078612
>Also he did not mention that crossbows are less efficient
Not true.
Crossbows tend to have a shorter power stroke, but that's not always that way.
