Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Gear in CU, and importance of and common myths (weight of weapons, viablity of armor, etc).

StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member

Hello, was thinking about this and figured it'd be an interesting thread.

I am wondering what kind of role will gear play in CU? Will it be as all-important as gear usually is in mmo's, where the gear usually "makes" your character and you're extremely dependent on it or will gear be m  treated more realistically, where it can enhance certain aspects but isn't nearly as important as skill in combat?

Like in the film Conan I find this quote fits best:

"That is strength, boy. That is power: the strength and power of flesh. What is steel compared to the hand that wields it?"

In MMO's this is usually the opposite, finding an "uber" sword or armor, while it is nice for "loot" games (IE diablo, etc)  gives you far more of an advantage over someone, even if they are more skillful as a player. I find it drastically takes away from the "pvp" experience found in mmo's.

 

DAOC was fairly ok with this, gear wasn't a huge a factor early on and with things not being bop(bind on pickup) and  attainable by ways other then pve was good, but TOA kind of killed this with it's uber gear.

UO was a great example of this. In UO gear was obtainable through crafters (which seems to be a major point for CU's crafting system from the interviews) and it wasn't uber nor did it "make" your character. A sword was a sword and generally compared to other swords, swords were more different depending on the type of sword (IE a longsword vs a rapier). Same goes for armor generally as welll. Crafters made gear, you could buy it fromt hem and with full loot drops it kept things turning over when you'd die and lose it. There were a few "rare" things, but because of looting these were something you'd want to use at the right moment (vanq weapons they were called) and losing them hurt bad because of the worth of them.

When it comes to mmo's in general most games , in terms of combat, go something like this:

Gear>Level/character skill>player skill.

Whereas games designed without a huge importance or relience on gear can put character and player skill head of it, which imo seems better for pvp reasons. Would you rather fight someone and win or lose depending on their skill in actual combat, what combat moves they make, how well they dodge/block your attakcs, or would you rather win or lose because one of you had more "uber" gear?

 

Moving on, there ar ea couple things I'd like to talk about, that are common myths that many video games just get flat out wrong when it comes to weapons and armor in the games. It was just something that irked me a bit, like the people making the game didn't research a lot of things they had or simple didn't care (I can understand if they think it "fits" better, it's their game afterall) but it usually comes off like they didn't know/research things enough or know better, which isn't generally helped by the poor myths perputated by Hollywood in movies and even books (even historical ones).

1. Weight of Swords/weapons and Plate armor. 

The Myth that swords used in fighting, could weigh a lot. Simply false, this is one of the most common myths. Some games just flat out  run with this (I'm looking at you Elder Scrolls with your absurdly huge weights for weapons). Most swords were <3 pounds, even some of your two handers could be around 3 pounds, with most being under 5 pounds at the max. People simply did not use 20+ pound swords. Not only would it be a pita to swing around, but it would tire you out quickly. The point of fighting was to stay alive, and the lighter the sword the longer you could fight and stay alive, not to mentiont he better balance. Swords aren't some unwieldly piece of steel you swing around like a madman, even the bigger ones, like Hollywood generally portrays. There was so much skill in fighting with them, one only need look at classic historical combat manuals to find this.

This also applies to other weapons, most notably the classic "warhammers" you find in most games, which look like...well big hammers, in reality they weren't nearly that big (the head of the weapon) and looked more like a normal hammer head rather then a huge blunt hammer head, weighed a hell of a lot less as well and were great vs heavy armor.

See: http://www.thearma.org/essays/weights.htm

As well it's a common myth that "plate" armor weighed a lot as well. While it could weigh more then other armors (like light leather, etc)  a good suit could weigh as little as 45 pounds and going up to around 65. To give you an idea of that, the average soldier these days can carry around 60 pounds in thier rucksack and even more depending on their mission, and that's ont heir back mostly.  Plate armor's weight was more evenly disitributed over your entire body and wasn't focused on one specific point of your body, unlilke Chainmail which had the majority of it's weight resting on your shoulders and could tire you out more easily.

A guy wearing full plate armor can easily do things , such as mount his own horse, run, hell even do cartwheel sin if he wanted.

2.  Shields - "Bigger = better" myth.  It's another common myth that the bigger the shield the better it is. This is simply false and ignores how important shields were and how much the right shield could add to a fight. It always takes away a LOT of strategy that is untapped in any game with shields.

In almost any rpg or game  with shields you find that "bigger=better," you generally start with bucklers and small shields, which have shite protection and are treated as "crap"shields, then you move up to bigger shields, going toward tower shields and such that are treated as some godly shield that can protect you from the weight of the moon falling upon you.

The truth of the matter is that shields of all shapes and sizes had both their advantages and disadvantages. There is no "This shield is thie BEST shield because that's simply not how combat works. It was dependent on both what style of fighting you wanted to do and what enemy you were facing and tactics you planned to use. Some shields are better at one thing, but worse at something else while another is better at the ladder.

A buckler for instance, which is almost always the "Crap" shield in any game, was actually one of the most versatile shields and widely used shields throughout history, and for good reason. When it comes to melee combat they provided the best advtages fighting vs other melee fighters. They were very light, held in your hand by a grip rather then strapped ot your arm like bigger shields. Because of their size and lack of weight you could block attacks more quickly with a buckler plus the  smaller sized didn't obstruct your vision as much and you could see the battlefield (and thus attacks coming at you) better. Because the buckelr was simply held in your hand, if it got grabbed or tangled up in something, you could simply "let go" of it and drop it. Also on top of this, the buckler could serve as an offensive tool as well. From simply hitting your enemy with it, to even going as far as adding vairious tools to it, such as a spike in the middle, to a latch (which was used to "catch" swords and pull them out of the hands of your enemy) to even sharpening the edge of the buckler to use as a slashing weapon. Hoewver the weakness of the buckler was range attacks, because of it's small size you couldn't protect as much of your body at once and thus were vunerable to arrows and other range attacks.

This is where bigger shields have an advantage, such as the kite shield and Tower shields. However the disadvantages of thees shields were in their weight which was heavier and could obstruct your vision more because of their size, as well sinc ethey could be strapped to your arm they could be used to throw you off balance and other things.

This is somoething that Irks me because I've alwyas wanted to play with a buckler in rpgs, but not a single game has ever did it quite right. Dark Souls was about the closest that it's come, since shields had weights and weights affected your attack/movement.

See here for some good info on bucklers and their use in combat:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/SwordandBuckler.htm

 

Sorry this went on a LOT longer then I intended, got into a bit of a ranty mode lol.

Just a closing note. I was a big player of UO (more so then DAOC I have to confess) and the player crafting and housing in it was second to none. You could just randomly wander around player towns, meet a crafter sitting on his porche crafting items, strike up a conversation with them and end up getting some great deals and even forming friendships that lasted long after UO was gone.  I hope CU has that sense of community with it's housing and crafting system, could even expand on it in more ways.

 

 

«1

Comments

  • meddyckmeddyck Athens, GAPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon

    Your character will probably appear in the world with a full set of basic gear that is good enough to start RvRing. When you can afford it, you will want to upgrade to a full set of crafted gear. It's unclear whether gear will have stat bonuses and if there will be something like spellcrafting.

    Hopefully beyond that gear will mainly be a cosmetic thing along the lines of the horizontal progression GW 2 was supposed to have then abandoned after 2 months. You could have glowy weapons that require components that are only dropped by keep lords etc.

    (Thanks for the info dump on real life weaponry. That was interesting.)

    * Edited to remove dumb statement that gear will work like in DAOC through SI when it clearly won't.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • Lore84Lore84 NorthamptonPosts: 69Member
    I believe the gear progression will almost exclusively be through crafted gear

    Ex-DAOC, Excalibur

  • GaladournGaladourn AthensPosts: 1,052Member
    Originally posted by Lore84
    I believe the gear progression will almost exclusively be through crafted gear

    Ok, but the question was whether gear will be more important than player skill.

  • CaldrinCaldrin CwmbranPosts: 4,533Member Uncommon

    we dont know yet..

     

    hopefully they will let us know in one of their updates :)

     

  • TadderTadder Naples, FLPosts: 38Member

    There needs to be a reason for crafters to continually push the envelope and develop higher quality items. In SWG, there were crafters, weaponsmiths/armorsmiths, that would literally be sold out everyday because they were considered the best and I'd buy 4 of their weapons if i saw them in stock. Likewise, if I found a rare mat for a weapon I'd go to XXX because he was the best.

    The differences in the items were never that huge, but for those wanting the best it was worth it I guess.

  • Lore84Lore84 NorthamptonPosts: 69Member
    There's really no way of knowing that yet Caldrin, though hopefully a good balance will be struck

    Ex-DAOC, Excalibur

  • ZinzanZinzan NorthPosts: 1,351Member
    Originally posted by Galadourn
    Originally posted by Lore84
    I believe the gear progression will almost exclusively be through crafted gear

    Ok, but the question was whether gear will be more important than player skill.

    I think we all hope not, but we don't know yet is the short answer.

    Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy :)

  • tleartlear Toronto, ONPosts: 142Member

    The thing with going "realistic" in these games is that plate armor basically makes you invulnerbale to most weapons unless you get taken down, arrows and even crossbow bolts are mostly harmless as well. The only thing that really mess you up is a something like poleaxe. Most the fighting 1on1 in plate is basically wrestling to see who can take the other guy down and then stick him with a dagger once he is down.

     

    Plate is also so much better then any other armor made before it. Leather, chain or anything else people came up with before is a joke compared to even early plate armor. Conan quote and all but even a very average fighter wearing decent quality plate will destroy even the most skilled unarmored opponent with ease and quality of plate matters, before firearms people learned and could make extremely thin plate armor tha could still withstand any hand weapon while weighing very little. Heavy plate is from later periods where it was designed to stop bullets, which it did very well

  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Tadder
    There needs to be a reason for crafters to continually push the envelope and develop higher quality items. In SWG, there were crafters, weaponsmiths/armorsmiths, that would literally be sold out everyday because they were considered the best and I'd buy 4 of their weapons if i saw them in stock. Likewise, if I found a rare mat for a weapon I'd go to XXX because he was the best.The differences in the items were never that huge, but for those wanting the best it was worth it I guess.

    Ah, fond memories. I remember a long, multi planet journey when I was a little newbling to see the best weapon crafter on the server. That type of interaction wasn't gameplay, it was a memory and an experience.

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon

    H

     

     

    C

     

     

    I not a big fan of realistic design. that only ruins the experience.

    image

  • LokyLoky Toronto, ONPosts: 182Member

    From what i have read (like everyone else) im understanding crafted gear will be the go to items, but skills and abilities on a character will make or break you. Or at least that is what im hoping....

    (Side thought: Remember how hard it was , Pre SI , to get a glowy weapon? For a while , only a few players had them, and it defined thier personalities. The weapon itself may have been just above average but it was great to get one since they were so rare. Player skill and character abilites still won the fights not a glowy sword.)

     

    image
  • meddyckmeddyck Athens, GAPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loky

    (Side thought: Remember how hard it was , Pre SI , to get a glowy weapon? For a while , only a few players had them, and it defined thier personalities. The weapon itself may have been just above average but it was great to get one since they were so rare. Player skill and character abilites still won the fights not a glowy sword.)

     

    It wasn't that hard. They dropped like candy in Midgard's level 35-50 dungeon once it was itemized, off princes in DF, and various other places (there were I think Elylls in the Alb frontier that dropped swords with a blue glow with white stars). I used a purple glowing DF prince hammer on my cleric for a long while. I do remember that the glowy weapons in Mid and possibly Hib were added first and I thought they were so awesome playing against them on my Albs and therefore I was excited to get that DF hammer on my cleric.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • LokyLoky Toronto, ONPosts: 182Member
    Meh seemed to me , when I first seen one, it may have been pre DF, i cant think that far back. You are right though, it did not take long once we figured where to pick them up. I think Lyonese was a good spot in Alb if memory serves. Seemed like within months though they were everywhere.

    image
  • MetanolMetanol TamperePosts: 247Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOExposed

    H

     

     

    C

     

     

    I not a big fan of realistic design. that only ruins the experience.

    Yeah, this is where personal preferences and opinions come in.

     

    I actually want all my armours as realistic as possible. I mean, what I want, is armor fitting for the setting. In "western fantasy", especially high fantasy, I expect there to be some special leathers and other metals, such as mithril, adamantium and what not. D&D (Especially Neverwinter Nights) is a great example of using all these materials.

    I personally cringe at the sight of eastern (manga or anime) influenced bikini armors and such. I want my girls clad in full mail and suits which make sense. Leather? Best leather armors what I've ever seen in games are in Neverwinter Nights 2, same can also be said for some absolutely gorgeous mail & plate designs there. Witcher -series also had an amazing visual style for armor.

     

    I will use this art to portray "realistic", yet femine armor on a female. The art belongs to Mount&Blade series, which I absolutely love. If you are interested in the portrayal of such armors in game, look at screens of games what I mentioned above.

    http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/185/mountbladez.jpg

    To me, the armor above looks ten times better than any bikini- or high fantasy armor which is overdone and epic. I also hate the style of WoW and Dragon Age going overboard with "epic plates" (mostly shoulders, but Dragon Age also had those -Massive- armors which looked just silly.)

    We?re all dead, just say it.

  • StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member

    Yea, I am one for more realistically designed armours.

     

    I've had enough of the huge spikey pauldrons and giant oversized helments with super giant horns sticking out of them. They have their place but it seems most mmo's design of armours go that route, the higher tier items have to look super-absurd to let people visually know "i'm super awesome" and I'd much rather have well designed, yet realistic looking armour.

     

    I think part of the problem is that many people don't know just how varied real plate armor and others could be. They assume Plate armor is just a silver color for every single thing and that's that, when it wasn't. Then on top of this you had different regions which were known for their style of armor, such as "Gothic" plate from Germany vs "Milanese" plate from Italy.

    No only was plate able to have various colours of the armour but it was also painted on, could have gilding, etchings, and then cloth over it as well.

    I think this could be an aamazing part of crafting, if crafters were able to visually design both weapons and armor, from vairous "layers" where they can select different base models and pieces of an armor, then the colour of ht ebase armor, then paintings on the armour, and then etching/gilding, etc Bascially it's all layered one over th eother so you can create some truly unique armor different from others, even develop their own "style" of armor that sets them apart from other crafters visually.

  • Angier2758Angier2758 Mt. Prospect, ILPosts: 1,011Member
    Originally posted by tlear

    The thing with going "realistic" in these games is that plate armor basically makes you invulnerbale to most weapons unless you get taken down, arrows and even crossbow bolts are mostly harmless as well. The only thing that really mess you up is a something like poleaxe. Most the fighting 1on1 in plate is basically wrestling to see who can take the other guy down and then stick him with a dagger once he is down.

     

    Plate is also so much better then any other armor made before it. Leather, chain or anything else people came up with before is a joke compared to even early plate armor. Conan quote and all but even a very average fighter wearing decent quality plate will destroy even the most skilled unarmored opponent with ease and quality of plate matters, before firearms people learned and could make extremely thin plate armor tha could still withstand any hand weapon while weighing very little. Heavy plate is from later periods where it was designed to stop bullets, which it did very well

     Please do some research; you're incredibly painfully wrong here.

    Plate armor was *done* as soon as crossbows came about.  Why might you ask?  Crossbows actually punched threw plate armor.   The british longbow could also bunch threw some plate.  The reason being is that plate armor for the weight and ability to stop slashing weapons actually had issues stopping crossbow bolts because they were much more powerful than normal bows (and required little training).

    Also to your point about heavy plate armor stopping bullets... yeah... no... I'm sure someone probably tried it, but by no means is it historically relevant since plate armor was gone militarily by the time we started using even basic muskets.

     

     

    A lot of the views of plate armor in our past are romanticized and not terribly factual.

  • GaladournGaladourn AthensPosts: 1,052Member
    Originally posted by Angier2758
    Originally posted by tlear

    The thing with going "realistic" in these games is that plate armor basically makes you invulnerbale to most weapons unless you get taken down, arrows and even crossbow bolts are mostly harmless as well. The only thing that really mess you up is a something like poleaxe. Most the fighting 1on1 in plate is basically wrestling to see who can take the other guy down and then stick him with a dagger once he is down.

     

    Plate is also so much better then any other armor made before it. Leather, chain or anything else people came up with before is a joke compared to even early plate armor. Conan quote and all but even a very average fighter wearing decent quality plate will destroy even the most skilled unarmored opponent with ease and quality of plate matters, before firearms people learned and could make extremely thin plate armor tha could still withstand any hand weapon while weighing very little. Heavy plate is from later periods where it was designed to stop bullets, which it did very well

     Please do some research; you're incredibly painfully wrong here.

    Plate armor was *done* as soon as crossbows came about.  Why might you ask?  Crossbows actually punched threw plate armor.   The british longbow could also bunch threw some plate.  The reason being is that plate armor for the weight and ability to stop slashing weapons actually had issues stopping crossbow bolts because they were much more powerful than normal bows (and required little training).

    Also to your point about heavy plate armor stopping bullets... yeah... no... I'm sure someone probably tried it, but by no means is it historically relevant since plate armor was gone militarily by the time we started using even basic muskets.

     

     

    A lot of the views of plate armor in our past are romanticized and not terribly factual.

    Actually, there was a documentary (was it Mythbusters? don't remember)  that tested longbows against plate armor and found out that even at 20ft the plate proved impenetrable.

  • General_Dru-ZodGeneral_Dru-Zod Unknown, CAPosts: 136Member

    Plate armor seriously hinders mobility and speed...

    A knight in heavy plate could be easily bested by a mere musketeer

    image

  • Angier2758Angier2758 Mt. Prospect, ILPosts: 1,011Member
    Originally posted by Galadourn
    Originally posted by Angier2758
    Originally posted by tlear

    The thing with going "realistic" in these games is that plate armor basically makes you invulnerbale to most weapons unless you get taken down, arrows and even crossbow bolts are mostly harmless as well. The only thing that really mess you up is a something like poleaxe. Most the fighting 1on1 in plate is basically wrestling to see who can take the other guy down and then stick him with a dagger once he is down.

     

    Plate is also so much better then any other armor made before it. Leather, chain or anything else people came up with before is a joke compared to even early plate armor. Conan quote and all but even a very average fighter wearing decent quality plate will destroy even the most skilled unarmored opponent with ease and quality of plate matters, before firearms people learned and could make extremely thin plate armor tha could still withstand any hand weapon while weighing very little. Heavy plate is from later periods where it was designed to stop bullets, which it did very well

     Please do some research; you're incredibly painfully wrong here.

    Plate armor was *done* as soon as crossbows came about.  Why might you ask?  Crossbows actually punched threw plate armor.   The british longbow could also bunch threw some plate.  The reason being is that plate armor for the weight and ability to stop slashing weapons actually had issues stopping crossbow bolts because they were much more powerful than normal bows (and required little training).

    Also to your point about heavy plate armor stopping bullets... yeah... no... I'm sure someone probably tried it, but by no means is it historically relevant since plate armor was gone militarily by the time we started using even basic muskets.

     

     

    A lot of the views of plate armor in our past are romanticized and not terribly factual.

    Actually, there was a documentary (was it Mythbusters? don't remember)  that tested longbows against plate armor and found out that even at 20ft the plate proved impenetrable.

     I watched a documentary where they proved the longbow could punch through, but found out it was in part due to the strength of the guy using the bow and not only the bow itself (might have been the same documentary?).  The british longbow is not a normal bow either.  They also showed how a crossbow bolt could go punch through plate armor; which sort of made plate armor a death trap.

    Also.... what was said about plate armor wearers wrestling each other to the ground.... that did not happen LOL.... they could barely walk in plate armor let alone fight in it... once a guy was brought off his horse in his plate armor he was done for.

    He wasn't a walking fortress by any means.  The reason the poleaxe was deadly was similar to the reason why crossbows were deadly to plate wearers.... a lot of force on a tiny point could punch through the armor....

  • MetanolMetanol TamperePosts: 247Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Angier2758

     I watched a documentary where they proved the longbow could punch through, but found out it was in part due to the strength of the guy using the bow and not only the bow itself (might have been the same documentary?).  The british longbow is not a normal bow either.  They also showed how a crossbow bolt could go punch through plate armor; which sort of made plate armor a death trap.

    Also.... what was said about plate armor wearers wrestling each other to the ground.... that did not happen LOL.... they could barely walk in plate armor let alone fight in it... once a guy was brought off his horse in his plate armor he was done for.

    He wasn't a walking fortress by any means.  The reason the poleaxe was deadly was similar to the reason why crossbows were deadly to plate wearers.... a lot of force on a tiny point could punch through the armor....

    First of all, lets talk about armor penetration. Steel bolts and all sorts of arrows were indeed used to penetrate plate armour, but there were more than a few factors to take in here. Also, the "age" at what the plate armor was used is a huge factor to this. Early plate armor (Coat of Plates), starting from 13th century did not actually stop most projectiles, but the further the time went, the better the armors became. It was not always about -thickness- of armor, but the curves mattered too.

    These two must always be taken into calculation when talking about armor penetration.

    1st. The angle of the projectile hitting the armor combined with armor thickness.

    2nd. The velocity of the projectile.

    Now, lets not talk in detail about the first one, since it should be logical, if you understand even WW 2 armored warfare.

    However, the second point is kind of interesting. Now, an english longbow was of course a unique weapon, and it did kill an unbelievable amount of French knights during the hundred years war, but it would not have fared against 15th or 16th century plate armour. Crossbows however, were quite different. Light and hunting crossbows could not penetrate most plates of any century, but a late 12th century Arbalest provided enough force to penetrate even the heaviest armours for.. well, god knows for how long? And then crossbows evolved, with different mechanisms coming to use and allowing them to be reloaded both faster and more easily than arbalests, which could only fire two bolts in a minute.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossbow#Medieval_Europe

     

    The "romanticed" view of Plate armour is often the 15th to 16th century "heaviest" ones, which were full plates (full suits, logical), or then the separate tournament armors, which indeed were heavy and restricted mobility - they were not meant for combat, only to make you a tank and possibly survive a tourney lance, were you to take it in your chest. Now, with tourney armor I understand that you could not possibly get up from the ground, but real plate armour, for combat? Do some more studying, please.

    Actual plate armour worn for combat did not prevent you from participating freely in combat. It was of course heavy (with the weight divided neatly all over you) and all troops who had such armour were trained to fight in it. Brawling did happen, but much more efficient way of killing would've been a poleaxe, a halberd or a hammer/maul. Swords in europe were often forged to be able to thrust into weaker points, but just hacking away would've done it too, since the blade was forged just for that (heavy and tough enough) and enough blunt trauma puts anything down.

    "Instead of cutting, long swords were then used more to thrust against opponents in plate armour, requiring a more acute point and a more rigid blade."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longsword#Blade_profile

    I suggest watching ten more documentaries and reading through all the information you can.

    We?re all dead, just say it.

  • StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member
    Originally posted by Angier2758
     

     I watched a documentary where they proved the longbow could punch through, but found out it was in part due to the strength of the guy using the bow and not only the bow itself (might have been the same documentary?).  The british longbow is not a normal bow either.  They also showed how a crossbow bolt could go punch through plate armor; which sort of made plate armor a death trap.

    Also.... what was said about plate armor wearers wrestling each other to the ground.... that did not happen LOL.... they could barely walk in plate armor let alone fight in it... once a guy was brought off his horse in his plate armor he was done for.

    He wasn't a walking fortress by any means.  The reason the poleaxe was deadly was similar to the reason why crossbows were deadly to plate wearers.... a lot of force on a tiny point could punch through the armor....

    Not true at all.

    Plate armour was considered the "best" armourr for a reason, and there's a reason it was so damn expensive too.

    Plate was pretty much impervious to arrows, and smaller arms/slashing, that is why it was so valued on the battlefield and used.

    Plate armour was generally curved to some degree, and it was thicker at parts likely to be hit (chest/helmet) and weaker at area's such as the joints which were thinner plate/open. 

    Arrows could generally penetrate only at close distances, to the point that if you were an archer firing at someone that close, you should be running away.

    Arrows that did penetrate armour, were usually done so by hitting these "weak" points of the armour, the joints, and the visor slit in helmets They did not generally penetrate plate armour otherwise, that is one of the main advantages to wearing plate armour. I'm not saying arrows NEVER pentrated armour, just not as easily or as "common" as most people think. Plate Armour (a good suit) was generally going to stop most any arrows from penetrating unless you were very very close to the archer firing it .

    Bodkin arrows, which is a common name thrown around for people who say plate was pierced by longbows/arrows, were made more for shooting vs light armour/mail, not against plate armour, getting in-between the rivets and such, it was not made to penetrate plate armour nor did it usually.

    See:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk

    A lot of modern "tests" you will find, they either have the wrong quality arrows, wrong quality plate armour (or evne just a crappy "flat" sheet of steel, which is not comparable to curved plate) and the yoften ignore the undergarments worn with padding that you would generally wear under the plate.

    As far as the "weight" you are wrong on that as well. Plate armour was not that heavy, people could run in it if they wanted, mount their own horse, etc. It did not make them a "slow" walking tank. I mean think logically here, if plate armour was THAT heavy what would be the point? It just would not be feasible to fight in.

    As far as "wrestling" goes, actualy they did. This is a type of combat that Hollywood movies generally ignore/are very ignorant about.

    They used things such as "half" swording (whereby you'd use the sword more of a spear then a normal sword stance) and a LOT of combat was focused on tripping, throwing, etc and basically getting people on the ground so you could stab them in the weak points of armour.

    See:

    http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html

    Do not get your history from movies.

     

     

  • MetanolMetanol TamperePosts: 247Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Stiler

    As far as the "weight" you are wrong on that as well. Plate armour was not that heavy, people could run in it if they wanted, mount their own horse, etc. It did not make them a "slow" walking tank. I mean think logically here, if plate armour was THAT heavy what would be the point? It just would not be feasible to fight in.

    As far as "wrestling" goes, actualy they did. This is a type of combat that Hollywood movies generally ignore/are very ignorant about.

    They used things such as "half" swording (whereby you'd use the sword more of a spear then a normal sword stance) and a LOT of combat was focused on tripping, throwing, etc and basically getting people on the ground so you could stab them in the weak points of armour.

    See:

    http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html

    Do not get your history from movies.

     

     

    Amen.

    We?re all dead, just say it.

  • Angier2758Angier2758 Mt. Prospect, ILPosts: 1,011Member
    It really was not feasible to fight in. Get it? Don't get your history from video games.
  • Angier2758Angier2758 Mt. Prospect, ILPosts: 1,011Member
    PS- crossbows ended plate armor as a real use on the battlefield.
  • StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member
    Originally posted by Angier2758
    It really was not feasible to fight in. Get it? Don't get your history from video games.

    Are you trolling or what? Post sources, becaues by all account sif it wasn't "feasible" to fight in........they wouldn't have, but they did.

    I get my information from historical documents, tests, and which I've linked to, you can look at real historical fighting manauals made back in those days and SEE these techniques that they trained in.

     

    Crossbows did not "end" plate armour, just as longbows didn't (hell even chainmail could stop some arrows, broadheads, etc). Crossbows were easier for common people to use then longbows, but they weren't m agical bows that penetrated plate armour with ease or something.

    Firearms is what sent plate armour on it's way out, not crossbows. Actually not even the early firearms did this , as Plate armour existed on the battlefields and was used a couple hundred years after the early firearms, until firearms become more evolved and eventually plate went out of favor and usefullness vs them.

     

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.