With respect... arrows, especially bodkin, were more designed to go through chain or ring armor. Arrows of that era vs. Plate armor (not accounting for possible impurities for plate armor) would most likely deflect at range, or could pierce at near 20m to melee range, but with little penetration to do damage to the padding or chain underneath while blunting the arrow tips. Ref on youtube, look up "Longbow vs Plate Armour" and "Armour Piercing with Medieval Arrows".
So with respect to staying on OP's topic, "tit-plate armor" of such would be a boon to protect the avatars perfect breasts from arrow and slashing attacks.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
With respect... arrows, especially bodkin, were more designed to go through chain or ring armor. Arrows of that era vs. Plate armor (not accounting for possible impurities for plate armor) would most likely deflect at range, or could pierce at near 20m to melee range, but with little penetration to do damage to the padding or chain underneath while blunting the arrow tips. Ref on youtube, look up "Longbow vs Plate Armour" and "Armour Piercing with Medieval Arrows". So with respect to staying on OP's topic, "tit-plate armor" of such would be a boon to protect the avatars perfect breasts from arrow and slashing attacks.
Depends on the Longbow.
As I said above plate armor was pretty effective against Crossbows and early Gunpowder weapons except at very close range. The arbalest and Musket basically killed plate armor with thier penetration.
There were exceptions however.
Welsh Longbow men (Often called English or Cumbrian Longbowmen) were VERY effective vs plate armors. Check out battles of Crécy (1346) and Poitiers (1356) and the Battle of Agincourt (1415) if you have doubts.
The reason they were so effective is because the welsh longbow draw weights were typically estimated at 667–712 N (150–160 lbf) at a 76.2-cm (30-inch) draw length. The range of draw weights was from 445 N to 823 N (100 to 185 lbf). (These figures taken from recovered Longbows from the Mary Rose)
A 667N(150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.9 oz) arrow 328.0 m (360 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.3 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (272 yd).
In comparison a modern longbow's draw is typically 265 N (60 lbf) or less and by modern convention measured at 71 cm (28 inches). Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 800N (180 lbf) bows accurately
These were of course an EXCEPTION and not the rule. Most archers used Self bows and were very inefficient against plate armors of the times. Of course by the late 1300's when armorsmithing had improved and steel was more common even the Longbow men had trouble with steel plate. However since most armor was still made of Iron with only the wealthy knights wearing steel the English Longbow was still a very effective weapon against armored troops (See again the Battle of Agincourt where English Longbowmen decimated the French charge 1415)
12th century account by Gerald of Wales:
... [I]n the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.
From a pure combat point of view... Yes i know, sex sells. But if giving women fully clothed armor keeps the kiddies away, I'm all for it. But that's not the focus of why I posted. Exceptions? When a game takes place in an age where there is little armor coverage such as Conan. I have no idea about the game, but at least Arnold sported only a rag about his twig and berries. It would be believable then that a women in armor would be dressed similarly. But mainly, if as a male, I am dressed in full plate armor and you can't even see my face let alone any skin, then why would a female have Plate Boots, a plate thong and bikini, and Plate gloves? ... more importantly, offer the same protection rating as the full on plate guy? Again, the sex sells thing?... it's not a good enough excuse. Not as long as the rational part of my brain exists. And since I gave WoW up a long time ago, I still have a rational brain cell somewhere.
I know! It's like they think these are imaginary worlds of make-believe and magic.....
To zymurgeist, wow someone got pretty offended. Only mistake I've made was confused maine gauche and misericorde and I already correct that on previous post.
The modern combat armor's weight can easily be adjusted since it can be inserted with additional plating. If you want to say a person with modern combat armor who fit as much additional plating as possible, then of course they will be heavier than plate armor. Not to mention did you include weapon and ammo weight of modern weapons to make your point?
Then wouldn't I be able to say if I remove all additonal inserts and leave only the vest and just count the gun without ammo it will definitely be lighter? You have a really interesting notion of how much something weight. A modern soldier's general equipment weight are based on armor, helmet, weapon, ammo, additional plating, and also canteen, ration, etc etc. If you take in acount of all these, then yes, it is very likely be heavier than plate armor, but just combat armor alone even with plating it is questionable.
Unless you want to tell me that we finally finished the new protype next-gen combat armors, and you were talking about that one, then I'll gladly admit I am wrong.
Someone above already stated how hard it is to move in a suit of armor in earlier post, and it might even be an antique or replica which the weight might be slightly lighter. Either way, if you really truly believe you are correct, go try wear them, and see which are easier to move and which are heavier. Arguement is meaningless, especially with modern combat armor is based on being easy to customize so weight can easily be adjusted.
I won't telling you that you know zip about stuff, since I am actually trying to respect your opinion.
Some games cover the ladies up. EQ2 comes to mind. I don't necessarily want my characters running around in a chainmail thong, I also don't want to wear ugly overalls and oven mits. (I mean, I do wear oven mitts when I am taking stuff out of the oven, but I don't walk around in them.) Sex sells, sure... Also, it's fantasy game, and having characters that look like that is as close as a lot of us ladies are ever going to get to looking like that. There's a thing about realism... it's generally not fun. If it were, we'd all turn off our gaming machines and go have another big dose of REAL instead.
Oven mitts are sexy!
Some of you people are very fortunate. I need to find someone with a smithy or perhaps a suit of armor of varying variety that I can toy around a bit. I've always wanted to see for myself what it's like to be decked out in full plate or chain. If someone happens to have one or more of these and lives close by let me know!
A good portion of the games I've played seem to cover women up quite nicely, at least when it comes to them being protected by armor the way one would think proper for protection. Only games that I've seen that use the "chain mail thong" came from the Asian market. DAoC covered the female characters in armor the same as the male ones. They still showed some curves and what not and you'd definitely be able to tell it was a female but it was by no means naked.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Lets give the girls a choice then. A set of plate armour that makes them look like a walking waste bin; or a set of sexy, beautifully detailed bikini armour.
You are talking as if girls pick what they wear on the basis of how realistic it is. Go shopping with your g/f sometime, realism does not feature much on their list.
People just need to use their brains and stop complaining. It's not sexism, or unfairness, or anything like that simply because it's a two-way street. Sure female armor is usually skimpy and revealing and emphasizes certain areas, but the armor usually goes the same way for men (albeit down a different route). Male armor is usually ludicrously huge, showing off muscles and containing so many spikes it must hurt just to move in the thing. Sure your armor may not look like it offers much protection, but at least you're not encased in a shiny metal coffin that probably weighs more than you. It may not be realistic, but it's equal, which is all you can really ask for.
Also you have to remember that these are games. They're not supposed to be realistic. The males and females are exaggerated and accentuated to make them more manly/womanly. They're protraying an epic hero, not an average person. People say no woman could ever realistically believe she could look like that, but what man could realistically believe they could look like the men in these games either? Look at the Conan movies, they're a perfect example of the same effect. Sure there's big breasted girls in skimpy outfits, but then you got Arnold running around in a loincloth.
At least if the armor is skimpy, you can just say it's got magic protection.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Female armor just doesn't make sense? Good. I like sexy female avatars in my games. *edit* My GF has just walked by, read this, and agreed that so does she.
So do I, but I guess I at least like my character wearing -something-. The 'sexiest' armour I don't mind would be like what Age of Conan had (although some of the priest armour was a bit silly...nipple cups essentially). The games where you just end up in stockings, a thong, and a bra...well that's not really want I want my avatar to wear.
With respect... arrows, especially bodkin, were more designed to go through chain or ring armor. Arrows of that era vs. Plate armor (not accounting for possible impurities for plate armor) would most likely deflect at range, or could pierce at near 20m to melee range, but with little penetration to do damage to the padding or chain underneath while blunting the arrow tips. Ref on youtube, look up "Longbow vs Plate Armour" and "Armour Piercing with Medieval Arrows". So with respect to staying on OP's topic, "tit-plate armor" of such would be a boon to protect the avatars perfect breasts from arrow and slashing attacks.
Depends on the Longbow.
As I said above plate armor was pretty effective against Crossbows and early Gunpowder weapons except at very close range. The arbalest and Musket basically killed plate armor with thier penetration.
There were exceptions however.
Welsh Longbow men (Often called English or Cumbrian Longbowmen) were VERY effective vs plate armors. Check out battles of Crécy (1346) and Poitiers (1356) and the Battle of Agincourt (1415) if you have doubts.
The reason they were so effective is because the welsh longbow draw weights were typically estimated at 667–712 N (150–160 lbf) at a 76.2-cm (30-inch) draw length. The range of draw weights was from 445 N to 823 N (100 to 185 lbf). (These figures taken from recovered Longbows from the Mary Rose)
A 667N(150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.9 oz) arrow 328.0 m (360 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.3 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (272 yd).
In comparison a modern longbow's draw is typically 265 N (60 lbf) or less and by modern convention measured at 71 cm (28 inches). Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 800N (180 lbf) bows accurately
These were of course an EXCEPTION and not the rule. Most archers used Self bows and were very inefficient against plate armors of the times. Of course by the late 1300's when armorsmithing had improved and steel was more common even the Longbow men had trouble with steel plate. However since most armor was still made of Iron with only the wealthy knights wearing steel the English Longbow was still a very effective weapon against armored troops (See again the Battle of Agincourt where English Longbowmen decimated the French charge 1415)
12th century account by Gerald of Wales:
... [I]n the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.
Someone above already stated how hard it is to move in a suit of armor in earlier post, and it might even be an antique or replica which the weight might be slightly lighter. Either way, if you really truly believe you are correct, go try wear them, and see which are easier to move and which are heavier. Arguement is meaningless, especially with modern combat armor is based on being easy to customize so weight can easily be adjusted.
As a US army vet I look at the real weight that matters which is your combat load, Combat load is the weight of everything you are realistically expected to have on you during a fire fight. Depending on body armor your looking at the 20-30 pound range easy with plate, and additional 20+ pounds with ammo weapon and equipment. Now to add to this almost all of this weight is entirely centered on your shoulders with very poor weight distribution.
Now as a guy who also fights in 13-14 century styles, and has friends who are active in the SCA as well the armor is not nearly as bad as everyone makes it out too be. First most people talking about the restricted movement and how tiring it is had two things going against them that takes them out of the discussions more and likely. One they were not used to fighting and moving in it. Try just putting random extra weight on your body and see how effective you and how long it takes for you to no longer be conscious of the weight. Also more and likely They did not have armor that was even closely fitted for them. Medievel armor was not a mass produced product(By the way when it comes to armor that actually a serious down side) each peice was made for a specific person and while most people can use it having a piece not fitted to you will cause it to bind, Restrict, pinch and generally be miserable to wear (most modern combat armor is like that I fought my armor as much as any enemy). Good armor fits properly doesn't have any plates that pinch, Rides well, balances the weight of the armor over your shoulders, Chest, legs, and arms. After a few hours in it getting used to it you can usually get around with very little if no restrictions. Time to get up is usually dependant on how many stars I'm seeing more then trying to manuveur leverage to stand(you take a 3lb+ hit to the head and see how fast you get up even with out armor).
Now on the OP you can have good looking armor that does actually work. Its rarely a tin can.
Imo, the armors don't need to make sense, since it's just a fantasy game. It doesn't make sense that people throw fireballs at eachother and make their blades burn by pure mental powers while fighting against a 1000 feet big one eyed cyclop dragon with 4 arms and 4 legs either.
I disagree OP, If I want realism, I can go put on heavy armor and try to move around in it .. But the great thing about fantasy is that it is just that, it isn;t real, nor should we expect it to be like reality. Real is bad, armor is heavy, you cannot move, when you get stabbed, it hurts and you can die...
I would like to see systems that allowed players to craft every item and customize every item in game with great detail, and have appearance have NOTHING at all to do with ability.
For example:
You could sew a ms. clause outfit, socket it , and give it abilities of full warrior armor, range armor, mage armor ect ..
SO yes, you would never know what attack your opponent was capable of doing prior to battle adding a level of unpredictibilty to games that is currently lacking.
Extreme customization would allow players to place emblems, trim, color, and socketed abilities to anything they crafted in game, and any player in game would be able to use the items.
I disagree OP, If I want realism, I can go put on heavy armor and try to move around in it .. But the great thing about fantasy is that it is just that, it isn;t real, nor should we expect it to be like reality. Real is bad, armor is heavy, you cannot move, when you get stabbed, it hurts and you can die... I would like to see systems that allowed players to craft every item and customize every item in game with great detail, and have appearance have NOTHING at all to do with ability. For example: You could sew a ms. clause outfit, socket it , and give it abilities of full warrior armor, range armor, mage armor ect .. SO yes, you would never know what attack your opponent was capable of doing prior to battle adding a level of unpredictibilty to games that is currently lacking. Extreme customization would allow players to place emblems, trim, color, and socketed abilities to anything they crafted in game, and any player in game would be able to use the items.
Extreme customization would be epic, but then I realized most emblems would consist of cock and balls, assholes and middle fingers.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
I disagree OP, If I want realism, I can go put on heavy armor and try to move around in it .. But the great thing about fantasy is that it is just that, it isn;t real, nor should we expect it to be like reality. Real is bad, armor is heavy, you cannot move, when you get stabbed, it hurts and you can die... I would like to see systems that allowed players to craft every item and customize every item in game with great detail, and have appearance have NOTHING at all to do with ability. For example: You could sew a ms. clause outfit, socket it , and give it abilities of full warrior armor, range armor, mage armor ect .. SO yes, you would never know what attack your opponent was capable of doing prior to battle adding a level of unpredictibilty to games that is currently lacking. Extreme customization would allow players to place emblems, trim, color, and socketed abilities to anything they crafted in game, and any player in game would be able to use the items.
Extreme customization would be epic, but then I realized most emblems would consist of cock and balls, assholes and middle fingers.
Of course they could have a large selecttion of emblems and emblem combinations to choose from as well, and players could " submit their artwork for approval" to be added into emblem data base.
I don't think this has anything to do with realism, but rather context. When you look at the male and female standing next to one another, you walk up and ask them what they're wearing in terms of armor and they tell you the exact same thing yet it looks completely different, the first thing that comes to mind is why's it so different. You'd think a hauberk would cover equally no matter what you put it on, be it a mannequin, or a male or female toon.
I think that's what the main issue here is. It starts to beg the question of why can't the male wear nothing but pants and still be fully protected as is the female with nothing more on then a bikini. I'm all for keeping guys covered. I like tits as much as the next guy but even I stop to think now and again and it's hard to suspend my disbelief even if it's a fantasy game. Would be a different story if on the box it said "this game is rated Ridiculous as in nothing makes sense even if you think it should therefore just go about your fun and don't worry about anything". Even if you say "there's no realism due to fireballs and lightning firing out of someone's ass" the armor is still there for protection. Otherwise there would be none and you wouldn't have to worry.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Men and armor vs. practicality or reality, one in particular.
The movie "300".
In the movie, the spartan hoplites had a helm, shield, and.... erm, capes? If you ask me, that's pretty damned nude for going to war. But wait a minute... ZOMG that's fiction! Ooookay.. so what did they really wear?
In reality, hoplites had a curiass (stereotypically in the form of a ripped chest), greaves, and helm. Soooooo something to cover the chest, shins, and head. Still pretty damned nude.
Did they do it to show off their muscles and how uber they were? No, they didn't need head to toe armor because of their tactics to support their style.
*in LeVar Burton voice* But you don't have to take my word for it!
Best advice, though. Mainly ASIAN games have skimpy female outfits. If this BOTHERS you... don't play a F2P game, or anything from NCsoft. End of Story.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
Because in gaming as a whole (not MMO specifically) 90% of the users are male. Dudes don't want to see other dudes "twig and berries" they want TnA. I have heard from so many of my friends that they roll female toons because starring at the backs for hours/days/weeks/months is more interesting than starring at a dude.
"Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought."
Why most of the people who have an issue with this are men? Things are weird on the internet.
Maybe they are just gay?
Anyways, I liked how this thread kinda turned into a mini history lesson about ancient weapons, styles, and tactics.
I always thought the Dark Elves from WAR were the hottest chic characters. =D
I can understand skimpy armor if you are a scout/assasin archetype, but for tanks and heavy armor dps and such, the ffxi armors for paladin/warrior were pretty damn sweet. Even the monk, samurai, and ninja classes had pretty cool "light armor".
Comments
With respect... arrows, especially bodkin, were more designed to go through chain or ring armor. Arrows of that era vs. Plate armor (not accounting for possible impurities for plate armor) would most likely deflect at range, or could pierce at near 20m to melee range, but with little penetration to do damage to the padding or chain underneath while blunting the arrow tips. Ref on youtube, look up "Longbow vs Plate Armour" and "Armour Piercing with Medieval Arrows".
So with respect to staying on OP's topic, "tit-plate armor" of such would be a boon to protect the avatars perfect breasts from arrow and slashing attacks.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
Depends on the Longbow.
As I said above plate armor was pretty effective against Crossbows and early Gunpowder weapons except at very close range. The arbalest and Musket basically killed plate armor with thier penetration.
There were exceptions however.
Welsh Longbow men (Often called English or Cumbrian Longbowmen) were VERY effective vs plate armors. Check out battles of Crécy (1346) and Poitiers (1356) and the Battle of Agincourt (1415) if you have doubts.
The reason they were so effective is because the welsh longbow draw weights were typically estimated at 667–712 N (150–160 lbf) at a 76.2-cm (30-inch) draw length. The range of draw weights was from 445 N to 823 N (100 to 185 lbf). (These figures taken from recovered Longbows from the Mary Rose)
A 667N(150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.9 oz) arrow 328.0 m (360 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.3 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (272 yd).
In comparison a modern longbow's draw is typically 265 N (60 lbf) or less and by modern convention measured at 71 cm (28 inches). Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 800N (180 lbf) bows accurately
These were of course an EXCEPTION and not the rule. Most archers used Self bows and were very inefficient against plate armors of the times. Of course by the late 1300's when armorsmithing had improved and steel was more common even the Longbow men had trouble with steel plate. However since most armor was still made of Iron with only the wealthy knights wearing steel the English Longbow was still a very effective weapon against armored troops (See again the Battle of Agincourt where English Longbowmen decimated the French charge 1415)
12th century account by Gerald of Wales:
... [I]n the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.
Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Longbow
I know! It's like they think these are imaginary worlds of make-believe and magic.....
To zymurgeist, wow someone got pretty offended. Only mistake I've made was confused maine gauche and misericorde and I already correct that on previous post.
The modern combat armor's weight can easily be adjusted since it can be inserted with additional plating. If you want to say a person with modern combat armor who fit as much additional plating as possible, then of course they will be heavier than plate armor. Not to mention did you include weapon and ammo weight of modern weapons to make your point?
Then wouldn't I be able to say if I remove all additonal inserts and leave only the vest and just count the gun without ammo it will definitely be lighter? You have a really interesting notion of how much something weight. A modern soldier's general equipment weight are based on armor, helmet, weapon, ammo, additional plating, and also canteen, ration, etc etc. If you take in acount of all these, then yes, it is very likely be heavier than plate armor, but just combat armor alone even with plating it is questionable.
Unless you want to tell me that we finally finished the new protype next-gen combat armors, and you were talking about that one, then I'll gladly admit I am wrong.
Someone above already stated how hard it is to move in a suit of armor in earlier post, and it might even be an antique or replica which the weight might be slightly lighter. Either way, if you really truly believe you are correct, go try wear them, and see which are easier to move and which are heavier. Arguement is meaningless, especially with modern combat armor is based on being easy to customize so weight can easily be adjusted.
I won't telling you that you know zip about stuff, since I am actually trying to respect your opinion.
depends on the crowd youre catering to.
if your proposing an immersive world that makes sense, then its a dumb idea
if the game has a hint of asian design, it doesnt matter. their hair can protect them from anything, much like a porcupine.
Oven mitts are sexy!
Some of you people are very fortunate. I need to find someone with a smithy or perhaps a suit of armor of varying variety that I can toy around a bit. I've always wanted to see for myself what it's like to be decked out in full plate or chain. If someone happens to have one or more of these and lives close by let me know!
A good portion of the games I've played seem to cover women up quite nicely, at least when it comes to them being protected by armor the way one would think proper for protection. Only games that I've seen that use the "chain mail thong" came from the Asian market. DAoC covered the female characters in armor the same as the male ones. They still showed some curves and what not and you'd definitely be able to tell it was a female but it was by no means naked.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Why most of the people who have an issue with this are men?
Things are weird on the internet.
Lets give the girls a choice then. A set of plate armour that makes them look like a walking waste bin; or a set of sexy, beautifully detailed bikini armour.
You are talking as if girls pick what they wear on the basis of how realistic it is. Go shopping with your g/f sometime, realism does not feature much on their list.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
ROLF
People just need to use their brains and stop complaining. It's not sexism, or unfairness, or anything like that simply because it's a two-way street. Sure female armor is usually skimpy and revealing and emphasizes certain areas, but the armor usually goes the same way for men (albeit down a different route). Male armor is usually ludicrously huge, showing off muscles and containing so many spikes it must hurt just to move in the thing. Sure your armor may not look like it offers much protection, but at least you're not encased in a shiny metal coffin that probably weighs more than you. It may not be realistic, but it's equal, which is all you can really ask for.
Also you have to remember that these are games. They're not supposed to be realistic. The males and females are exaggerated and accentuated to make them more manly/womanly. They're protraying an epic hero, not an average person. People say no woman could ever realistically believe she could look like that, but what man could realistically believe they could look like the men in these games either? Look at the Conan movies, they're a perfect example of the same effect. Sure there's big breasted girls in skimpy outfits, but then you got Arnold running around in a loincloth.
At least if the armor is skimpy, you can just say it's got magic protection.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Female armor just doesn't make sense?
Good.
I like sexy female avatars in my games.
*edit* My GF has just walked by, read this, and agreed that so does she.
So do I, but I guess I at least like my character wearing -something-. The 'sexiest' armour I don't mind would be like what Age of Conan had (although some of the priest armour was a bit silly...nipple cups essentially). The games where you just end up in stockings, a thong, and a bra...well that's not really want I want my avatar to wear.
Ningen wa ningen da.
----
http://twitter.com/Ciovala
Depends on the Longbow.
As I said above plate armor was pretty effective against Crossbows and early Gunpowder weapons except at very close range. The arbalest and Musket basically killed plate armor with thier penetration.
There were exceptions however.
Welsh Longbow men (Often called English or Cumbrian Longbowmen) were VERY effective vs plate armors. Check out battles of Crécy (1346) and Poitiers (1356) and the Battle of Agincourt (1415) if you have doubts.
The reason they were so effective is because the welsh longbow draw weights were typically estimated at 667–712 N (150–160 lbf) at a 76.2-cm (30-inch) draw length. The range of draw weights was from 445 N to 823 N (100 to 185 lbf). (These figures taken from recovered Longbows from the Mary Rose)
A 667N(150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.9 oz) arrow 328.0 m (360 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.3 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (272 yd).
In comparison a modern longbow's draw is typically 265 N (60 lbf) or less and by modern convention measured at 71 cm (28 inches). Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 800N (180 lbf) bows accurately
These were of course an EXCEPTION and not the rule. Most archers used Self bows and were very inefficient against plate armors of the times. Of course by the late 1300's when armorsmithing had improved and steel was more common even the Longbow men had trouble with steel plate. However since most armor was still made of Iron with only the wealthy knights wearing steel the English Longbow was still a very effective weapon against armored troops (See again the Battle of Agincourt where English Longbowmen decimated the French charge 1415)
12th century account by Gerald of Wales:
... [I]n the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.
Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Longbow
Interesting information, thank you for the reply!
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
As a US army vet I look at the real weight that matters which is your combat load, Combat load is the weight of everything you are realistically expected to have on you during a fire fight. Depending on body armor your looking at the 20-30 pound range easy with plate, and additional 20+ pounds with ammo weapon and equipment. Now to add to this almost all of this weight is entirely centered on your shoulders with very poor weight distribution.
Now as a guy who also fights in 13-14 century styles, and has friends who are active in the SCA as well the armor is not nearly as bad as everyone makes it out too be. First most people talking about the restricted movement and how tiring it is had two things going against them that takes them out of the discussions more and likely. One they were not used to fighting and moving in it. Try just putting random extra weight on your body and see how effective you and how long it takes for you to no longer be conscious of the weight. Also more and likely They did not have armor that was even closely fitted for them. Medievel armor was not a mass produced product(By the way when it comes to armor that actually a serious down side) each peice was made for a specific person and while most people can use it having a piece not fitted to you will cause it to bind, Restrict, pinch and generally be miserable to wear (most modern combat armor is like that I fought my armor as much as any enemy). Good armor fits properly doesn't have any plates that pinch, Rides well, balances the weight of the armor over your shoulders, Chest, legs, and arms. After a few hours in it getting used to it you can usually get around with very little if no restrictions. Time to get up is usually dependant on how many stars I'm seeing more then trying to manuveur leverage to stand(you take a 3lb+ hit to the head and see how fast you get up even with out armor).
Now on the OP you can have good looking armor that does actually work. Its rarely a tin can.
Imo, the armors don't need to make sense, since it's just a fantasy game. It doesn't make sense that people throw fireballs at eachother and make their blades burn by pure mental powers while fighting against a 1000 feet big one eyed cyclop dragon with 4 arms and 4 legs either.
Why do they always trip and fall when they are running away in the horror movies?
I disagree OP, If I want realism, I can go put on heavy armor and try to move around in it .. But the great thing about fantasy is that it is just that, it isn;t real, nor should we expect it to be like reality. Real is bad, armor is heavy, you cannot move, when you get stabbed, it hurts and you can die...
I would like to see systems that allowed players to craft every item and customize every item in game with great detail, and have appearance have NOTHING at all to do with ability.
For example:
You could sew a ms. clause outfit, socket it , and give it abilities of full warrior armor, range armor, mage armor ect ..
SO yes, you would never know what attack your opponent was capable of doing prior to battle adding a level of unpredictibilty to games that is currently lacking.
Extreme customization would allow players to place emblems, trim, color, and socketed abilities to anything they crafted in game, and any player in game would be able to use the items.
Cause rape.
Extreme customization would be epic, but then I realized most emblems would consist of cock and balls, assholes and middle fingers.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
Extreme customization would be epic, but then I realized most emblems would consist of cock and balls, assholes and middle fingers.
Of course they could have a large selecttion of emblems and emblem combinations to choose from as well, and players could " submit their artwork for approval" to be added into emblem data base.
I don't think this has anything to do with realism, but rather context. When you look at the male and female standing next to one another, you walk up and ask them what they're wearing in terms of armor and they tell you the exact same thing yet it looks completely different, the first thing that comes to mind is why's it so different. You'd think a hauberk would cover equally no matter what you put it on, be it a mannequin, or a male or female toon.
I think that's what the main issue here is. It starts to beg the question of why can't the male wear nothing but pants and still be fully protected as is the female with nothing more on then a bikini. I'm all for keeping guys covered. I like tits as much as the next guy but even I stop to think now and again and it's hard to suspend my disbelief even if it's a fantasy game. Would be a different story if on the box it said "this game is rated Ridiculous as in nothing makes sense even if you think it should therefore just go about your fun and don't worry about anything". Even if you say "there's no realism due to fireballs and lightning firing out of someone's ass" the armor is still there for protection. Otherwise there would be none and you wouldn't have to worry.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Well. Lets take a reverse look at it.
Men and armor vs. practicality or reality, one in particular.
The movie "300".
In the movie, the spartan hoplites had a helm, shield, and.... erm, capes? If you ask me, that's pretty damned nude for going to war. But wait a minute... ZOMG that's fiction! Ooookay.. so what did they really wear?
In reality, hoplites had a curiass (stereotypically in the form of a ripped chest), greaves, and helm. Soooooo something to cover the chest, shins, and head. Still pretty damned nude.
Did they do it to show off their muscles and how uber they were? No, they didn't need head to toe armor because of their tactics to support their style.
*in LeVar Burton voice* But you don't have to take my word for it!
Best advice, though. Mainly ASIAN games have skimpy female outfits. If this BOTHERS you... don't play a F2P game, or anything from NCsoft. End of Story.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
Because in gaming as a whole (not MMO specifically) 90% of the users are male. Dudes don't want to see other dudes "twig and berries" they want TnA. I have heard from so many of my friends that they roll female toons because starring at the backs for hours/days/weeks/months is more interesting than starring at a dude.
"Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought."
Maybe they are just gay?
Anyways, I liked how this thread kinda turned into a mini history lesson about ancient weapons, styles, and tactics.
I always thought the Dark Elves from WAR were the hottest chic characters. =D
I can understand skimpy armor if you are a scout/assasin archetype, but for tanks and heavy armor dps and such, the ffxi armors for paladin/warrior were pretty damn sweet. Even the monk, samurai, and ninja classes had pretty cool "light armor".