All these are warn by the same classes..Warrior..Paladin..Cleric..Dread Knight..
Yeah, but in many games (like AoC, EQ1 & 2 and so one) can certain classes wear chainmail but not plate, and the point is that that makes no sense whatsoever.
I agree with you,if you can wear plate then you should be able to wear chain,which is what Vanguard allows.
See, what would really be the most historically accurate is if rogues didn't use chain armor at all and just stuck to studded leather armor. You know, it's like leather armor... but with studs! For protection!
Agreed. I remember trying to sneak in a chainmail many years ago in a fantasy live, not something I recommend.
Some reinforcement on a leather armor in no problem though.
Eh? I was under the impression that so-called studded leather never actually existed. Like... the D&D kind of studded leather, where there are just hundreds of metal rivets punched through it all over the place on the off chance that they might deflect a hit.
See, what would really be the most historically accurate is if rogues didn't use chain armor at all and just stuck to studded leather armor. You know, it's like leather armor... but with studs! For protection!
Agreed. I remember trying to sneak in a chainmail many years ago in a fantasy live, not something I recommend.
Some reinforcement on a leather armor in no problem though.
Eh? I was under the impression that so-called studded leather never actually existed. Like... the D&D kind of studded leather, where there are just hundreds of metal rivets punched through it all over the place on the off chance that they might deflect a hit.
It did but was more of a poor mans chainmail, it was fairly common during the dark ages. Usually it was a leather armor with iron crosses or rings on the outside. It didn't really look like the D&D armor though.
I dont know any mmorpgs that represent our own history, and even if there was, I dont think it should be so serious as if the historic facts are correct or not to the point (as long as it's not something totally stupid like robes having more protection than armour), at the end of the day it's just a game to have fun in.
What MMOs call chain armor is NOT 12th century chain mail.
MMO chain armor is more equal to the historical Brigindine and doublet armor which is a cloth and metal hybrid. This type of armor was lighter than plate mail and was used alongside plate mails in the 15th and 16th century. The MMO devs aren't completely out of the loop as the OP might think here.
On a side note the Chain and Plate mail bikini is just totally rediculous. Though Various Barbarian warriors did fight naked or nearly naked and occasionally did win against better armed forces. Example of Valdal Barbarians defeating the Romans in the 5th century or Scottish highlanders defeating the British in the 13th century. Or one could even look at the Indians defeating Custer in 1873 or the Zulu to prove that armor wasn't everything. But the thing is these were all shirtless male warriors not chicks running arround in Bikinis.
What MMOs call chain armor is NOT 12th century chain mail.
MMO chain armor is more equal to the historical Brigindine and doublet armor which is a cloth and metal hybrid. This type of armor was lighter than plate mail and was used alongside plate mails in the 15th and 16th century. The MMO devs aren't completely out of the loop as the OP might think here.
On a side note the Chain and Plate mail bikini is just totally rediculous. Though Various Barbarian warriors did fight naked or nearly naked and occasionally did win against better armed forces. Example of Valdal Barbarians defeating the Romans in the 5th century or Scottish highlanders defeating the British in the 13th century. Or one could even look at the Indians defeating Custer in 1873 or the Zulu to prove that armor wasn't everything. But the thing is these were all shirtless male warriors not chicks running arround in Bikinis.
The same Scottish Highlanders (The Picts) went to war naked against the Vikings and the Romans and won. It wasn't until the lowland peoples and the Vikings attacked them from the north and south at the same time that they lost.
Chainmails are in opposite to what most MMO devs seems to think actually both heavier and harder to move in than a plate mail. In have been proved again and again (if you want to see an example, see when they test them against each other in “The deadliest warrior – Jeanne Dárc Vs Wilhelm the Conqueror from a few weeks back).
Chainmail and platemail represent 2 different technologies and generally are chainmail primitive and offers a lot less protection. Platemail is a evolution of it that offers greatly improved protection and better movement. I own a chainmail myself and have tried out plate as well.
And yet in MMOs chainmail is a lighter armor often used by rogues or swashbucklers side by side with warriors using plate mail. It makes no sense whatsoever.
Sure, the Romans had both a breastplate and chainmail armors but the Roman breastplate were a lot more primitive than the 15- early 16th century plate armors that MMO plates are based on.
Why do some classes have acess to chain armor but not plate? It just makes no sense.
i bet most dev dont know that in real life mail weightmore then plate.unless they expect plate to be 3 inch thick?
A lot of French plate (100 years war era) was stupidly heavy. Why crossbows were so popular before the Church outlawed them (I believe Richard de Cour brought them back for the crusades).
Chainmails are in opposite to what most MMO devs seems to think actually both heavier and harder to move in than a plate mail. In have been proved again and again (if you want to see an example, see when they test them against each other in “The deadliest warrior – Jeanne Dárc Vs Wilhelm the Conqueror from a few weeks back).
Chainmail and platemail represent 2 different technologies and generally are chainmail primitive and offers a lot less protection. Platemail is a evolution of it that offers greatly improved protection and better movement. I own a chainmail myself and have tried out plate as well.
And yet in MMOs chainmail is a lighter armor often used by rogues or swashbucklers side by side with warriors using plate mail. It makes no sense whatsoever.
Sure, the Romans had both a breastplate and chainmail armors but the Roman breastplate were a lot more primitive than the 15- early 16th century plate armors that MMO plates are based on.
Why do some classes have acess to chain armor but not plate? It just makes no sense.
the answer is simple... look at LOTR, THEY USED MYTHRIL ARMOR!!!
ok joke aside, the best place for people to get an understanding of armor is to go back and play UO, armor was really balanced in that when you had heavier armored players they were slower and usually got around via a horse or teleports, the lighter armored players could run away if they wanted or try to fight and get man handled by the heavier armored foes
Vindictus allows anyone to access armor classes which is nice, but they are irrelevant if you want to play the correct path of the characters
Dungeons and dragons online allows anyone to access any type of armor and play, but then again they have the best setup becuase they damn well invented the RPG's out there.
truth is, i dont really understand why most mmo's develop a system where you can only equip and use specific things, but it could possibly be becuase of the sheer amount of coding that would go into the game and they want to make a specific Rock Paper Scissors approach to it instead of giving everyone a blank slate and say chissle your own path out of it.
I'm willing to BET that it's far more KNOWN then YOU think. It's done for GAMEPLAY REASONS. and as someone else said it's more intuitive. and for the dummy players when they see chainmail they assume it weighs less then the hulking behemoth wearing full titanium steel on them. Sure it's wrong. But it's for Gameplay and balancing reasons...NOT because designers/developers are stupid.
say it with me....balaaaaaaaaance and gaaaaaaameplaaaaaaaaaaay
the fact this thread has gone on this long discussing it is dumber then the act itself. because at least the developers have a REASON for doing it.
***EDIT***
oh and if you're going to nitpick (which is all this is..a stupid nitpick) then I have news for you. Orcs, goblins, dragons, gnomes, elves....they DO NOT EXIST either..so are you going to criticize them for using those made-up races? it's dumb to call foul on accuracy on one thing while letting something so HUGE go.
also...people don't fling fireballs out of their butts either.
gonna nitpick that alongside the chain vs plate argument you have here?
I can't believe this thread has this many responses.
Who the hell cares. If you're gonna pick on MMO's doing things that don't make sense, what about warriors surviving big ass hits by these 30 foot x 10 feet wide muscled behomoths. I mean, no human being regardless of their armor can take a full on hit from a 30x10 muscled behomoth regardless of the armor you are wearing. Unless of course it is magic but still. Oh well.
I like the pictures of chainmail bras .
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Originally posted by Cryomatrix I can't believe this thread has this many responses. Who the hell cares. If you're gonna pick on MMO's doing things that don't make sense, what about warriors surviving big ass hits by these 30 foot x 10 feet wide muscled behomoths. I mean, no human being regardless of their armor can take a full on hit from a 30x10 muscled behomoth regardless of the armor you are wearing. Unless of course it is magic but still. Oh well. I like the pictures of chainmail bras .
Reading through the comments I can't help but feel the same. This is the oddest topic with more than 100 replies I've ever seen here.
What MMOs call chain armor is NOT 12th century chain mail.
MMO chain armor is more equal to the historical Brigindine and doublet armor which is a cloth and metal hybrid. This type of armor was lighter than plate mail and was used alongside plate mails in the 15th and 16th century. The MMO devs aren't completely out of the loop as the OP might think here.
Thanks for the explanation! Definitely puts to rest the plate vs. chain debate.
On a side note the Chain and Plate mail bikini is just totally rediculous. Though Various Barbarian warriors did fight naked or nearly naked and occasionally did win against better armed forces. Example of Valdal Barbarians defeating the Romans in the 5th century or Scottish highlanders defeating the British in the 13th century. Or one could even look at the Indians defeating Custer in 1873 or the Zulu to prove that armor wasn't everything. But the thing is these were all shirtless male warriors not chicks running arround in Bikinis.
I have made this point many times before when people are clamouring for realistic armour, and frowning upon the sexy aesthetic of fantasy: In most of these games, our characters get their defenses not from the armour they wear, per se, but the enchantments tied to these armours. Also, the protection seems to be more for magic fuelled attacks and not from regular ones.
In most games, player abilities are not called, "Kick", "Punch", "Lift Shield". They're usually "Thunderous Blow", "Ferocious Strike", or "Shield Wall". Abilities that are fuelled by our inner power as heroes. Which is why the plate bikini, while no where in the realm of realism, are perfectly justified.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Originally posted by Loke666 Originally posted by lizardbones
The example of the bow was for the restriction on movement. A person's movement, in full plate armor is more restricted than in chain armor. A person can wear partial plate, something like a Roman soldier and get a lot of movement back, but if they are in full plate armor, they do not have a full range of motion.
Remember, we're talking video games, where we're trying to draw a logical link* from cloth->leather->chain->plate. Weight is ignored in favor of bag space. So plate armor supporting its own weight or being lighter/heavier doesn't matter. Mass doesn't really seem to count either, so neither does inertia. We're left with how much protection the armor offers and how much range of motion it offers.
* I'm calling silly shenanigan on this. There doesn't need to be a real logical reason when you can fly around on a winged horse made of stars.
Sorry, but it just isn't true. Ever wore a platemail or a chainmail? A chainmail that covers arms and legs restricts the movements a lot. If you want a pop cultural TV program ala mythbusters to show you, see the deadliest warrior season 3 e02, it is not really science but they loose about twice as much movement in the Norman chainmail as in the Frensh 15 century plate there. Or go down to your local ARMA and talk to someone there.
Are you talking swinging your arms around movement or walking around movement?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by lizardbones Originally posted by Loke666
Originally posted by lizardbones
The example of the bow was for the restriction on movement. A person's movement, in full plate armor is more restricted than in chain armor. A person can wear partial plate, something like a Roman soldier and get a lot of movement back, but if they are in full plate armor, they do not have a full range of motion.
Remember, we're talking video games, where we're trying to draw a logical link* from cloth->leather->chain->plate. Weight is ignored in favor of bag space. So plate armor supporting its own weight or being lighter/heavier doesn't matter. Mass doesn't really seem to count either, so neither does inertia. We're left with how much protection the armor offers and how much range of motion it offers.
* I'm calling silly shenanigan on this. There doesn't need to be a real logical reason when you can fly around on a winged horse made of stars.
Sorry, but it just isn't true. Ever wore a platemail or a chainmail? A chainmail that covers arms and legs restricts the movements a lot. If you want a pop cultural TV program ala mythbusters to show you, see the deadliest warrior season 3 e02, it is not really science but they loose about twice as much movement in the Norman chainmail as in the Frensh 15 century plate there. Or go down to your local ARMA and talk to someone there.
Are you talking swinging your arms around movement or walking around movement?
I can tell by how this is going through my head that historical accuracy does not matter when it comes to armor in video games. Even if every developer was a renowned expert on armor development and history it still wouldn't matter.
In the minds of most people, chain mail is lighter and easier to move around in than plate armor. That's why it's in video games like that.
I do not admit to being wrong, nor do I admit to error or a lack of knowledge about the history of armor. Ever.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
From the time of 16th to 4th century BC Achaen bronze plate to 4th century BC cast iron mail (5-7mm rings) the advances in armor has sought improvements over organic sinew/leather. The implementation of alloys from copper into bronze and iron into steel reflects the application of technology and research into metalurgy.
In the OP opinion of mail vs plate he seems to ignore bronze and overlook the fundamental difference of 8th century work-hardened iron to 3rd century BC quench-hardened steel. Since swords and axe were intended as cutting weapons iron-ring mail was utilized for slash protection, but for pierce dmg going from 4 in 1 to 8 or 6 in 1 patterns were common. ref, ref2
In advancing from 1500bc Achaean cast bronze to 900bc plates (lamellae, Hittite iron) to 300bc Celtic iron mail (chain) armor; steel full plate armor does not supersed these until the 13th century AD, and it was rendered obsolete by crossbows and 16th century flintlock muskets.
Until a game causes you to drown when you enter water w/ any armor on it will me a moot point (I am going to go out on a limb here w/o looking on wiki that there was never a specify designed armor pre -18th century created for aquatic warfare). Trying to find realism in most games is a futile, if not sometimes enjoyable pastime.
posted by zymurgeistThat's grossly oversimplified. A lot of it had to do with material availability and technology but social conditions playd a greater part. It's not a straight timeline from one type of armor to another. The French were still using brass helmets during the Napoleonic wars. for no aparrent reason, and their promary weapon was still the sword. Crossbows didn't make plate armor obsolete. They co-existed for centuries. Armor had largely been abandoned as unworkable by the matchlock era. If anything it was the mercenary infantries adoption of the pike that doomed the armored knight and not because of the armor but because it ended the dominance of cavalry over infantry. Quite simply the armored knight died with the feudal system and the rise of well trained professional armies.
i am surprised you are not ashamed in posting a reply to my facts when almost EVERYTHING in your reply is WRONG! "The French were still using brass helmets during the Napoleonic wars.for no aparent reason," ref1 A VERY few calvary wore flamboyant helmets presumably to offer some protection against enemy calvary sabres. The huge majority of French troops equipped with bi & tricorn hats, cloth Shako or bearskin caps.
"and their promary weapon was still the sword" ref2 The primary weapon of Napoleonic troops was the .69 cal Musket with afixed bayonet that should fire a round every 20 seconds capable of hitting targets past 80 yards.
"Crossbows didn't make plate armor obsolete. They co-existed for centuries." The use of crossbows in European warfare is again evident from the Battle of Hastings until about the year 1500. They almost completely superseded hand bows in many European armies in the twelfth century. Longbows and crossbows could pierce plate armour up to ranges of 200 meters. Can. 29 of the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II in 1139 tried to have banned the use of crossbows against Christians. Mounted knights armed with lances proved ineffective against formations of pikemen combined with crossbowmen whose weapons could penetrate most knights' armor. Plate armor was becoming passe by the end of the 15th century.
After 1650, plate armour was mostly reduced to the simple breastplate (cuirass) worn by dragoons. This was due to the development of the flintlock musket which could penetrate armour at a considerable distance, severely reducing the payoff from the investment in full plate armour. ref3 Combat crossbows preceded steel plate armor by 400yrs and xbows were largely replaced by muskets by the 1600s. Steel plate armor was effective for only about 200yrs by the 1700s most troops were in cloth armor.
"If anything it was the mercenary infantries adoption of the pike that doomed the armored knight" Most of the Napoleonic <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Arm
posted by zymurgeistThat's grossly oversimplified. A lot of it had to do with material availability and technology but social conditions playd a greater part. It's not a straight timeline from one type of armor to another. The French were still using brass helmets during the Napoleonic wars. for no aparrent reason, and their promary weapon was still the sword. Crossbows didn't make plate armor obsolete. They co-existed for centuries. Armor had largely been abandoned as unworkable by the matchlock era. If anything it was the mercenary infantries adoption of the pike that doomed the armored knight and not because of the armor but because it ended the dominance of cavalry over infantry. Quite simply the armored knight died with the feudal system and the rise of well trained professional armies.
i am surprised you are not ashamed in posting a reply to my facts when almost EVERYTHING in your reply is WRONG!
"The French were still using brass helmets during the Napoleonic wars.for no aparent reason,"
ref1 A VERY few calvary wore flamboyant helmets presumably to offer some protection against enemy calvary sabres.
The huge majority of French troops equipped with bi & tricorn hats, cloth Shako or bearskin caps.
The primary weapon of Napoleonic troops was the .69 cal Musket with afixed bayonet that should fire a round every 20 seconds capable of hitting targets past 80 yards.
"Crossbows didn't make plate armor obsolete. They co-existed for centuries."
The use of crossbows in European warfare is again evident from the Battle of Hastings until about the year 1500. They almost completely superseded hand bows in many European armies in the twelfth century. Longbows and crossbows could pierce plate armour up to ranges of 200 meters.
Can. 29 of the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II in 1139 tried to have banned the use of crossbows against Christians. Mounted knights armed with lances proved ineffective against formations of pikemen combined with crossbowmen whose weapons could penetrate most knights' armor.
Plate armor was becoming passe by the end of the 15th century.
After 1650, plate armour was mostly reduced to the simple breastplate (cuirass) worn by dragoons. This was due to the development of the flintlock musket which could penetrate armour at a considerable distance, severely reducing the payoff from the investment in full plate armour.
Combat crossbows preceded steel plate armor by 400yrs and xbows were largely replaced by muskets by the 1600s. Steel plate armor was effective for only about 200yrs by the 1700s most troops were in cloth armor.
"If anything it was the mercenary infantries adoption of the pike that doomed the armored knight"
Comments
I agree with you,if you can wear plate then you should be able to wear chain,which is what Vanguard allows.
http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Jesus/Jesus.htm
It is rather common, here is from EQ2.
Eh? I was under the impression that so-called studded leather never actually existed. Like... the D&D kind of studded leather, where there are just hundreds of metal rivets punched through it all over the place on the off chance that they might deflect a hit.
I also like a mixture of both..
http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Jesus/Jesus.htm
It did but was more of a poor mans chainmail, it was fairly common during the dark ages. Usually it was a leather armor with iron crosses or rings on the outside. It didn't really look like the D&D armor though.
That is not chainmail but brigandine or scalemail mixed with plate. Looks 15th century but not 100% accurate. It looks pretty good.
I dont know any mmorpgs that represent our own history, and even if there was, I dont think it should be so serious as if the historic facts are correct or not to the point (as long as it's not something totally stupid like robes having more protection than armour), at the end of the day it's just a game to have fun in.
What MMOs call chain armor is NOT 12th century chain mail.
MMO chain armor is more equal to the historical Brigindine and doublet armor which is a cloth and metal hybrid. This type of armor was lighter than plate mail and was used alongside plate mails in the 15th and 16th century. The MMO devs aren't completely out of the loop as the OP might think here.
On a side note the Chain and Plate mail bikini is just totally rediculous. Though Various Barbarian warriors did fight naked or nearly naked and occasionally did win against better armed forces. Example of Valdal Barbarians defeating the Romans in the 5th century or Scottish highlanders defeating the British in the 13th century. Or one could even look at the Indians defeating Custer in 1873 or the Zulu to prove that armor wasn't everything. But the thing is these were all shirtless male warriors not chicks running arround in Bikinis.
The same Scottish Highlanders (The Picts) went to war naked against the Vikings and the Romans and won. It wasn't until the lowland peoples and the Vikings attacked them from the north and south at the same time that they lost.
My theme song.
A lot of French plate (100 years war era) was stupidly heavy. Why crossbows were so popular before the Church outlawed them (I believe Richard de Cour brought them back for the crusades).
well, I wouldn't say one game is defining the genre.
edit: and as others have said, fantasy worlds dont' tend to err on the side of historical accuracy.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
the answer is simple... look at LOTR, THEY USED MYTHRIL ARMOR!!!
ok joke aside, the best place for people to get an understanding of armor is to go back and play UO, armor was really balanced in that when you had heavier armored players they were slower and usually got around via a horse or teleports, the lighter armored players could run away if they wanted or try to fight and get man handled by the heavier armored foes
Vindictus allows anyone to access armor classes which is nice, but they are irrelevant if you want to play the correct path of the characters
Dungeons and dragons online allows anyone to access any type of armor and play, but then again they have the best setup becuase they damn well invented the RPG's out there.
truth is, i dont really understand why most mmo's develop a system where you can only equip and use specific things, but it could possibly be becuase of the sheer amount of coding that would go into the game and they want to make a specific Rock Paper Scissors approach to it instead of giving everyone a blank slate and say chissle your own path out of it.
-> OP..you're missing the point.
I'm willing to BET that it's far more KNOWN then YOU think. It's done for GAMEPLAY REASONS. and as someone else said it's more intuitive. and for the dummy players when they see chainmail they assume it weighs less then the hulking behemoth wearing full titanium steel on them. Sure it's wrong. But it's for Gameplay and balancing reasons...NOT because designers/developers are stupid.
say it with me....balaaaaaaaaance and gaaaaaaameplaaaaaaaaaaay
the fact this thread has gone on this long discussing it is dumber then the act itself. because at least the developers have a REASON for doing it.
***EDIT***
oh and if you're going to nitpick (which is all this is..a stupid nitpick) then I have news for you. Orcs, goblins, dragons, gnomes, elves....they DO NOT EXIST either..so are you going to criticize them for using those made-up races? it's dumb to call foul on accuracy on one thing while letting something so HUGE go.
also...people don't fling fireballs out of their butts either.
gonna nitpick that alongside the chain vs plate argument you have here?
sorry but, this is a really stupid thread.
I can't believe this thread has this many responses.
Who the hell cares. If you're gonna pick on MMO's doing things that don't make sense, what about warriors surviving big ass hits by these 30 foot x 10 feet wide muscled behomoths. I mean, no human being regardless of their armor can take a full on hit from a 30x10 muscled behomoth regardless of the armor you are wearing. Unless of course it is magic but still. Oh well.
I like the pictures of chainmail bras
.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Reading through the comments I can't help but feel the same. This is the oddest topic with more than 100 replies I've ever seen here.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
Ever wore a platemail or a chainmail?
A chainmail that covers arms and legs restricts the movements a lot. If you want a pop cultural TV program ala mythbusters to show you, see the deadliest warrior season 3 e02, it is not really science but they loose about twice as much movement in the Norman chainmail as in the Frensh 15 century plate there. Or go down to your local ARMA and talk to someone there.
Are you talking swinging your arms around movement or walking around movement?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Ever wore a platemail or a chainmail?
A chainmail that covers arms and legs restricts the movements a lot. If you want a pop cultural TV program ala mythbusters to show you, see the deadliest warrior season 3 e02, it is not really science but they loose about twice as much movement in the Norman chainmail as in the Frensh 15 century plate there. Or go down to your local ARMA and talk to someone there.
Are you talking swinging your arms around movement or walking around movement?
I can tell by how this is going through my head that historical accuracy does not matter when it comes to armor in video games. Even if every developer was a renowned expert on armor development and history it still wouldn't matter.
In the minds of most people, chain mail is lighter and easier to move around in than plate armor. That's why it's in video games like that.
I do not admit to being wrong, nor do I admit to error or a lack of knowledge about the history of armor. Ever.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Elves and dwarves learned how to make better chainmail than modern day recreationist.
/thread
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
its indeed hard to believe that this
restricts movement more and is a lot heavier than this
11.9.11
From the time of 16th to 4th century BC Achaen bronze plate to 4th century BC cast iron mail (5-7mm rings) the advances in armor has sought improvements over organic sinew/leather.
The implementation of alloys from copper into bronze and iron into steel reflects the application of technology and research into metalurgy.
In the OP opinion of mail vs plate he seems to ignore bronze and overlook the fundamental difference of 8th century work-hardened iron to 3rd century BC quench-hardened steel.
Since swords and axe were intended as cutting weapons iron-ring mail was utilized for slash protection, but for pierce dmg going from 4 in 1 to 8 or 6 in 1 patterns were common.
ref, ref2
In advancing from 1500bc Achaean cast bronze to 900bc plates (lamellae, Hittite iron) to 300bc Celtic iron mail (chain) armor; steel full plate armor does not supersed these until the 13th century AD, and it was rendered obsolete by crossbows and 16th century flintlock muskets.
Hello
Until a game causes you to drown when you enter water w/ any armor on it will me a moot point (I am going to go out on a limb here w/o looking on wiki that there was never a specify designed armor pre -18th century created for aquatic warfare). Trying to find realism in most games is a futile, if not sometimes enjoyable pastime.
Rev
11.9.12
i am surprised you are not ashamed in posting a reply to my facts when almost EVERYTHING in your reply is WRONG!
"The French were still using brass helmets during the Napoleonic wars.for no aparent reason,"
ref1 A VERY few calvary wore flamboyant helmets presumably to offer some protection against enemy calvary sabres.
The huge majority of French troops equipped with bi & tricorn hats, cloth Shako or bearskin caps.
"and their promary weapon was still the sword"
ref2 The primary weapon of Napoleonic troops was the .69 cal Musket with afixed bayonet that should fire a round every 20 seconds capable of hitting targets past 80 yards.
"Crossbows didn't make plate armor obsolete. They co-existed for centuries."
The use of crossbows in European warfare is again evident from the Battle of Hastings until about the year 1500. They almost completely superseded hand bows in many European armies in the twelfth century. Longbows and crossbows could pierce plate armour up to ranges of 200 meters.
Can. 29 of the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II in 1139 tried to have banned the use of crossbows against Christians. Mounted knights armed with lances proved ineffective against formations of pikemen combined with crossbowmen whose weapons could penetrate most knights' armor.
Plate armor was becoming passe by the end of the 15th century.
After 1650, plate armour was mostly reduced to the simple breastplate (cuirass) worn by dragoons. This was due to the development of the flintlock musket which could penetrate armour at a considerable distance, severely reducing the payoff from the investment in full plate armour.
ref3 Combat crossbows preceded steel plate armor by 400yrs and xbows were largely replaced by muskets by the 1600s. Steel plate armor was effective for only about 200yrs by the 1700s most troops were in cloth armor.
"If anything it was the mercenary infantries adoption of the pike that doomed the armored knight"
Most of the Napoleonic <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Arm
I really can't see chainmail being more restrictive than full plate armour.
I mean imagine trying to move in these..
Chainmail..
Although the chainmail does look restrictive.
http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Jesus/Jesus.htm