IncredibleBee Member
- Last Seen: 8 yrs ago
- Joined: 12 yrs ago
- Posts: 1347 (0.30 / day)
- VMs: 0
-
Username history
- IncredibleBee 12 yrs ago
Status
User has no status, yet
Bio
User has no bio, yet
Most Recent Posts
Lightish red?
I might make a sheet. Give me some time to figure some things out.
Well it can't be the grim darkness of the 41st millennium all the time, now can it?
It is unlike a bee to give up. We must protect the Queen.
Humans today are only slightly taller and heavier, and that's due to our diet. Humans a few centuries ago would be more trim, with hard, wiry muscle, but still have roughly the same physiology. Any difference is practically negligible; it's a matter of a few inches.
Second, Vietmyke is giving us firsthand knowledge of swimming with notably heavier weights. I think most soldiers carry somewhere over a hundred pounds of gear, and most of that is placed directly on the back. A set of plate weighs roughly fifty, and is evenly distributed around the body. Fifty pounds of metal is lighter than a hundred pounds of anything else. And I just gave you video evidence that a suit of armor maintains full range of motion, so your movements aren't hampered in the slightest.
Also, armor tended to be rounded off and have mostly smooth surfaces. It'd stay relatively hydrodynamic.
Second, Vietmyke is giving us firsthand knowledge of swimming with notably heavier weights. I think most soldiers carry somewhere over a hundred pounds of gear, and most of that is placed directly on the back. A set of plate weighs roughly fifty, and is evenly distributed around the body. Fifty pounds of metal is lighter than a hundred pounds of anything else. And I just gave you video evidence that a suit of armor maintains full range of motion, so your movements aren't hampered in the slightest.
Also, armor tended to be rounded off and have mostly smooth surfaces. It'd stay relatively hydrodynamic.
The Fated Fallen said
This is not an argument either of us will win. You have made your mind up long ago, as have I. Attempt to change either of our minds is futile and I have not the energy nor the will to proceed, I suggest you duck out of this one as well otherwise we'll hate each other to the end of time
An inability to agree does not mean an answer does not exist.
It's only 50 or so pounds. Modern military forces train to swim with heavier weights on their back, instead of being distributed evenly. A man wearing armor can fight with dexterity equal to an unarmored foe.
For reference, this video has a clip showing a man sprinting in an accurate recreation of 15th century plate.
http://youtu.be/NqC_squo6X4?t=34m29s
Immediately afterwards, it shows a short video of two knights fighting on foot with polearms, further demonstrating the speed and mobility available.
For reference, this video has a clip showing a man sprinting in an accurate recreation of 15th century plate.
http://youtu.be/NqC_squo6X4?t=34m29s
Immediately afterwards, it shows a short video of two knights fighting on foot with polearms, further demonstrating the speed and mobility available.
Whoops; disregard that last post. I was thinking of an entirely different game.
As long as we're talking about tech, an 18th century level of firearms technology and production would mean that full plate had been phased out, most swords and pole arms were gone; we'd passed the medieval combat you associate with sword and sorcery by literally centuries.
Most combat was done via rows of riflemen, firing in succession, then taking land by charging with their bayonets. Officers would receive cavalry, and there'd also be teams for cannons.
Also there's no reason to use magic with this level of gun technology. Why would you try and cast a weak fireball that might kill you when you could just shoot a gun that won't kill you?
Why would you bother using magic at all when it would probably kill you if you do anything wizards are normally useful for?
Most combat was done via rows of riflemen, firing in succession, then taking land by charging with their bayonets. Officers would receive cavalry, and there'd also be teams for cannons.
Also there's no reason to use magic with this level of gun technology. Why would you try and cast a weak fireball that might kill you when you could just shoot a gun that won't kill you?
Why would you bother using magic at all when it would probably kill you if you do anything wizards are normally useful for?
The Fated Fallen said
This is clearly not an argument either of us are going to win...
That's because it's already been won by history.
Also, phoenix, a single rifle shot wouldn't completely crush the armor. If it didn't penetrate, it would only leave a dent to some degree. It might crack a rib.
© 2007-2026