Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
guest_
· 6 years ago
· FIRST
While many types and designs of “plate armor” existed- generally speaking they weren’t as bad as one might imagine on mobility. Some tasks would be more difficult as certain joints could be limited in range of motion- especially at the extremes of the range; and they did add some bulk. Most steel plate armor weighed well under 100lbs, few being more than half that, and wouldn’t be any more cumbersome than say- going from 150 to 200lbs of body weight. One must consider though that plate evolved through the ages to suit the battles of the time. Bulky padded garments were often worn beneath to help protect the wearer from impacts and weapons. Not seen in the video is the helmet, which depending on design could reduce visibility greatly. All in all plate armor wasn’t really that bad. It was expensive, required maintenance, and was made obsolete by to a degree by evolving weapons but more so changing tactics of the battle field and other reasons- not because it was ineffective.
21
deleted
· 6 years ago
Wasn’t it mainly done away with because cannons and guns tore right through it?
7
morebacon
· 6 years ago
This kind of in depth explanation of stuff is why I fucking love this place
9
Show All
scatmandingo
· 6 years ago
I think crossbows were the first really effective weapon against plate.
3
guest_
· 6 years ago
@yimmye- guns can damage plate, but fun facts- Well made plate can even stand up to many modern small arms. Armoreres of the day did create bullet resistant armors as well. In fact- bows and arrows actually compare as well or better in penetration to even modern guns. However the kinetic energy of a hit still can injure or kill the wearer, even with padding. The armor would also be damaged, and not likely to stop many more direct hits. The battle field changed towards ever more mobile and spontaneous combat, over longer ranges. Weapons like guns could be made cheap and fast to a spec, and required less skill and less skilled workers to build and maintain. Cutting down on specialists and special tools required for “old” warfare included armorers and their trade. Full plate was always very expensive, not practical for mass deployment. In most mass battles it just stopped being worth it to use.
5
guest_
· 6 years ago
@scatmandigo- sort of. Cross bows can have an incredible force for their size, are compact, but most important were far simpler to use than a long bow. Like guns they require less skill, especially close up, and so could be deployed readily and used effectively by less elite troops. The effective increase in numbers of a capable army is invaluable. A hoard of even unarmed people, if sufficient size, will take out a small band of well trained and equipped soldiers in full armor.
4
companion
· 6 years ago
Dark Souls is gonna be even more fun now that I know it's realistic, other than the dragons, undead, magic, giant birds, giant wolves... Okay fine it's not very realistic, shut up
6
kamatsu
· 6 years ago
The ease of death, at least, is completely realistic.
3
