861 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir JK]

crimzontearz wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

By the way, I've never seen a pirate fighting in a suit of armor, leather or otherwise.

pirates (the kinda pirate you are thinking of) came to be after the introduction of gunpowder in europe....armor was obsolete by then..also pirate did not have enough money to ownj or maintain one

The pirate era of the carribean was from the early 16th to the mid 17th century. Which is to say the heyday of the full plate harness. This is the era of the 30 year war, the cuirassiers (dressed from top to toe in articulated plate), the Polish Hussars and riding into battle with pistols in hand. Portraits of generals and kings of the era feature them in their full black armours. It is from this era the word bullet proof comes from. Smih had to present a proof that the armours they made had survived a point blank shot by a pistol by showing the dent or the lodged bullet (hence Bullet proof)

Plate and pirates were contemtory. The only reason pirates didn't wear them is because you can't swim in them.

Modifié par Sir JK, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:35 .

[Archereon]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

By the way, I've never seen a pirate fighting in a suit of armor, leather or otherwise.

pirates (the kinda pirate you are thinking of) came to be after the introduction of gunpowder in europe....armor was obsolete by then..also pirate did not have enough money to ownj or maintain one

The kind of pirate I am thinking of uses a rapier or cutlass in battle.

Otaya: Well, that's not entirely true, gunpowder weapons and "knights in armor" coexisted for quite a while, guns only began to emerge as supreme in the 1500s when they became accurate, powerful and reliable enough to trump armored knights.

[Lenimph]

Thorn18 wrote...

It was neat putting Alister in the King's old armor, or giving Oghren the Meteor sword. Now I feel like i'm just upping some numbers.

This... finding armors and weapons that had a back story and placing them on the characters that seemed fitting was very satisfying.

Like buying the bard's shoes and putting them on Leliana
Or placing the nug crusher in Oghren's hands....

*sigh* Whatever... 

Modifié par Lenimph, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:35 .

[crimzontearz]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

By the way, I've never seen a pirate fighting in a suit of armor, leather or otherwise.

pirates (the kinda pirate you are thinking of) came to be after the introduction of gunpowder in europe....armor was obsolete by then..also pirate did not have enough money to ownj or maintain one

The kind of pirate I am thinking of uses a rapier or cutlass in battle.

gopod then

that kind of pirate came to be AFTER gunpowder was introduced....armor at that point was rather obsolete.....

even if gunpowder did not exist armor is VERY expensive to aquire AND to maintain in working order, pirates did not have that much money

point is, neither of this applies to isabela because A: there are no handguns in DA only cannons from the Qunari and B: once paired with Hawke (or any average RPG here) she will have a LOT of money to actually get and maintain her armor....even if it's just studded leather

[Ortaya Alevli]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

By the way, I've never seen a pirate fighting in a suit of armor, leather or otherwise.

Something to do with life at sea I feel. Not so much the you'd-sink-like-a-rock effect, beause apparently many sailors couldn't actually swim (thanks history pedants!), but pre industrial sailing boats were some of the most cramped living conditions in the history of man.

I can understand that. Point being, it's not the end of the world if companions didn't wear armor in a fight while Hawke did.

[Ziggeh]

Archereon wrote...

For example, when you get out of bed, you assume several things, including that

1. Nobody is hiding under your bed waiting for you to get out so they can kill you.
2. The floor is solid and won't give way when you stand on it.

These are reasonable assumptions based on known factors and information. Your assumptions were based on nothing of the sort.

[crimzontearz]

Archereon wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

By the way, I've never seen a pirate fighting in a suit of armor, leather or otherwise.

pirates (the kinda pirate you are thinking of) came to be after the introduction of gunpowder in europe....armor was obsolete by then..also pirate did not have enough money to ownj or maintain one

The kind of pirate I am thinking of uses a rapier or cutlass in battle.

Otaya: Well, that's not entirely true, gunpowder weapons and "knights in armor" coexisted for quite a while, guns only began to emerge as supreme in the 1500s when they became accurate, powerful and reliable enough to trump armored knights.

they attempted that in "the deadlies warrior"

a flintlock pistol does not penetrate a breasplate.......yet....the "shotgun" they had whatever it's called renders even full plate armors useless

[Archereon]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Archereon wrote...

For example, when you get out of bed, you assume several things, including that

1. Nobody is hiding under your bed waiting for you to get out so they can kill you.
2. The floor is solid and won't give way when you stand on it.

These are reasonable assumptions based on known factors and information. Your assumptions were based on nothing of the sort.

So you say.  I say that they are extrapolations on current data.  Theories, which will eventually be tested.

So should all theories be forbidden from moving forward (making assumptions that hinge on an unproven theory being true) until they are validated?

Modifié par Archereon, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:39 .

[Maria Caliban]

Sir JK wrote...

Plate and pirates were contemtory. The only reason pirates didn't wear them is because you can't swim in them.

That and, I assume, the price. The average sailor couldn't afford full plate armor.

[SgtElias]

I don't necessarily agree with your post, but I can say definitively that, in answer to your question, "Why is everyone so happy about the new inventory system?" that not everyone is happy about the new inventory system, not by a long shot. While listening to the podcast, the very first thing I thought after "ooh, pictures!" was "Oh man, the forums are going to be ablaze with the backlash on this one."

Inventory is not, and has never been, important to me, personally; I am perhaps in the minority here when I say that I never really cared that Mass Effect 2 practically did away with it. But I understand that to others, it is important. I just don't think there's anything to be done about it.

Sorry. 

[Helena Tylena]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Plate and pirates were contemtory. The only reason pirates didn't wear them is because you can't swim in them.

That and, I assume, the price. The average sailor couldn't afford full plate armor.

Also, wearing full plate is damn annoying when working as crew on a ship. I don't care it's possible. It's not practical.

[upsettingshorts]

Helena Tylena wrote...
Also, wearing full plate is damn annoying when working as crew on a ship. I don't care it's possible. It's not practical.

If they had it, they could always strap on a breastplate prior to boarding.  And if they had them, they did just that.  Pirates were nothing if not practical. 

[Archereon]

filaminstrel wrote...

You can upgrade their armor both in its materials and with rune slots, and saying the companions will be useless in combat is just speculation. I tended to severely under-equip my companions in DAO (compared to my character) and they were not useless. Companions are not useless in other RPGs where you have lower levels of customization. And if the devs, through playtesting, find a certain companion to be useless, it's actually easier for them to ameliorate this than previously by just upping the stats of the companion's base armor, or making their unique talents more useful.

I do hope rune slots are better this time around.  I hated their function in DA:A.

[Sir JK]

Maria Caliban wrote...
That and, I assume, the price. The average sailor couldn't afford full plate armor.

By the 17th century plate harnesses were being mass produced. They had really started to become really cheap as a result of the development of cannon metalurgy. It reached to point were every soldier was outfitted with a sword and a cuirass and a helmet, every cavalryman with a full suit.
Armour was really cheap at that point. There were even bandits in poor parts of europe wearing plate when they were out marauding.

EDIT: There were plenty of stories about soldiers looting the clothes of fallen enemies but not the armour. Because the clothes were way more expensive.

Except of course... in the carribean.

Modifié par Sir JK, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:45 .

[Aermas]

*stands on soapbox

Most pirates & sailors could not swim, properly crafted armor of any kind will not hinder or fatigue anyone overmuch, leather armor was boiled & had the hardness of hardwood. & Most important sailors wore a breastplate of "proved plate" which is a term used to identify armor that could withstand a pistol shot form close range

*steps of soapbox

I kind of hope loot will be dealt with like it is in FF12 (God smite the rest of Final Fantasy), it was intuitive & easy to use.

Modifié par Aermas, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:47 .

[Ziggeh]

Archereon wrote...

So you say.  I say that they are extrapolations on current data.  Theories, which will eventually be tested.

So should all theories be forbidden from moving forward (making assumptions that hinge on an unproven theory being true) until they are validated?

Leaving aside that they are at best, bias "extrapolations", I certainly think that condemning something based on theories is incredibly thin ground and frankly a little ludicrous.

There's a difference between "it would be bad if" and "it will be like this so it is bad".

[Ortaya Alevli]

Crimzon; in 21st century, we have gunfighters who wear or don't wear protection. In military, in law enforcement, in anywhere else you can think of. Armor being helpful or available doesn't necessarily mean everyone has to wear an armor suit. So Isabela prances into battle in classic pirate outfit. Do you really consider this a dealbreaker? It's not a financial matter; it's a matter of preference. I can afford an Xbox and experience Origins on a console, but I don't feel like doing so.



Archereon; I know about the early presence of firearms, but their use when you board a ship was limited. It quickly boiled down to close-quarters combat.

[Ziggeh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Pirates were nothing if not practical.

I don't know, burying treasue seems to display a terrible grasp of economics.

[Archereon]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Archereon wrote...

So you say.  I say that they are extrapolations on current data.  Theories, which will eventually be tested.

So should all theories be forbidden from moving forward (making assumptions that hinge on an unproven theory being true) until they are validated?

Leaving aside that they are at best, bias "extrapolations", I certainly think that condemning something based on theories is incredibly thin ground and frankly a little ludicrous.

There's a difference between "it would be bad if" and "it will be like this so it is bad".

I tend to assume the worst as I hope for the best in times like these.  Until I am disproved, I base my opinions on a game on my fears, not my hopes, as to not be disappointed.  Yes, I am a cynic, but I am rarely disappointed with products because of my attitude.

[upsettingshorts]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Pirates were nothing if not practical.

I don't know, burying treasue seems to display a terrible grasp of economics.

Real pirates.  They didn't think that far ahead though.  Most just spend their winnings in scummy ports. Some actually saved up enough to retire - some of those burrying the treasure, because hey what bank is going to hold on to their money for them.  Others were bought off by local governors and retired then.

The vast majority of pirates though probably ended up on the end of a rope.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:52 .

[crimzontearz]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Crimzon; in 21st century, we have gunfighters who wear or don't wear protection. In military, in law enforcement, in anywhere else you can think of. Armor being helpful or available doesn't necessarily mean everyone has to wear an armor suit. So Isabela prances into battle in classic pirate outfit. Do you really consider this a dealbreaker? It's not a financial matter; it's a matter of preference. I can afford an Xbox and experience Origins on a console, but I don't feel like doing so.

Archereon; I know about the early presence of firearms, but their use when you board a ship was limited. It quickly boiled down to close-quarters combat.

is it a deal breaker....no, I played Mass Effect 2 where Miranda wears a bdsm catsuit the whole time and Jack wears a nipple harness so...yeah it's not a deal breaker it is just ridiculous

oh...and go tell a Marine in Afhganistan he does not have to wear his vest...go...I dare you

[Sir JK]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
Real pirates.  They didn't think that far ahead though.  Most just spend their winnings in scummy ports. Some actually saved up enough to retire - some of those burrying the treasure, because hey what bank is going to hold on to their money for them.  Others were bought off by local governors and retired then.

The vast majority of pirates though probably ended up on the end of a rope.

Yeah, the only pirate in history that has buried treasure was Jack Rackham (once) and that was just to hide it from inspection. Most pirates just spent it in ports.

And as you said, the most successful ones saved their for retirement. Of course... the only real successful pirates to retire was Sir Francis Drake, Sir Henry Morgan, Sir Walter Raleigh and Hayreddin Barbarossa.

[Ziggeh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Real pirates.  They didn't think that far ahead though.  Most just spend their winnings in scummy ports. Some actually saved up enough to retire - some of those burrying the treasure, because hey what bank is going to hold on to their money for them.  Others were bought off by local governors and retired then.

The vast majority of pirates though probably ended up on the end of a rope.

I read somewhere that far from being dictatorial, pirates were among the first groups to embrace democracy, actually voting for those in positions of authority.

"Ar. I be standin' on a platform of killin' those who ain't us and takin' their things."

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 08 novembre 2010 - 04:02 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

crimzontearz wrote...

is it a deal breaker....no, I played Mass Effect 2 where Miranda wears a bdsm catsuit the whole time and Jack wears a nipple harness so...yeah it's not a deal breaker it is just ridiculous

oh...and go tell a Marine in Afhganistan he does not have to wear his vest...go...I dare you

Miranda and Jack aren't military. And I'm not discussing decency here.

I've fought people using AK-47s for months. Without a vest. It's not outside common practice.