934 réponses à ce sujet

[Piecake]

Aermas wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Aermas wrote...

I generalize so that people won't debate one aspect to the point of oblivion.

All the other info I can give proof of, as for the samurai info I cannot say I'm 100% accurate (as I'm heavily bias towards European styles) & I don't care to investigate.

You should change that tactic because that is a horrible way to debate, especially when you are debating history.  Specifics are key.  So, saying that, I can pretty much guarantee that you are wrong, since ts always a mistake to generalize a vast group of people, especially over a significant period of time. 

And I would say that, in general, China had the most advaned metallurgy technology. 

Well to be fair I began debating about armor, which does need a lot of generalization because of the uniqueness of the craft. I offered to give proof to that, & admitted I have a limited knowledge of Asian armor. I didn't think it would be a big deal, if you want me to I can be much more literal.

Well, I can tell you that Japanese armor is not mostly made of wood, and there are a ton of different styles of swords.  As for tactics, well im sure one style focus's on one hit kills, but there are a lot of different styles.

I probably should say something on topic right now, so I shall.  I really dont care whether DA2's armor is realistic or not as it looks good.  And no, I did not think DAO's armor looked good.  The leather especially looked horribly boring and generic.

[Matchy Pointy]

Piecake wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Johnny Chaos wrote...

i want some some ****ing samuri armor................................. yea boyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Samurai Armor is crap, it's mostly made of wood & the stylization leaves you vulnerable in battle. Plus ascetically it's dumb:whistle:

I find that hard to believe, especially since Japan's metalurgy technology was more advanced than medieval Europe's. 

The only reason that had such metalurgy is becasue they had crap quality iron in Japan, so they needed to fold it and work with it to be ablt to use it for sevicable weapons, something medieval europe didn't need because of the abundance of iron. Despite what people believe, Katana's isnt the best sword out there sans non, it's an awesome blade, but not the sword to end all swords (sorry for going a bit off topc, this is just a pet subject of mine).

[Lotion Soronarr]

GodWood wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
They don't want warriors dual-wielding because they think it would look silly to have then flipping about, and yet somehow fighting without armour doesn't look silly?

This is an excellent point.

IMHO, fliping about in combat AT ALL is silly. Rouges and Warriors having different animations is a wrong decission imho.

[Matchy Pointy]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
They don't want warriors dual-wielding because they think it would look silly to have then flipping about, and yet somehow fighting without armour doesn't look silly?

This is an excellent point.

IMHO, fliping about in combat AT ALL is silly. Rouges and Warriors having different animations is a wrong decission imho.

Flipping is a bit silly, agreed, tough done right it can be kinda fun (in a funny way). Rolling on the other hand is pretty darn common in battle, and something a person don't do with a lot of plate armor on.

[Sir JK]

Well the spanish Rodelero (sword and buckler men) who specialised in rolling under pikes (and then stab the pikeman) where known to wear anything from no armour to full plate harnesses into battle. So rolling with plate is definantely an valid tactic.

[Matchy Pointy]

Well, the spanish had wuite technologicly advanced platearmour, so yes, with that type it's most certainly possible, I would like to see people do it in armour like the massive ones in DA though, and was what I meant, I apologize for not being more clear about that.

[Piecake]

Matchy Pointy wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Johnny Chaos wrote...

i want some some ****ing samuri armor................................. yea boyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Samurai Armor is crap, it's mostly made of wood & the stylization leaves you vulnerable in battle. Plus ascetically it's dumb:whistle:

I find that hard to believe, especially since Japan's metalurgy technology was more advanced than medieval Europe's. 

The only reason that had such metalurgy is becasue they had crap quality iron in Japan, so they needed to fold it and work with it to be ablt to use it for sevicable weapons, something medieval europe didn't need because of the abundance of iron. Despite what people believe, Katana's isnt the best sword out there sans non, it's an awesome blade, but not the sword to end all swords (sorry for going a bit off topc, this is just a pet subject of mine).

Never meant to imply anything like that.  Heck, the only reason why they had such technology was the diffusion of those processes from China to Japan.

[Matchy Pointy]

Piecake wrote...

Matchy Pointy wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Johnny Chaos wrote...

i want some some ****ing samuri armor................................. yea boyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Samurai Armor is crap, it's mostly made of wood & the stylization leaves you vulnerable in battle. Plus ascetically it's dumb:whistle:

I find that hard to believe, especially since Japan's metalurgy technology was more advanced than medieval Europe's. 

The only reason that had such metalurgy is becasue they had crap quality iron in Japan, so they needed to fold it and work with it to be ablt to use it for sevicable weapons, something medieval europe didn't need because of the abundance of iron. Despite what people believe, Katana's isnt the best sword out there sans non, it's an awesome blade, but not the sword to end all swords (sorry for going a bit off topc, this is just a pet subject of mine).

Never meant to imply anything like that.  Heck, the only reason why they had such technology was the diffusion of those processes from China to Japan.

Don't worry, as I said, it's a pet peeve of mine, the opinion about the Katanas as the best sword in the world

[Matchy Pointy]

BrotherWarth wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Atakuma wrote...
Exactly. I just dont understand all this selective realism.

Because it makes some people feel better to denounce something they don't like as being objectively unrealistic than to simply say that it's beyond the realm of what they personally are willing to accept in a game.

That's a cop out. In all fantastical settings like DA and the like there is a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that's just a given. Yes, monsters are not real. Yes, trees don't come alive. Yes, people can't turn into shadows. But there is a point where you must make things believable in the context of the world. A sword-and-shield warrior wearing an apron and pants into every battle is not believable. Saying "Well you bought dragons and orcs, why not a woman fighting armed, armored men with no pants or armor on?" is ridiculous in and of itself.

Why not make the men wear no armor as well then, that should resolve that problem for you. And for the pants, well, plenty of people live and lived their lives without putting on a pair, so I don't see the problem people have with that.

[Matchy Pointy]

BrotherWarth wrote...

Matchy Pointy wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Atakuma wrote...
Exactly. I just dont understand all this selective realism.

Because it makes some people feel better to denounce something they don't like as being objectively unrealistic than to simply say that it's beyond the realm of what they personally are willing to accept in a game.

That's a cop out. In all fantastical settings like DA and the like there is a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that's just a given. Yes, monsters are not real. Yes, trees don't come alive. Yes, people can't turn into shadows. But there is a point where you must make things believable in the context of the world. A sword-and-shield warrior wearing an apron and pants into every battle is not believable. Saying "Well you bought dragons and orcs, why not a woman fighting armed, armored men with no pants or armor on?" is ridiculous in and of itself.

Why not make the men wear no armor as well then, that should resolve that problem for you. And for the pants, well, plenty of people live and lived their lives without putting on a pair, so I don't see the problem people have with that.

I can't tell if this is a joke or not.

Well, the giving men no armor was partly a joke, the pants thing is not however.

[Matchy Pointy]

There are plenty of examples of people going into battle with no armour on, for many reasons, and I'm not saying it's the most effective way. You can however have plenty effective armor without any pants, just ask the Roman Legion.

[Wulfram]

In DA3, we'll be fighting the darkspawn using flowers and love poetry, wearing pretty dresses.

Who needs realism, after all?

[Matchy Pointy]

Wulfram wrote...

In DA3, we'll be fighting the darkspawn using flowers and love poetry, wearing pretty dresses.
Who needs realism, after all?

Who knows, maybe all the darkspawn have allergy to flowers, and no one have realized it yet.

[Piecake]

Wulfram wrote...

In DA3, we'll be fighting the darkspawn using flowers and love poetry, wearing pretty dresses.
Who needs realism, after all?

We already do though, Bard's songs.

Oh snap!

Modifié par Piecake, 30 novembre 2010 - 02:28 .

[Ziggeh]

Matchy Pointy wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

In DA3, we'll be fighting the darkspawn using flowers and love poetry, wearing pretty dresses.
Who needs realism, after all?

Who knows, maybe all the darkspawn have allergy to flowers, and no one have realized it yet.

Maybe they just wait 400 years for the pollen count to go down.

[upsettingshorts]

What if one of your companions is Poison Ivy?

[Sir JK]

BrotherWarth wrote...
That's a cop out. In all fantastical settings like DA and the like there is a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that's just a given. Yes, monsters are not real. Yes, trees don't come alive. Yes, people can't turn into shadows. But there is a point where you must make things believable in the context of the world. A sword-and-shield warrior wearing an apron and pants into every battle is not believable. Saying "Well you bought dragons and orcs, why not a woman fighting armed, armored men with no pants or armor on?" is ridiculous in and of itself.

This was what I wanted to comment on Gaider's post too at first... but then I read his statement again.

He's actually right.

Most of us aren't so much clamouring for what is actually realistic as for what our individual preferences are.

Fighting with or without proper armour is both equally realistic really. But people don't want to see tanks (which is a unrealistic concept in itself) in anything less than a fully covering plate harness (the face might maybe be excused). So they don't really care wether there actually are any realism in wearing that kind of armour as much as they don't want to see a unarmoured or lightly armoured tank. It's not a demand for more realism... but a demand for the art of that companions current outfit to appeal to them. Using the word realism to justify it (because if it's realistic then it's something that should be strived for).

That's how I interpreted it after a reflection.

[Piecake]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

What if one of your companions is Poison Ivy?

then I would hope she is one of your love interests

[David Gaider]

BrotherWarth wrote...
That's a cop out. In all fantastical settings like DA and the like there is a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that's just a given. Yes, monsters are not real. Yes, trees don't come alive. Yes, people can't turn into shadows. But there is a point where you must make things believable in the context of the world. A sword-and-shield warrior wearing an apron and pants into every battle is not believable. Saying "Well you bought dragons and orcs, why not a woman fighting armed, armored men with no pants or armor on?" is ridiculous in and of itself.

But that "certain amount of suspension of disbelief" varies according to one's personal preferences, and don't pretend that there's some set bar even across fantastical settings -- that's not so. There's nothing wrong with saying there are some things you prefer and/or are used to, but trying to claim that something that's just a convention in some fantastical settings as more realistic than other conventions is silly-- we also have people taking multiple hits from massive weapons and walking away after combat, which is downright unrealistic even ignoring the many other arbitrary yet accepted standards that people are willing to accept in a game world.

And that "sword-and-shield warrior" doesn't wear an apron and pants into every battle. We've already said she gets armour, and she does so fairly quickly. Not that I'd care if she didn't, so long as the convention was consistent within the game, but evidently you do.

[Maria Caliban]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

What if one of your companions is Poison Ivy?

Then you'll be dead within a few months anyway.

David Gaider wrote...

And that "sword-and-shield warrior" doesn't wear an apron and pants into every battle. We've already said she gets armour, and she does so fairly quickly. Not that I'd care if she didn't, so long as the convention was consistent within the game, but evidently you do.

One hopes it doesn't cover her arms.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 30 novembre 2010 - 04:12 .

[Wulfram]

Is the convention that rogues don't need armour consistent in the game?

Or in other words, is the PC not wearing armour a reasonable option?

[Nerevar-as]

It wouldn´t be that bad if this had started on Origins. It didn´t, and no matter how much BW seem to make less of that game (at least I´m getting that impression), the setting is established with warriors using armors. So at least for some of us watching the new characters going into battle "dressed" as Isabella is cringe worthy. Not to mention Qunari charging in war paint chest armor. Is it magical, or qunari close combat strategy is Zergling rush?