513 réponses à ce sujet

[Boycott Bioware]

A magical plate armor, it will bend as according to your body posture....It look like the armor is made of rubber....by the way, why must she always stand like a model?

[Squire]

...I do think a certain sense of believability is essential though for a game like DA where people are expected to take its darker more adult themes a bit more seriously.

QFT!

...(flexible armour)...

Yeah, this was pretty much the case with just about every fantasy RPG so far...breastplates would flex and bend with the wearer, as if they were made of neopreme!

I put it down to animation limitations, and I've had to learn to live with it (it was possible during the game itself but much harder in cut scenes, when you're right up close to one of these flexi-cuirasses). I suspect that this may still be the case, unfortunately.

[Vilegrim]

Wulfram wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

except that having breasts on a breastplate is a dangerous flaw, you can make the breast plate  'teailored', to give more room, but a channel like that, to guide a thrust at a weak point right over the heart? Yea, bad idea.

While that's true, I'll still take boob plate over chainmail bikini any day.  At least boob plate requires a bit of knowledge and/or thought to realise it's not a good idea.

True, it isn't anywhere near as bad, and sillier features have turned up on real armour (especially festival or public appearance armours, some of those have masks and glasses on the visor) .

[bEVEsthda]

Well, the way I see it, the recent video of gameplay gives a good idea of where they've gone with art direction. And my perception is that they've more like stuck with DA2, than gone back to DA:O, but hopefully minded some details and moderated excesses as they've evolved it. To me, that's unfortunate but just something I'm going to resign myself to. It's water under the bridge. If I had liked DA2 I wouldn't ever have complained about the art direction anyway. That's the key, an  overall likable game, even if filled with imperfections.

The *bad* decisions (opinion) are drowned in an avalanche of truly exciting (and daring) decisions. It kinda looks like an experimental  first step towards the development of the ultimate, dream cRPG, a Bioware story in a Bethesda style world. As such, though difficult project, it's going to be a milestone and an all time classic. I sure as hell won't be anal retentive about the details of arms and armor in regards of that experience. One must also remember that a certain degree of connection to the old DA games, should also be present.

While it's interesting to discuss arms and armor, that's my ultimate position on the subject.

(but not my last words, ofc)

[Deflagratio]

From what I've seen on the PAX footage, the weapons are a bit more believable, though by no means realistic. So far it looks much better than DA:O or DA2, which had borderline Fable ridiculousness with its weapon designs.

Seriously, Daggers the size of broadswords? wut


I personally like things to be in that middle ground. Just go give an example though the beautiful art of arbitrary numbers, on a 1 to 10 a 1 is Most realistic and and a 10 is wildly unrealistic.

WoW and most Final Fantasy games sit at 10. Comfortably.
Fable/Dragon Age Origins/2 sits at about a 7.5
Skyrim is squatting at about a 6.5
Oblivion a 5.
Morrowind a 3.5 with occasional WTF weapons like the Daedric Crescent.
Mount&Blade Warband would be a 1. That game is meticulously designed to be as realistic as is possible while still being engaging and fun.

I prefer my weapons to be at about a 4-5 in terms of silly. Enough artistic freedom to make things look immediately distinguishable from other items, but not so much that it feels like overdesign and embellishment is a requirement for everything.

Armor is a bit different. I prefer a bit more stylized approach, realistic armor is usually ridiculously unattractive. Dark Souls has hit a perfect balance between style and believability in its armor designs.

Modifié par Deflagratio, 08 octobre 2013 - 06:38 .

[Boycott Bioware]

These are cool...from Deviant Art...it is fantasy, exaggerated but simple and realistic...it doesn't need to be bulky, spiky, bizarre looking...but simple and artistic

[Mox Ruuga]

 I'm hoping for somewhat toned down approach from DA2.

The main competitors of DA seem to have better looking stuff in this case... Though the Daedric Armor and weapons of the Elder Scrolls series is slightly OTT looking in my opinion. But Skyrim had armor and weapons made from Dragon bone and scales that actually looked the part, unlike the recolors of DA:O. And Hayder's Razor remains the most ridic thing I've seen in a while. I almost never use that thing, it is so hideous looking.

[giveamanafish...]

1) Possibly inappropriate image (KIng Henry VII armor codpiece)::
http://www.google.ca...ved=0CD8Q9QEwAw
Keep in mind that Henry VIII was one self-indulgent a-hole. But still, i feel that my characters in DAI should be allowed to wear such a thing, probably should be bigger.

2) Breast plates on a women wearing armour may act to deflect blows and arrows. << or >> The channel where there would normally be cleavage could be reinforced with an additional thickness of plate or with chain-mail backing,.

3) Just to be nit picky. There isn't enough throat protection on the armor shown on the images posted by Quistina. The bottom picture the guy is carrying a shield, if that's supposed to be an one-handed sword, it's awful big. Here's some images of actual armor used , in one case by Richard the III: http://whiterosewrit...mitage-fan.html

4) I think spiked armor knees on a rogue would be just dandy. Perfect for upclose and personal situations.

5) 4 reminds me: Shouldn't we also be talking about realism in violence as much as in armor and weaponry. Most attacks with a sword or arrow which leaves the victim unable to fight won't necessarily kill them outright, and your fighters aren't going to have time to deal a mercy killing. Lots of blood, severed arms, legs, stomach contents, brains, heads rolling around. Constant screams of pain and cries for mercy.

[Boycott Bioware]

Actually, heavy plate armors wearer no need wielding a shield, because they already have enough protection. The ones who need to wear a shield are the one who wear light armors, because protection come from the shield, their armor is just a back up

It is a misconception that two handed weapon warrior must use light armor and shield warrior use full plate armor, actually it is in reverse, two handed weapon warrior must use full plate and shield warriors use light armor

Because the idea of TANK in game world, it made that shield warrior wear full plate armor.

Look at pikemen, Swiss guard, Samurai, Naginata warrior, Zweihander and many more, they use heaviest armor possible because they wear no shield...the ones who use shield wear light armor such as chain mail

[Cainhurst Crow]

You can never have enough protection. More is always better than less.

And there is no dicotomy, you wore what you could afford. If it was full plate, you wore full plate. If it was half plate, you wore half plate. If it was leather, you wore leather. I don't think I've ever seen or heard of any case of a person who wasn't suffering from deluded arrogance say  "You know what, I won't be wearing the best armor I can afford into battle. Because I already own a shield."

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 08 octobre 2013 - 05:54 .

[giveamanafish...]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

 I'm hoping for somewhat toned down approach from DA2.

The main competitors of DA seem to have better looking stuff in this case... Though the Daedric Armor and weapons of the Elder Scrolls series is slightly OTT looking in my opinion. But Skyrim had armor and weapons made from Dragon bone and scales that actually looked the part, unlike the recolors of DA:O. And Hayder's Razor remains the most ridic thing I've seen in a while. I almost never use that thing, it is so hideous looking.

Skyrim also had "iron armor" and swords, known in the real world as something which is impossible. Iron in metalalurgy is either very low or very high in carbon content (cast iron), and thus is either too soft or too brittle to be used as a weapon or in armor.  It can be used for these purposes iIf treated by hammer forging, tempering and other means, but this means it has been transformed into steel. Take a look in your tool-box, no iron tools, some things look irony like cold chisels or some of the parts of pipe flaring tools and the like, but these are more likely to be some form of steel.

Modifié par ismoketoomuch, 08 octobre 2013 - 06:01 .

[Boycott Bioware]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
You can never have enough protection. More is always better than less.

And there is no dicotomy, you wore what you could afford. If it was full plate, you wore full plate. If it was half plate, you wore half plate. If it was leather, you wore leather. I don't think I've ever seen or heard of any case of a person who wasn't suffering from deluded arrogance say "You know what, I won't be wearing the best armor I can afford into battle. Because I already own a shield."

Look at Roman armor, they don't even wear pants, it is because they have a very big shield

Armor designers don't just make armors, but they also study the science of combat, even though Roman legionnaire armor don't cover most part, it is because it is a no need. They have big shields, they fight as a unit, the way they fight is systematic. They focus on thrusting because thrusting is faster than swinging, and swinging open your armpit

Why European swords are pointed end? Because of thrusting, everyone wear plate mail that cover most part, but certain part is still weak, the pointed end of the sword is used to thrust on that part...so when two warriors fighting with two handed weapon, they don't swing a lot, but thrusting and penetrating each other

But shield warrior who have shield will hide behind the shield and only attack if the enemy weakness is opened, borrowing Roman legionnaire style they will thrust their sword instead of swinging. Those you see in the movies are faked combat, European soldiers are excellent in thrusting and penetration.

Later in Renaissance era, the rapier is an advance form of weapon of thrusting and penetration, why need big sword to do the job? Size doesn't matter

DA2 shield skill is wrong, thrusting should deal more damage than swinging

Modifié par Qistina, 08 octobre 2013 - 06:18 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

You are so far off course with your assessment, that your going into straight up ancient aliens level of retarded ridiculousness.

Okay, first off, do you have any idea how hard it was to get metals needed for armor back in the time of the roman empire? Any idea at all? It was very hard, since most mining techniques hadn't been invented to properly gather said materials. Than there is the traditional and cultural element to their armor. People who were either mostly naked or wore robes as their primary clothing weren't likely to invent armored pants anytime soon. A armored skirt or studded one was likely all you'd find.

A people using sheilds have nothing to do with the amount of armor they wore, as is exemplified throughout the dark ages as knights, who come from cultures who do practice wearing pants, began to claim the scraps left behind by the ever collapsing roman empire. Armor had to do primarily with the culture to influence design, and resources available to them in making their armor and weapons. Cultures devoid of lots of metals wore less armor, and usually tended to use spears over swords. Cultures with abundances of metal or similar materials wore more armor, and gravitated towards swords and polearms. Arrows or thrown weapons were almost unanimously used because of how little was needed to make them. Swords on the other hand require a lot of labor and material compared to even a spear or other polearm, which only needed to pole it was attached to, and not an entire shaft of metal.

Your nonsense is ridiculous. BTW pointed weapons remained in fashion due to the invention of chain-mail, as stabbing was better to pierce these defenses than slicing or slashing was. But even than, plate armor made much more sense when faced with enemies using arrows than swords, along with, of course, the shield. It was only when knights began to be phased out of combat, along with their heavy armor, with the invention of firearms and a trained malitia, did the rapier begin to find prominence, as did the curved saber. No armor tends to result in weapons that didn't need to carry a lot of kinetic force behind them like the longsword did.

[The Qun & the Damned]

K1LL STREAK wrote...

 

I'll take twelve!

[Deflagratio]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

 I'm hoping for somewhat toned down approach from DA2.

The main competitors of DA seem to have better looking stuff in this case... Though the Daedric Armor and weapons of the Elder Scrolls series is slightly OTT looking in my opinion. But Skyrim had armor and weapons made from Dragon bone and scales that actually looked the part, unlike the recolors of DA:O. And Hayder's Razor remains the most ridic thing I've seen in a while. I almost never use that thing, it is so hideous looking.

Just in defense of Daedric and the occasional OTT design, it's fitting with the origin of the set. All the weapons and armor must be crafted by lesser minions of Oblivion, so they retain a decidedly "Alien" look. Skyrim's smithing skill be damned.

[giveamanafish...]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

You are so far off course with your assessment, that your going into straight up ancient aliens level of retarded ridiculousness.

Okay, first off, do you have any idea how hard it was to get metals needed for armor back in the time of the roman empire? Any idea at all? It was very hard, since most mining techniques hadn't been invented to properly gather said materials. Than there is the traditional and cultural element to their armor. People who were either mostly naked or wore robes as their primary clothing weren't likely to invent armored pants anytime soon. A armored skirt or studded one was likely all you'd find.

A people using sheilds have nothing to do with the amount of armor they wore, as is exemplified throughout the dark ages as knights, who come from cultures who do practice wearing pants, began to claim the scraps left behind by the ever collapsing roman empire. Armor had to do primarily with the culture to influence design, and resources available to them in making their armor and weapons. Cultures devoid of lots of metals wore less armor, and usually tended to use spears over swords. Cultures with abundances of metal or similar materials wore more armor, and gravitated towards swords and polearms. Arrows or thrown weapons were almost unanimously used because of how little was needed to make them. Swords on the other hand require a lot of labor and material compared to even a spear or other polearm, which only needed to pole it was attached to, and not an entire shaft of metal.

Your nonsense is ridiculous. BTW pointed weapons remained in fashion due to the invention of chain-mail, as stabbing was better to pierce these defenses than slicing or slashing was. But even than, plate armor made much more sense when faced with enemies using arrows than swords, along with, of course, the shield. It was only when knights began to be phased out of combat, along with their heavy armor, with the invention of firearms and a trained malitia, did the rapier begin to find prominence, as did the curved saber. No armor tends to result in weapons that didn't need to carry a lot of kinetic force behind them like the longsword did.

I agree with almost all of your points. However, Quistina is probably correct on the point that the European swords was most useful as a thrusting, penetrating weapon against any kind of armour as opposed to be used for slashing. Check out this comparison between a Katana and a European longsword:
 
6:14 on for a comparison of use against plate armor. Although the katana, with its layered composition, curved form and differential tempering is a superior weapon in all regards, the longsword is not able to penetrate the armor except via thrusting.

Thrusting penetrating.

Modifié par ismoketoomuch, 08 octobre 2013 - 07:06 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

You neglect to account for something the longsword was capable of doing, which was carrying more kinetic force with it's blows. It's designed not just with cutting or thrusting in mind, but more as a multi-purpose weapon.

I will grant you however that european swords were designed with thrusting in mind. But it's important to understand that swords were, essentially, extended versions of spears heads when they started out. They may have changed slightly as time went on and were prescribed other meanings by cultures who adopted them, but their origin point remains based off the spear, which was itself a piercing weapon.

[giveamanafish...]

Now I wonder if, during the Medieaval period, the European long-sword's primary purpose was not for use in combat against other armored knights but as a weapon to be used to control the lower classes, peasants and such.

I think I read that the poleax and halberd were superior in some ways to swords against armor , and were certainly cheaper to produce.... Which brings me to MELEE FIGHTING MAGES, which is what i really want to talk about. (put some metal banding or metal ribs on a mage staff , axe head and spike on the ends). Some ohter time tho. Its late,

[Boycott Bioware]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
Okay, first off, do you have any idea how hard it was to get metals needed for armor back in the time of the roman empire? Any idea at all? It was very hard, since most mining techniques hadn't been invented to properly gather said materials. Than there is the traditional and cultural element to their armor. People who were either mostly naked or wore robes as their primary clothing weren't likely to invent armored pants anytime soon. A armored skirt or studded one was likely all you'd find.

Roman time is the same with Persian time in which exist before Romans, Persian exist long before Leonidas and his 300 men, and Persians wear chain mail for their Cataphract cavalry, not only themselves wear chain mail but also their horses. So metal is hard to come by is moot point. Greeks making very large metal shields even before Roman rise

[Boycott Bioware]

ismoketoomuch wrote...
I think I read that the poleax and halberd were superior in some ways to swords against armor , and were certainly cheaper to produce.... Which brings me to MELEE FIGHTING MAGES, which is what i really want to talk about. (put some metal banding or metal ribs on a mage staff , axe head and spike on the ends).

Polearm, halberd, pikes are use to against cavalry. Since Europeans have started to use cavalry as main force for their armies, to counter it is by using advance version of spear man, there you got pike man

Actually, Europeans are so bad on horses, Romans and Greek weakness is their horse, Europeans don't have good horses. It was in Crusade Era where Europeans learn the significance of mobility from the Arabs, they adopt horse fighting and use it widely. Jousting become popular as sport. So to counter an army that are heavy and strong and having advantage of speed on a horse is by using heavy spear...halberd, pike, and pole arm

Modifié par Qistina, 08 octobre 2013 - 07:40 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

ismoketoomuch wrote...

Now I wonder if, during the Medieaval period, the European long-sword's primary purpose was not for use in combat against other armored knights but as a weapon to be used to control the lower classes, peasants and such.

I think I read that the poleax and halberd were superior in some ways to swords against armor , and were certainly cheaper to produce.... Which brings me to MELEE FIGHTING MAGES, which is what i really want to talk about. (put some metal banding or metal ribs on a mage staff , axe head and spike on the ends). Some ohter time tho. Its late,

Swords weren't the go to weapon against other knights. That would be the pollaxe, or weapons like the crowbill. You need a weapon that's designed to deliver powerful concentrated force at a single point to crush in armor, and cause blunt force trauma. Internal bleeding and broken bones could be just as deadly as a severed limb in those days.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Qistina wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...
Okay, first off, do you have any idea how hard it was to get metals needed for armor back in the time of the roman empire? Any idea at all? It was very hard, since most mining techniques hadn't been invented to properly gather said materials. Than there is the traditional and cultural element to their armor. People who were either mostly naked or wore robes as their primary clothing weren't likely to invent armored pants anytime soon. A armored skirt or studded one was likely all you'd find.

Roman time is the same with Persian time in which exist before Romans, Persian exist long before Leonidas and his 300 men, and Persians wear chain mail for their Cataphract cavalry, not only themselves wear chain mail but also their horses. So metal is hard to come by is moot point. Greeks making very large metal shields even before Roman rise

So persians and romans/greeks are the same thing? You can't seriously be unable to tell the cultural differences apart. I f that's the case, why don't we just bring up the chinese and their weapons and armor while we're at it. 

Not to mention different geographic locations and topography. What started as an abundance of metal for one nations location and a lack of metal for another can cause a difference in style of armor to come about. Even if they get more metal, they'll already have a tradition of what armor looks like, and are not likely to chsnge thst by choice. 

And that's not even getting into how most persian infintry didn't have metal armor, or thst full metal armor was something of a sign of importance and rank, along with a status symbol.

[Boycott Bioware]

As Europeans adopt Arabs fancy fighting styles, Arabs also learn from Europeans. In middle and late medieval, the Arabs start using a very big double axe called "Tabariyya", this axe is specifically designed to whack European heavy plate armor

Middle eastern swords mostly single edged, used for chopping, not effective against European armor. So this double axe is the answer to against European knights and nobles. The axe will hack through armor destroy the armor, not only the victim suffer the blade but also part of his own armor get into his flesh. So if the victim survive the hacking, he will be badly injured even when to pull off the armor.

Far eastern peoples love chopping instead of thrusting, that is why there is chicken chop...lol, anyway, most far eastern peoples never have exposed with outside world, rarely involve in war with outside world, so they develop the chopping technique up to advance style of chopping, like in Kendo, they can chop without rising their hands, chopping but the hands stay

Modifié par Qistina, 08 octobre 2013 - 08:12 .

[Boycott Bioware]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
Not to mention different geographic locations and topography. What started as an abundance of metal for one nations location and a lack of metal for another can cause a difference in style of armor to come about. Even if they get more metal, they'll already have a tradition of what armor looks like, and are not likely to chsnge thst by choice.

The answer is trade....metals come by through trades, other than conquest. Traditions come from experience. Armor makers not only make armor by thinking "this should be put here, this should be put there", but war experience of that people. They study the science of combat, not like Bioware designers design armors...

[Deflagratio]

There's a reason why the common European sword was double edged to a tapered point. That was to combat armor.

Typically though, a full suit of plate armor was something extraordinarily rare, at worst, most fighters encountered Chainmail, which succumbed to the typical longsword or broadsword with enough force behind a thrust. More often the armies weren't even lucky enough to be equipped that well.

When armored, even lightly, wounds themselves weren't particularly fatal, at least not by today's standards. The real killer was the complete lack of competence when it came to wound treatment. Even a minor wound had a high chance to become infected and cause the blood to go septic, and that's if you survived the blood loss.

Often the victor in a skirmish would go around and slay any wounded that remained, either out of mercy or a desire to loot with impunity, so that also plays into mortality rates in medieval combat.