2576 réponses à ce sujet

[Han Shot First]

Not true, the Greeks had composite armors made from several layers of linen glued together and it stopped swords and arrows made from copper. Also leather armor can stop swords.
Same with modern bullet proof vests, they're made of Kevlar which is basically tough fabric. The bullets it has to stop are made from copper and lead. Even hard ballistic plates against rifle fire are made from softer compressed composite materials, and they can stop armor piercing bullets with a mild steel core penetrator.

Also if I use a thick copper plate I can stop rifle bullets which are harder, it just depends on the thickness.

 

Good post.

 

Sort of related to that..a short vid on the effectiveness of a padded gambeson against bows:

 

[Giant ambush beetle]

Good post.
 
Sort of related to that..a short vid on the effectiveness of a padded gambeson against bows:
 

 

Wow, I shoot a 75-80lbs long bow and I'm a power lifter, holding a bow string at 140 lbs must be hell on the drawing fingers. 

Also very cool demonstration. 

[Puppy Love]

You know the more I think about it, the more annoyed I am as I find armors who's change compared to males is just ripping huge pieces off, molding it to a woman's breasts and calling it feminine.  Feminine does not equal showing flesh or breast shape, lots of feminine things do, but it is not that quality that makes it feminine.  Just cutting off pieces of armor, and making breasts molds simply does not do it...  often it just looks weird, and not a lick feminine.

 

Feminine qualities = softer shapes and textures, flowing cloth, more flowery designs and colors, it equals a lot of things other than showing flesh and breasts.. 

 

But instead of incorporating feminine designs and qualities, designer just rip pieces off the armor and mold what remains to our breasts and call it feminine.  Or if there is feminine designs 90% of the time it is accompanied by unnecessary impractical skin being shown causing feminine to be associated with impractical and excessive flesh which is not.

 

I've been working hard trying to figure out how best to explain what I want to see more of.  Which seems to be in an odd place in the typical armor debate as it incorporates feminine qualities most often only found in a lot of the skimpier armors, but incorporated and blended with more practically protective armors. 

 

Both sides go so anti each other that the practical side tends to avoid anything feminine entirely in an extreme push against the skimp ware crowd, while the skimp ware crowd want anything with any feminine qualities what so ever to show as much breast as possible. 

 

This leaves me, and hopefully I'm not alone, people like me, that enjoy more feminine things, being stuck between two stubborn sides of a debate that due to the nature of their fighting ends up completely screwed when really what I'd like to see more of falls into a practical blend of certain aspects of both sides.  Since it's not in either extremes narrow little box it ends up in neither, and most armor panders to one extreme or the other.

[NoForgiveness]

Ooh. I like that one but it's probably too greek for da....

[Giantdeathrobot]

Armor does next to nothing against arrows, so even if you were wearing some fantastic full plate an analogous arrow would pierce it and could kill you (depending on the bow/crossbow.

 

 

 

That's just as wrong as your belief that swords weight 20 pounds (that's heavier than a sledgehammer!). Even a quilted jacket could stop arrows from lesser bows, and it took an English longbow with bodkin arrow at fairly close range hitting a non-rounded surface to reliably pierce through plate. Even a coat of mail with padding underneath could stop most arrows, E-ro has provided a nice source, and even Muslim accounts from the battle of Hattin attest to that.

 

Crossbows didn't really pierce more than arrows (mostly they pierced less until the really elaborate models of the Renaissance if I recall correctly), their big advantage was that you could train someone in their use in a few weeks, whereas being a good archer took a lifetime of training.

[Han Shot First]

So much ignorance in this thread, it hurts.
 
First of all, swords were very light. Most would weigh about 2lbs. 
 
 

 

I think the impression that some weapons were ridiculously heavy comes from the portrayal of them in many (most?) fantasy RPGs, where they quite often are ridiculously oversized and bulky. They often tend to look a lot heavier in games than they would in the real world.

 

Hawke's Key vs. the longsword.

[n7stormrunner]

I want some nice looking lighter armors. yes for warriors too.  da 2 was a little all over the place there were a few  pieces that couldn't seem to decide what they were. and da o had way fewer designs for lighter armours. and only two robes. 

 

and a nice dress/robe for my qunari mage please. not da: o morrigan, though I want one of those too, but just a normal pretty dress is that too much too ask for 

[Andir]

i want something like Iron Bull has (his 'main' armor set we have seen where he is shirtless) for a female rogue i am rolling. my idea for her is that as a rogue, your whole goal is to avoid being hit. so for her, showing more skin his showing her confidence in her abilities.

i think there should be choices for people who more 'real' armor that is bulkier but looks practical, and for those who mght like to have it better fitted for whatever reason. I don't see why it needs to be one or the other : p

[Puppy Love]

Weapon difficulty is not weight, it's bulk, aka weight distribution.  For a good example of this, go outside and grab a rake.  1st hold it in two hands both spread out like you normally would, now slowly move your hands closer together toward the far end from the rakes head.  As you do, you'll notice it becomes a lot harder to keep the rakes head off the ground and steady.

 

Now weapons are designed to try and compensate for this, but as length grows, the attacking end becomes heavier and the smaller the handle becomes the more difficult the weapon becomes to wield.  It is not so simple as the weight.  Stretch 5 lbs out to a long enough reach with too small a handle with most of it's weight at the far end and it'll be difficult to wield as well.  It has less to do with weight and more to do with physics.  Most fighting styles incorporate movements that work with the weapons weight and balance.  Many require constant motion and flow because the weapons bulk is designed for flow, meaning that trying to stop the swing is silly and you are meant to flow with it and direct it rather than force it. 

 

Different weapons fall into different places where this is involved.

 

What makes a Maul so hard to wield for example is not the overall weight of the weapon, but that almost all that weight is in the head of the weapon.

 

So when people mention weapon weights it is ultimately irrelevant unless we know how and where that weight is distributed and how the weapon is handled. 

[Notshauna]

Not true, the Greeks had composite armors made from several layers of linen glued together and it stopped swords and arrows made from copper. Also leather armor can stop swords.
Same with modern bullet proof vests, they're made of Kevlar which is basically tough fabric. The bullets it has to stop are made from copper and lead. Even hard ballistic plates against rifle fire are made from softer compressed composite materials, and they can stop armor piercing bullets with a mild steel core penetrator.

Also if I use a thick copper plate I can stop rifle bullets which are harder, it just depends on the thickness.

See this is why I really need to stay away from gross over simplifications. Yeah what I said is ridiculously oversimplified as it ignores so much complexity when it comes to materials and their properties, it doesn't even try to define quality materials, for good reason too as it's ridiculously complicated. Basically for this case we can measure armor in terms of protection from piercing, arrows for their ability to pierce and bows for the force in which they launch the arrows. Now the only way to find this is via the usage of very complicated mathematics. So I'll try and explain my point in a simpler way, an arrow is designed to take the force of the bow and transfer as much of it as possible into the tip of the arrowhead, armor is designed to resist breaking. If you take object that applies enough force to match the tensile strength of the material then when it is given a point it will pierce said material.

 

For example Graphene is the material with the strongest tensile strength of 130000 MPa or 130 trillion kilograms per meter per second per second if you were to take a 130 trillion newton force and were to direct it's energy into less than 1 metre squared you'd pierce Graphene. Of course it's ridiculous to imagine such a force but equally ridiculous to imagine Graphene plate armor. Long story short if you took something that was JUST stopped by an object and gave it a point it would cease to stopped. (this took a lot longer than I wanted it to, I really need to work on my Newtonian physics skills, had completely forgotten how much easier this problem would of been solved if I thought about it in terms of energy not force).

[bazzag]

I expect most armors will be the same regardless of gender, just less bulky for the female form, kinda like how it was in origins. Although if there were some armours that were like it, as a design for both genders, or a way you could craft that spedcific type of skimpy outfit, that would be pretty cool too.

 

My personal preference, as a male, is that although sometimes the skimpy look is a nice design, theres nothing wrong with how the armours look in origins. Same design just more curvy.

[Mathias]

@pengin21 @AlexiaRevan @Mihura @Woldan

 

It is what it is. First off you need to understand that I'm speaking in general, there's always gonna be exceptions to the rule. Not everyone cares about a person's looks. But for the most part this is just how things are in our culture. How do men get sexier to the public eye? They work out and build muscle. Look at the magazines next time you go to the store. You'll see shirtless guys on the cover ripped with muscle, and women looking pretty in clothes and make up. 

 

When it comes to women wanting to look sexy and attractive, what do a lot of them do? They buy pretty clothes/shoes, wear make up, fix up their hair, worry about their weight, etc etc. And though I don't condone this, some of them take more extreme measures like plastic surgery. On the other hand, what do guys do if they wanna look sexy and attractive? They hit the gym. When it comes to competition, guys will feel threatened by the most physically superior dude in the room, and women will feel threatened by the girl with the hottest face and body.

[Notshauna]

So yeah, the idea that arrows would go right through plate is nonsense. With a huge amount of luck, and very close range you might hit a guy in plate with enough force to hurt him with sheer force, but that arrow is not going right through the plate.

As this thread has gone on it has gone farther and farther out of my depth and I've continued to try and stick on with it and ended up saying some very factually inaccurate things so I'm going to just try and reign it in here. The arrow stuff was really, really, really wrong as was the sword weight stuff, but the original statement was as follows that wearing plate armor and nothing underneath was less effective than the leather and cloth and mail armor used by actual soldiers. That how fantasy games show full plate armor clad soldiers running around the battlefield on foot without anything underneath is highly unrealistic. That the stopping power of armor isn't all that matters so does it's ability to absorb the blow (which is why cloth and leather armor was still important even under plate). 

 

I REALLY need to stop somehow getting further and further out of my understanding and ending up trying to somehow prove a point I wasn't even trying to make but somehow ended up making despite it having really nothing to do with my original point.

[Puppy Love]

I want some nice looking lighter armors. yes for warriors too.  da 2 was a little all over the place there were a few  pieces that couldn't seem to decide what they were. and da o had way fewer designs for lighter armours. and only two robes. 

 

and a nice dress/robe for my qunari mage please. not da: o morrigan, though I want one of those too, but just a normal pretty dress is that too much too ask for 

 

Here you go.

 

[n7stormrunner]

Here you go.

 

 

 

too much plot.

[animedreamer]

i haven't seen these sexy armors... can i get some examples, from bioware games not mods or other companies games (looking at you final fantasy Lightning Returns) but forced in a Bioware Game? This is something i have to see.

[Puppy Love]

too much plot.

plot?

[n7stormrunner]

plot?

 

sorry been reading to much manga lately.  

 

plot is an ecchi manga euphemism for large breasts.

[Giant ambush beetle]

How do men get sexier to the public eye? They work out and build muscle. Look at the magazines next time you go to the store. You'll see shirtless guys on the cover ripped with muscle, and women looking pretty in clothes and make up.

As a semi-professional powerlifter I have muscle, but I can tell you from first hand experience that only 1/10 women find that attractive. (And this doesn't bother me) Which makes sense, in a save environment we live in other qualities are more important than being physically able to wrestle attacking bears. Social skills, equality in a potential partnership, having an entertaining personality, things like that are seen as attractive by women.
Being Johnny Bravo just doesn't cut it anymore, LOL.

Also for me a nice appearance in a woman is but a fragment of the the mosaic that is beauty. A mediocre looking girl can easily make it up with intelligence, charisma and skills.

[Spectre Impersonator]

I go for Femshep armor.

[Puppy Love]

sorry been reading to much manga lately.  

 

plot is an ecchi manga euphemism for large breasts.

 

Eh I like her the way she is.  I don't have an anti large breast bias a lot of people do lately.  There's too large of course, but I think hers teeters nicely right on the edge of that, wouldn't go any bigger.

 

I find it silly how so many people treat odd things like they are dirty, not saying you are, but like large breasts, so often people scoff at them like there's actually something wrong with them now in days.

 

I mean like Solas, a lot of people get angry and some furious because there's a possibility he might only want to be with another elf that's female because he wants to have children and a family someday, as if that would be such a horrible dirty thing.  Is one romance of many and some women like the family ideal.  If that does turn out to be why, I welcome it, I personally like the idea of a romance with a family man.  Must all romance partners hate children and a family or something?

 

Sorry for the random tangent.   I just find certain things odd.  I mean she's a qunari mage in a pretty dress (which are the two things you asked for), and your focus is my preference on breast size rather than the dress and qunari herself.

[Mathias]

As a semi-professional powerlifter I have muscle, but I can tell you from first hand experience that only 1/10 women find that attractive. (And this doesn't bother me) Which makes sense, in a save environment we live in other qualities are more important than being physically able to wrestle attacking bears. Social skills, equality in a potential partnership, having an entertaining personality, things like that are seen as attractive by women.

Also for me a nice appearance in a woman is but a fragment of the the mosaic that is beauty. A mediocre looking girl can easily make it up with intelligence, charisma and skills.

 

Well no, if you have ripped muscles but zero personality, then yes a lot of women will be weirded out by that. But I'm talking about imagery. What you just said is fairly obvious. But you do understand that when it comes to physical attraction, a lot women prefer the toned out or ripped body instead the out of shape ones right?

 

Put 100 women in the same room and have them all meet two guys. Both these guys have the same interests as each other, they're both equally funny, charming, well dressed, and smart. The only different is one of them is out of shape, and the other has a very nicely built body. If those 100 woman had to choose one to go out with, I guarantee you the majority are gonna pick the one who's more physically built. Same thing can be said for 100 guys meeting two girls.

[Monster A-Go Go]

I've been working hard trying to figure out how best to explain what I want to see more of.  Which seems to be in an odd place in the typical armor debate as it incorporates feminine qualities most often only found in a lot of the skimpier armors, but incorporated and blended with more practically protective armors. 

 

This, to me, is about the most elegant mix of the two I've ever seen.

[Giant ambush beetle]

I go for Femshep armor.

I really loved most of the Femshep armors.