And you wonder why knights rode into battle. Sure, riding a horse can be a workout, but it's much less demanding than slogging (and slugging) it out on foot when you're encased in steel.
Science Breakthrough: Plate Armor is Heavy
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Thus why half-plate was a much better option, as well as the armor skirt as apposed to metal leggings.
lol kings couldn't afford to have bad soldiers. They were built dudes, lugging all that armor along with weaponry wasn't something a scrawning guy could pull off. And that means they had to be fed.
Proof that humans descendended from idiots. How much time, effort, and money were used to prove this obvious fact. I mean fuck, dnd knew this 40 years ago, plate armor sucks. Jeez guys, what are you gonna study next, are you going to prove that men have arms?
Honestly, I think this is one of those misguided attempts to say "Man, those people back in the medieval ages were total idiots; look how much smarter we are now with our SCIENCE!".
As others have said in this thread- who were the test subjects? Knights didn't spend six hours a day in front of a television with a beer in their hand; they spent a lot of time training, wearing the armor in all sorts of situations, and their access to better-quality food and medicine (of the era) meant that they were prime physical specimens compared to the serfs and servants. It's not very likely you're going to pull twenty people off of the street of any major city today and have them be a physical match.
Five hundred years from now, they'll be doing tests to show how stupid we were lugging around Kevlar-titanium-ceramic body armor, and how much smarter they are for having energy shields.
As others have said in this thread- who were the test subjects? Knights didn't spend six hours a day in front of a television with a beer in their hand; they spent a lot of time training, wearing the armor in all sorts of situations, and their access to better-quality food and medicine (of the era) meant that they were prime physical specimens compared to the serfs and servants. It's not very likely you're going to pull twenty people off of the street of any major city today and have them be a physical match.
Five hundred years from now, they'll be doing tests to show how stupid we were lugging around Kevlar-titanium-ceramic body armor, and how much smarter they are for having energy shields.
Never mind all the people dying of cancer and the millions that suffer from diseases and hunger world-wide, lets focus our energies on PROVING SOMETHING POINTLESS!
Gentleman, lets do Science! Huuuurrrrrr!
Gentleman, lets do Science! Huuuurrrrrr!
It was really useful, right up until the British decided to use the longbow and made knights into pincushions.
Now my reason for, in hypotheticals, never wearing heavier than chain in a 1v1 duel is scientifically supported. Truth be told, I'd probably go for lamellar. Fairly light, easy to maintain, and as if not more effective than mail. Also, I think it's layered nature made it better against bows too.
However, for a battle line, it's probably best to wear heavier armor because you don't really have the luxury of free movement.
However, for a battle line, it's probably best to wear heavier armor because you don't really have the luxury of free movement.
ive worn a plate-mail helmet (replica of Robert the Bruce's). i nearly faceplanted it was that bloody heavy.
Except any actual testing proves your theory wrong.WouldYouKindly said:
Average suit of chainmail? probably close to 30 pounds or so for something that's full body.
Average Plate Armor? Mine is 20 pounds and my helmet makes up far too much of that due to safety reqs for the SCA.
Weight placement for Chainmail? except for the legs it all rests on the shoulders.
Weight placement for Plate? Except for legs it rests evenly along the full torso.
AS for movement, in my armor I lose a very slight bit of arm range in that my arm cannot go straight up. But I've yet to really ever encounter any type of situation where it needs to. But other than that I can dive roll, jog, move my leg in full motion, my arms across my chest and behind me. My torso bends just fine when I need to.
As much as I hate refferencing this movie for a factual point, if you look at Knight's Tale. THe guys in heavy armor having to be lifted into their horses? That's not combat plate, that's jousting plate. It is heavy and limiting because all it's meant for is riding down a straight even path and being able to withstand a lance strike from roughly one direction. Real plate is going to be similar to the "fictional" stuff Heath Ledger wears. Jogging, no limitations, vaulting into a saddle.
Contrary to whoever these "scientists" are, plate isn't heavy or all that encumbering.
Not really. Rode horses because a horse had more endurance than a human, and in combat a well trained Warhorse is another weapon independant of the rider. Combine that with the ability to strike while moving much much faster and thus with a lot more force and you have what is effectively the medieval tank/battering ram.
Again, the heavy, need horse to move, armor is from alter era Sport Jousting. Not combat armor.
Again, the heavy, need horse to move, armor is from alter era Sport Jousting. Not combat armor.
And the sky is blue, water is wet, and gravity makes shit hit the ground. Anyone who even thought about plate armor and didn't think it weight a good 100 pounds is fooling themselves.
And the hindrance (sp?) to mobility is common sense - it's a bit more difficult to lift something that 20lbs versus something 20oz, is it not?
And the hindrance (sp?) to mobility is common sense - it's a bit more difficult to lift something that 20lbs versus something 20oz, is it not?