Active Users:1061 Time:15/12/2025 09:21:53 PM
Maybe, maybe not HyogaRott Send a noteboard - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM
RJ never really went into the OP defying properties of C. The fireballs are pure weaves of fire, no weave, no fire, no heat. We also do not know about the heat transferance properties of C. For all we know it could pass heat like tin foil, or be so resistant to it you could hold it in your hand while someone plays a palsma torch over it. We just don't know. Lightning might or might not be effective. C started as iron, but is it still ferrous? If not, just how perfect an insulator is it? It could be such a high value insulator that lighting will not strike it, again we just don't know.

An interesting debate might be what would happen if someone wearing C armor got hit by balefire. Balefire is pure OP that burns you out of the pattern backwards, but C is immune to the OP. Would it just wash off you, or could (theoretically) a channeler use enough OP to burn far enough back to before you put it on, or before the armor was converted from iron...

My position is simple. C armor would not be hard to make, making it would not violate any of the oaths, and C armor is substantially better than normal armor. just how much better is something we can go round and round on because only RJ could have given a definitive answer; but he never did.

Reply to message
Functional Cuendillar Armor: Possible or impossible? - 10/02/2012 04:45:34 PM 1643 Views
You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 10/02/2012 06:29:28 PM 1106 Views
You busted him! I wonder why he would post it again... *NM* - 10/02/2012 07:25:47 PM 577 Views
I suppose I am on a... - 10/02/2012 11:00:47 PM 1028 Views
No, you go back and re-read what everyone said. - 11/02/2012 11:02:47 PM 1106 Views
We're actually losing them by the troves. My apologies. *NM* - 12/02/2012 02:52:01 AM 531 Views
I rest my case. - 10/05/2012 04:34:02 PM 1000 Views
Re: You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 11/02/2012 01:37:27 PM 1173 Views
Agreed. - 11/02/2012 06:24:36 PM 968 Views
why not some plate armor. duh. *NM* - 12/02/2012 09:54:43 PM 573 Views
See? - 10/05/2012 04:35:25 PM 980 Views
Possible, but hard. - 11/02/2012 01:56:03 AM 1134 Views
scale or plate armor would be quite easy *NM* - 11/02/2012 01:38:47 PM 491 Views
My thought was always about weapons. - 11/02/2012 06:31:45 AM 1231 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 12/02/2012 10:51:43 AM 1026 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 14/02/2012 01:53:59 PM 999 Views
Should be perfectly feasible - 11/02/2012 12:28:47 PM 1004 Views
Exactly - 11/02/2012 01:53:24 PM 1019 Views
Certainly possible, but given the effort most women have to put toward changing even a small item - 12/02/2012 05:10:35 AM 1098 Views
Ummm, Warders... - 14/02/2012 01:39:23 PM 946 Views
How would Cuendillar armour help against channelers? - 14/02/2012 07:58:58 PM 1009 Views
It can not be directly effected by the OP - 14/02/2012 09:08:57 PM 916 Views
some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 09:52:41 PM 1043 Views
Re: some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 10:54:26 PM 880 Views
which way is it? - 15/02/2012 04:14:41 AM 894 Views
Actually I'd call the Seanchan tactically inferior to the White Tower in using the power - 15/02/2012 01:48:55 PM 999 Views
That's really not my point. - 15/02/2012 03:21:15 PM 886 Views
My point is - 15/02/2012 03:52:43 PM 860 Views
Agree on all points *NM* - 15/02/2012 07:06:09 PM 636 Views
I never said that they could not be stopped - 15/02/2012 01:58:41 PM 978 Views
I really think you're over-estimating how difficult it would be. - 15/02/2012 03:22:44 PM 942 Views
Not nesecarrily - 15/02/2012 04:01:45 PM 929 Views
You just said that most of their tactics are indirect. - 15/02/2012 05:44:22 PM 1041 Views
..and you are creating new tactics - 15/02/2012 06:32:02 PM 901 Views
*shrug* I don't see it as some world-shaking action - 15/02/2012 08:47:40 PM 870 Views
Not accurate - 15/02/2012 03:54:00 PM 993 Views
You are thinking too far inside the box - 15/02/2012 04:23:28 PM 977 Views
I disagree - 15/02/2012 04:43:33 PM 932 Views
If armor is of no benefit... - 15/02/2012 06:19:30 PM 846 Views
Missing my point ... Cuendillar armor is impractical not useless - 15/02/2012 07:00:48 PM 990 Views
nope - 15/02/2012 07:21:03 PM 863 Views
*Shrug* - 15/02/2012 08:28:48 PM 1029 Views
Re: *Shrug* - 15/02/2012 09:07:24 PM 1197 Views
Re: It can not be directly effected by the OP - 15/02/2012 02:37:40 AM 883 Views
Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM 855 Views
Re: Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 06:11:42 PM 1034 Views
I'll happily amend my initial statement to "maybe even challeling ones" - 15/02/2012 07:03:48 PM 893 Views
Fair enough. - 16/02/2012 02:08:19 AM 894 Views
what a lot of people are forgetting with their suggestions of plate armor... - 13/02/2012 02:36:50 PM 1048 Views
Your understanding of how plate armor functions is in error - 14/02/2012 01:45:37 PM 902 Views
I believe AND I was hoping you would go into the physics of it :p - 14/02/2012 11:01:18 PM 872 Views
here ya go, I still skipped almost all of the math though. - 15/02/2012 03:00:09 PM 979 Views
Two things: *NM* - 16/02/2012 04:03:52 PM 554 Views

Reply to Message