Active Users:732 Time:03/08/2026 04:03:59 PM
If armor is of no benefit... HyogaRott Send a noteboard - 15/02/2012 06:19:30 PM
The why did anyone ever wear it? By your logic, wouldn't everyone just go into battle naked and thus have the greatest amount of mobility?

Fine functional (iron) plate armor restricts mobility less than you think. And when you can construct it form 1/16th or 1/32nd thich plates instead it gets even better. When we change the discussion to a scale mail variant then the discussion of mobility becomes even less relevant. A C scale jerkin would probably weigh less, and restrict less than a leather one, and warders have been shown to wear that regularly.

No matter how you slice it (no pun intended) C, as a material for armor, makes excellent sense.

As for your suggestion for plated city walls or gates, there would indeed be benefits, though far less often. Absent rams and trebuchets, city walls and gates are resiliant even when made of stone and regular iron because there is no real need to be concerned about weight and mobility.

It is those 2 concerns that makeS C be so effective. Use of armor has always been a trade off between better protection, and the weight a being or vehicle can handle with the mobility limitation that weight causes.

Iron is approximately 480 pounds per cubic foot. 40 pounds of iron is about 144 cubic inches. 144c ubic inches flatened to about 1/16th inch creates a sheet of iron about 3' by 10'; yes that is right feet, not inches. If you can actually manage to roll the sheet to 1/32nd you doubble the size of that final sheet. Even when you factor in that C is heavier than a like mass of iron (we don't know how heavier, just that it is mentioned several times as fact). a full suit of C plate armor would still only be about 20 to 40 pounds (depending on how thin your technology/skill allows you to roll the iron).

When you consider that the swords warders swing around weigh the better part of 10 pounds, the weight of armor (because it is distributed around the body) would hardly be noticed.
Reply to message
Functional Cuendillar Armor: Possible or impossible? - 10/02/2012 04:45:34 PM 1780 Views
You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 10/02/2012 06:29:28 PM 1240 Views
You busted him! I wonder why he would post it again... *NM* - 10/02/2012 07:25:47 PM 648 Views
I suppose I am on a... - 10/02/2012 11:00:47 PM 1179 Views
No, you go back and re-read what everyone said. - 11/02/2012 11:02:47 PM 1253 Views
We're actually losing them by the troves. My apologies. *NM* - 12/02/2012 02:52:01 AM 613 Views
I rest my case. - 10/05/2012 04:34:02 PM 1149 Views
Re: You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 11/02/2012 01:37:27 PM 1323 Views
Agreed. - 11/02/2012 06:24:36 PM 1113 Views
why not some plate armor. duh. *NM* - 12/02/2012 09:54:43 PM 659 Views
See? - 10/05/2012 04:35:25 PM 1131 Views
Possible, but hard. - 11/02/2012 01:56:03 AM 1283 Views
scale or plate armor would be quite easy *NM* - 11/02/2012 01:38:47 PM 568 Views
My thought was always about weapons. - 11/02/2012 06:31:45 AM 1382 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 12/02/2012 10:51:43 AM 1175 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 14/02/2012 01:53:59 PM 1153 Views
Should be perfectly feasible - 11/02/2012 12:28:47 PM 1161 Views
Exactly - 11/02/2012 01:53:24 PM 1170 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 1246 Views
Ummm, Warders... - 14/02/2012 01:39:23 PM 1108 Views
How would Cuendillar armour help against channelers? - 14/02/2012 07:58:58 PM 1161 Views
It can not be directly effected by the OP - 14/02/2012 09:08:57 PM 1045 Views
some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 09:52:41 PM 1220 Views
Re: some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 10:54:26 PM 1025 Views
which way is it? - 15/02/2012 04:14:41 AM 1033 Views
Actually I'd call the Seanchan tactically inferior to the White Tower in using the power - 15/02/2012 01:48:55 PM 1151 Views
That's really not my point. - 15/02/2012 03:21:15 PM 1050 Views
My point is - 15/02/2012 03:52:43 PM 1013 Views
Agree on all points *NM* - 15/02/2012 07:06:09 PM 706 Views
I never said that they could not be stopped - 15/02/2012 01:58:41 PM 1130 Views
I really think you're over-estimating how difficult it would be. - 15/02/2012 03:22:44 PM 1101 Views
Not nesecarrily - 15/02/2012 04:01:45 PM 1081 Views
You just said that most of their tactics are indirect. - 15/02/2012 05:44:22 PM 1186 Views
..and you are creating new tactics - 15/02/2012 06:32:02 PM 1060 Views
*shrug* I don't see it as some world-shaking action - 15/02/2012 08:47:40 PM 1021 Views
Not accurate - 15/02/2012 03:54:00 PM 1149 Views
You are thinking too far inside the box - 15/02/2012 04:23:28 PM 1138 Views
I disagree - 15/02/2012 04:43:33 PM 1083 Views
If armor is of no benefit... - 15/02/2012 06:19:30 PM 1026 Views
Missing my point ... Cuendillar armor is impractical not useless - 15/02/2012 07:00:48 PM 1174 Views
nope - 15/02/2012 07:21:03 PM 1024 Views
*Shrug* - 15/02/2012 08:28:48 PM 1192 Views
Re: *Shrug* - 15/02/2012 09:07:24 PM 1346 Views
No way they could pull off what you are talking about with current tech - 16/02/2012 01:55:19 AM 1146 Views
Re: It can not be directly effected by the OP - 15/02/2012 02:37:40 AM 1025 Views
Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM 1013 Views
Re: Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 06:11:42 PM 1204 Views
I'll happily amend my initial statement to "maybe even challeling ones" - 15/02/2012 07:03:48 PM 1041 Views
Fair enough. - 16/02/2012 02:08:19 AM 1045 Views
what a lot of people are forgetting with their suggestions of plate armor... - 13/02/2012 02:36:50 PM 1210 Views
Your understanding of how plate armor functions is in error - 14/02/2012 01:45:37 PM 1057 Views
I believe AND I was hoping you would go into the physics of it :p - 14/02/2012 11:01:18 PM 1052 Views
here ya go, I still skipped almost all of the math though. - 15/02/2012 03:00:09 PM 1170 Views
Two things: *NM* - 16/02/2012 04:03:52 PM 634 Views

Reply to Message