Active Users:1306 Time:04/05/2026 01:54:44 AM
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 1731 Views
You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 10/02/2012 06:29:28 PM 1198 Views
You busted him! I wonder why he would post it again... *NM* - 10/02/2012 07:25:47 PM 620 Views
I suppose I am on a... - 10/02/2012 11:00:47 PM 1127 Views
No, you go back and re-read what everyone said. - 11/02/2012 11:02:47 PM 1196 Views
We're actually losing them by the troves. My apologies. *NM* - 12/02/2012 02:52:01 AM 577 Views
I rest my case. - 10/05/2012 04:34:02 PM 1103 Views
Re: You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 11/02/2012 01:37:27 PM 1271 Views
Agreed. - 11/02/2012 06:24:36 PM 1067 Views
why not some plate armor. duh. *NM* - 12/02/2012 09:54:43 PM 619 Views
See? - 10/05/2012 04:35:25 PM 1076 Views
Possible, but hard. - 11/02/2012 01:56:03 AM 1229 Views
scale or plate armor would be quite easy *NM* - 11/02/2012 01:38:47 PM 537 Views
My thought was always about weapons. - 11/02/2012 06:31:45 AM 1332 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 12/02/2012 10:51:43 AM 1119 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 14/02/2012 01:53:59 PM 1107 Views
Should be perfectly feasible - 11/02/2012 12:28:47 PM 1111 Views
Exactly - 11/02/2012 01:53:24 PM 1115 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 1198 Views
Ummm, Warders... - 14/02/2012 01:39:23 PM 1059 Views
How would Cuendillar armour help against channelers? - 14/02/2012 07:58:58 PM 1106 Views
It can not be directly effected by the OP - 14/02/2012 09:08:57 PM 997 Views
some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 09:52:41 PM 1157 Views
Re: some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 10:54:26 PM 975 Views
which way is it? - 15/02/2012 04:14:41 AM 983 Views
Actually I'd call the Seanchan tactically inferior to the White Tower in using the power - 15/02/2012 01:48:55 PM 1098 Views
That's really not my point. - 15/02/2012 03:21:15 PM 993 Views
My point is - 15/02/2012 03:52:43 PM 964 Views
Agree on all points *NM* - 15/02/2012 07:06:09 PM 677 Views
I never said that they could not be stopped - 15/02/2012 01:58:41 PM 1073 Views
I really think you're over-estimating how difficult it would be. - 15/02/2012 03:22:44 PM 1047 Views
Not nesecarrily - 15/02/2012 04:01:45 PM 1030 Views
You just said that most of their tactics are indirect. - 15/02/2012 05:44:22 PM 1131 Views
..and you are creating new tactics - 15/02/2012 06:32:02 PM 1007 Views
*shrug* I don't see it as some world-shaking action - 15/02/2012 08:47:40 PM 959 Views
Not accurate - 15/02/2012 03:54:00 PM 1096 Views
You are thinking too far inside the box - 15/02/2012 04:23:28 PM 1069 Views
I disagree - 15/02/2012 04:43:33 PM 1030 Views
If armor is of no benefit... - 15/02/2012 06:19:30 PM 961 Views
Missing my point ... Cuendillar armor is impractical not useless - 15/02/2012 07:00:48 PM 1093 Views
nope - 15/02/2012 07:21:03 PM 967 Views
*Shrug* - 15/02/2012 08:28:48 PM 1134 Views
Re: *Shrug* - 15/02/2012 09:07:24 PM 1288 Views
Re: It can not be directly effected by the OP - 15/02/2012 02:37:40 AM 973 Views
Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM 948 Views
Re: Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 06:11:42 PM 1148 Views
I'll happily amend my initial statement to "maybe even challeling ones" - 15/02/2012 07:03:48 PM 990 Views
Fair enough. - 16/02/2012 02:08:19 AM 989 Views
what a lot of people are forgetting with their suggestions of plate armor... - 13/02/2012 02:36:50 PM 1158 Views
Your understanding of how plate armor functions is in error - 14/02/2012 01:45:37 PM 1008 Views
I believe AND I was hoping you would go into the physics of it :p - 14/02/2012 11:01:18 PM 974 Views
here ya go, I still skipped almost all of the math though. - 15/02/2012 03:00:09 PM 1099 Views
Two things: *NM* - 16/02/2012 04:03:52 PM 601 Views

Reply to Message