Midcal9
Member
LOUWEWWW FAANTASIIIEHH. LOUWWW FAANTTASSIIEEHH. NAOUGHT HIGH FANTASY. NOUGHHT. BADDD CATBEARHZ.
"Must have" clothing and armor thread.
- Thread starter Syllabear3
- Start date
Syllabear3
Member
Its matter of time we start seeing half naked lolis with 2 meters swords killing everything one hit with some vocaloid music.
Midcal9
Member
U want Sui Gendris gou full retard dontcha muh little pal?
Its matter of time we start seeing half naked lolis with 2 meters swords killing everything one hit with some vocaloid music.
Homiccus
Member
Actually to stop you two from derailing the thread even futher... I come to you in the wake of recent events to issue a call to reason (and for truce). While we battle one another, divided be the petty strife of our common history, the tide of greater conflict is turning against us, threatening to destroy all that we have accomplished. It is time for us as [...] individuals to set aside our long-standing feuds and unite.
I would very much like to see a complete set of Hatanga Degel incrorporated in the game. Whilst not as shiny as going full gothic, it does have, in my humble opinion, this "badass" look.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEjaJDGXUAAPEbV.jpg
I would very much like to see a complete set of Hatanga Degel incrorporated in the game. Whilst not as shiny as going full gothic, it does have, in my humble opinion, this "badass" look.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEjaJDGXUAAPEbV.jpg
Midcal9
Member
I'm not derailing anything, the thread is reching its own logical conclusion with Kwatbeahrz asking for BS shiett. Which is totally fine, I accept him the way he is!
As for the armour, not bad, pretty 9th century-ish, but i'm not wearing that in Expert arena. although it does have some plate mail elements.
Homiccus
Member
Aww... I was hoping you'll follow up with the rest of the Speech... ;,( Anyways, Sillybear is a bit like Marmite - you either love him or hate him. Sometimes both. But it's hard to imagine this forum without him.
Actually this pattern is sort-of 14th century-ish. Eastern cultures never progressed through to the exoskeleton of the full plate for some reason, but the "replacements" (such as plated-mail or full lamellar) are gorgeous and full of texture. The khatanga (hatanga or hatangu) is a "soft" armour but nevertheless is fully lined with iron plates, allowing full protection of all the vulnerable bits whilst minimally hampering the mobilty. Furthermore (I'm not sure how true it is, being a medieval written account) some examples of the hatanga were made with tightly woven silk outer layer, which would make it a medieval analogue to modern kevlar ballistic vest with ceramic inserts - that is to dissipate kinetic energy of the incoming projectile and prevent penetration whilst spreading the impact over larger area.
Truly astonishing piece of engineering.
Midcal9
Member
That's very interesting, his breast piece looked like a coat of plates to me while his helmet is fairly viking influenced. I've never seen this type of Armour any museums of Kiev though apart from his helmet, his helmet is a fairly common exemplar. Or is it Mongol Armour?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw0sw9EUAAA7RgY.jpg
It's elementary Watson, they didn't have the necessary craftsmanship and materials to craft the more advanced, labor and design intensive items so they resorted to cheating. Silk is no kevlar come on, you sound like katana fanboy, whooshh they had silk in it, uncut-able! Well, buzz off. I got 30 layers of linen!
Homiccus
Member
Yep, it is a Mongol armour. I think the photo you've attached shows a form of Kuyak, however the hatanga works off the same principle. Or it could be a hatanga, but inside out? Hrmmm... More pics?
The reason for strange looking armour on my attachment (ie. the tied up edges of the kaftan - the gambeson equivalent, or the aventail reaching and attached to the face mask) is because it has to fulfill the strict requirements of the HMB combat. Call it "experimental archeology" if you like.
I'm not sure if I am supposed to be offended or entertained. I think I'll err on the latter.
In my defence, I'd like to point out I had tried to be rather precise with my wording, that's why I used words such as "analogue" and "dissipate" instead of "is" and "uncuttable" respectively.In small print - (you are probably aware of this but for the benefit of less versed forum users) the kevlar is used multi-layered and is in practice designed to stop projectiles of circa 300-600 J (220-440 ft-lb) energy at the point of delivery, by multiaxial warping of the membrane and gradual breaking of the layers. The bullet doesn't just "bounce off" the ballistic vest, it actually penetrates some of the layers, breaking them in the process.
An arrow delivers, what, 50-80 J (36-59 ft-lb, heavily depending on the bow poundage, arrow weight, head type, arrow's centre of weight etc.) at point-blank range? I find accounts of arrows getting stuck in the outer silk layer(s) of the hatanga without penetrating the plate underneath rather believable. Bear in mind that these, just as in the Western world, were used in conjunction with a multi-layered gambeson equivalent.
And PS. No I'm not a katana fanboy, rather the opposite, if you haven't already deduced that from my post above that is, thank you Captain Obvious.
Midcal9
Member
I knew that Kevlar vests would always get a little bit penetrated by the projectiles but I didn't know the exact data behind it, thanks for sharing. Although I wouldn't compare bullets to arrows per se because often times they were a lot heavier than any firearm projectile (also not all arrowheads are created equal, some could be nothing but a sharp ice pick). Arrows and bolts are very different beasts. Besides, I said that you sound like a katana FB, I know for a fact that you are not one, don't worry.Yep, it is a Mongol armour. I think the photo you've attached shows a form of Kuyak, however the hatanga works off the same principle. Or it could be a hatanga, but inside out? Hrmmm... More pics?
The reason for strange looking armour on my attachment (ie. the tied up edges of the kaftan - the gambeson equivalent, or the aventail reaching and attached to the face mask) is because it has to fulfill the strict requirements of the HMB combat. Call it "experimental archeology" if you like.
I'm not sure if I am supposed to be offended or entertained. I think I'll err on the latter.
In small print - (you are probably aware of this but for the benefit of less versed forum users) the kevlar is used multi-layered and is in practice designed to stop projectiles of circa 300-600 J (220-440 ft-lb) energy at the point of delivery, by multiaxial warping of the membrane and gradual breaking of the layers. The bullet doesn't just "bounce off" the ballistic vest, it actually penetrates some of the layers, breaking them in the process.
An arrow delivers, what, 50-80 J (36-59 ft-lb, heavily depending on the bow poundage, arrow weight, head type, arrow's centre of weight etc.) at point-blank range? I find accounts of arrows getting stuck in the outer silk layer(s) of the hatanga without penetrating the plate underneath rather believable. Bear in mind that these, just as in the Western world, were used in conjunction with a multi-layered gambeson equivalent.
And PS. No I'm not a katana fanboy, rather the opposite, if you haven't already deduced that from my post above that is, thank you Captain Obvious.
As for the Armour you described. Imagine wearing a gambeson-like vest on top of that thing. It would be even more cumbersome than wearing plate, plate was worn with special clothes which were significantly less thick than gambeson based on what I know. Anyways, plate absorbs more shock because it's a somewhat self supporting, continuous shell. This Armour is more of a advanced gambeson or unter-brigandine.
\Point being, we basically had hatagana in Europe in late 13th century, it was called coat of plates. Silk can buzz off, linen would suffice. We moved on.
Syllabear3
Member
Not as much as you wanting grandma steel dresses added to the game
yet you complain about an average helm just because it has wings.
At this point i start thinking you are trolling.
Not going to mention that you derailed this thread discussing about what dress is more resistant to projectiles.
I am in shock atm.
Midcal9
Member
Not necessarily this one, but they could pick a few elements from those statues. I think that kastenbrust cuirass looks awesome.https://www.flickr.com/photos/98015679@N04/9208563154/in/album-72157634473862443/
I didn't expect you to laugh out a statue that was created by the best sculptors and painters of Europe including Albrecht Durer only because it doesn't please your Otaku sensibilities. Well, I've got news for you, a lot of medieval clothes would look silly to us, our sense of aesthetics if very different from what they had. Anyways, if you have a problem with my posts than do not reply to me because I'm pretty much done reading your weaponized autism.
Syllabear3
Member
I didn't laugh or think is bad, i just think is extremely femenine.
And you need to calm down, try some testostore pills or something. That will help.
ps: and honestly, it does please me because it pretty much looks like gothic lolitas with moustaches.
Adding elements from those statues we are a step closer to get full kawaii.
We already can create smallest and skinniest characters using heavy weapons like if they don't weight... thats another point.
We are getting more and more kawaii each moment and there is nothing u can do to stop it.
Oh i almost forgot the colours.
Last edited:
Midcal9
Member
Ok so you dislike one set of armour. There are more of them there. What's testostore?
If you don't want to constantly come off as a total cretin and imbecile then I'd advice you to look for a good, historically accurate or at least plausible set of armor which has not been featured in Exanima. Please, find something worthwhile, surprise me.
Syllabear3
Member
No i dont want to watch more steel dresses, stop it.
Mods pls he is insulting me and forcing me to watch dresses, pls help me.
ChildrenofMana
Member
As other persons have asked before, I would like to see asymmetrical armour and clothing.
Historically speaking similar to Roman Gladiators with one sided arm brace/shoulder and clothing.
Roman mosaic (unknown source)
Another Mosaic from the Villa Borghese.
(Mosaic at the National Archaeological Museum in Madrid)
Homiccus
Member
We are going to put our nit-picking mantle on, shall we precious? Yes... (Cough, cough) (nasty hobbitses).
1) The coat of plates is a derivative of the eastern armour, brought back from the Crusades in the form of armoured surcote. The Mongol Invasion only added to the spread of the armour. So, yes, "we" have had a form of hatanga in the 13th century, but it was a "copy" of the eastern technology. What "we" did with the copy is obviously an entirely different matter... which leads me to my next point.
2) We haven't really moved on. Obviously the evolution line of the globular breastplate (known colloqiually as the "Churburg") led to the technologically advanced man-powered-exoskeleton of the likes of the "Maximillian Armour" or "Greenwich Armour". But... alongside the astronaut suit of the era, tailored to the user and full of floating rivets, the "Visby pattern" coat of plates proliferated and was kept alive all the way into the 17th century, well past the peak use of the shiny plate. The likes of "brigandine", forms of "corrazzina" and simple-to-make-but-not-so-sexy "jack of plates" are all working off the same principle that began with the 9th century "Ding-jia" (or slt). Mostly adjustable, practical, easy to repair in the field and still functional as protection - what's not to like?
Then, the history turned a full circle, and today's main battlefield armour is still a "soft" vest lined with hard plates.
3) Silk didn't buzz off either. The best, brightest and most gorgeus sets of brigandine are done with the outer shell made of silk (or velvet, or brocade for that matter), regardless of the soundness of the claims of arrow-proof qualities of the latter.
The data presented here is orientational at best and somewhat-true for vests NIJ Class IIa. Classes above that have significantly different specs and requirements. They all work by the same principle though.
There is no need to wear additional layers on top of the hatanga. It is used exactly in the same way as the european coat of plates - with a gambeson. The Mongols used the kaftan as the gambeson for both lamellar and hatanga armours.
Funny you should say that as this armour evolved exactly like that.
Okay, this I will not agree with, for several reasons (bear in mind the below is partly my own theory).
1) The coat of plates is a derivative of the eastern armour, brought back from the Crusades in the form of armoured surcote. The Mongol Invasion only added to the spread of the armour. So, yes, "we" have had a form of hatanga in the 13th century, but it was a "copy" of the eastern technology. What "we" did with the copy is obviously an entirely different matter... which leads me to my next point.
2) We haven't really moved on. Obviously the evolution line of the globular breastplate (known colloqiually as the "Churburg") led to the technologically advanced man-powered-exoskeleton of the likes of the "Maximillian Armour" or "Greenwich Armour". But... alongside the astronaut suit of the era, tailored to the user and full of floating rivets, the "Visby pattern" coat of plates proliferated and was kept alive all the way into the 17th century, well past the peak use of the shiny plate. The likes of "brigandine", forms of "corrazzina" and simple-to-make-but-not-so-sexy "jack of plates" are all working off the same principle that began with the 9th century "Ding-jia" (or slt). Mostly adjustable, practical, easy to repair in the field and still functional as protection - what's not to like?
Then, the history turned a full circle, and today's main battlefield armour is still a "soft" vest lined with hard plates.
3) Silk didn't buzz off either. The best, brightest and most gorgeus sets of brigandine are done with the outer shell made of silk (or velvet, or brocade for that matter), regardless of the soundness of the claims of arrow-proof qualities of the latter.
I don't want to rain on your parade mate, but it's actually you that forces us to look at the "steel granny's" dress.
I agree, however the strictly asymmetrical armour (like ones on your example) are not found too often outside very specific use for athletes (for the lack of a better term) - ie. single manica for the Hoplomachus or the likes of Stechzeug of the 16th century. We see some asymmetry on the gothic plate but it does not go all the way to the point where one arm is missing.
Last edited:
Midcal9
Member
What i meant to say underneath it, not on top of it. By on top of it I mean "in addition to". Yeah, that's what you get when you haven't mastered a foreign language yet, you get all these brain farts all over the place. It's very annoying.
I've never heard about coat of plates being a derivative of eastern armor. Can you tell me where you got that from? An Expert opinion with some primary source would suffice. Or at least a plausible hypothesis. Although we sure as hell did a lot more with it than they've managed to do even if it is true.
I've never seen a coat of plates types armors that were used in 16th century apart from brigandines. Got any pictures of any Visby Coat of plates from 17th century? Were they used all across Europe or maybe they were a Scottish thing..good lord they used shields in 18th century...? Give me some more info.
I've seen velvet ones but that is on outer shell, a lair of fabric on the outside. And even if they used silk in those it wasn't done for defensive reasons.
You're trying way too hard to suggest that we've been using coat of plates as well in order to stress its usefulness and capability, you make all these hints and suggestions to make accent on it. In reality we've moved en masse to munition grade plate-fucking-Armour in 15th century which was both common and I'd say probably better than your Asian Brigandine. Btw, I wouldn't be surprised if it was more labor intensive to make a good quality hatagana than a good quality (without any fancy polish or bluing, just serviceable one) full plate Italian white Armour.
I'll say it once more to crystallize it for you, Plate Armour became widely available even for ordinary soldiers in 15th century. Gambesons, chain mail and brigandines even more so.
Homiccus
Member
You and me both... in my case the English is the foreign language though.
Right. I owe you some explanation then with apologies. My "hints" were aimed at perceived ignorance and derogatory attitude towards the family of "plates" armour. I obviously don't know you personally and I have (had?) no idea how much knowledge in the matter you possess - most people remark "studded leather" upon seeing the likes of Visby or the hatanga. For underestimating you in this regard, as well as mis-recognizing your "contempt" of "plates", I apologize.
Secondly, I try to approach the history of the arms and armour holistically. For me the terms "brigandine", "Visby" coat of plates or "jack of plates" mean the same or at least similar. They are of course different terms that the modern man applied to the equipment of the times and denote different styles of armour, but in principle they are the same, save for practical improvements, material/skill limitations and vagaries of fashion. That is why you will not find the "Visby" pattern coat of plates in 1500's, as at that time, it had been superseded by the "brigandine".
I am well aware of how ubiquitous the plate was in the West. I am not trying to downplay the importance of the plate armour in its various forms - I believe we have misunderstood each other in this regard. I am however more interested in life and death of the lower echelons of the society and perceive the "poor man's plate" as an important piece of equipment of a common soldier.
Thirdly, I am fond of "experimental archeology". The sad truth about studying history is - we will never know for sure. Various "experts" may forward their peer-reviewed theories. You may read as many medieval eyewitness accounts as you'd like. You may dig out as many corroded lumps of metal and identify them as "mail coif" as you like. But, you will never know for sure the manner it was used, how exactly it was made and how widespread and common it was. All we have is more or less plausible theories. I therefore have huge respect for a student of HEMA that experiments with the stances or the member of the Russian HMB team that through experience and experiment perfects his or hers fighting harness. It's way better than just holding on to the well confirmed dogmas.
I can't recall the author off the top of my head. Maybe it was in one of the Mikhail Gorelik's works? Or Kriskó Gyula's treatise on the Mongol Invasion of 1240's? You know, one of the authors that does not share the western-centric view of the world, which seems to be an emerging trend in these days of political correctness. Details are vague though. I must have read it some years ago, and, as I usually research everything at once using some obscure sources, all I was left with is the general impression. I think the gist of it was:
a) the Crusaders left for Jerusalem clad in mail, came back wearing armoured surcotes;
b) the "Vikings" left for Byzanium clad in mail, came back wearing lamellar cuirasses and Briost Bjorg;
c) the greatest concentration of depictions of the first CoP's and armoured surcotes seem to originate from Germany or Spain, both of which had frequent altercations with the "eastern" cultures;
d) the "eastern" armour of choice of the time is a form of hatanga degel as well as the lamellar armour;
e) the Europe was only just coming out of the "Dark Ages" at the time, and many other scientific novelties and improvements were imported via the crusading armies and their followers;
f) hence the notion the armour in that form (fabric reinforced with plates) was imported in it most primitive form, or at least heavily inspired by, the clash with the Eastern World in the form of Crusades, Mongol Invasion or the Reconquista.
This does not hinge on anything other than free thinking (or in some cases wishful thinking) considering how sparse, politically biased and incomplete the sources are. I do however urge you to pull together everything you know about the first depictions and descriptions of the armoured surcote and its origins and think about it for a minute.
Midcal9
Member
No, Sir you do not owe any apologies. But I did find some of your claims to be somewhat new to me simply beciase I've never heard anyone else say that. I know of coat of plates but I've never heard Tobias Capwell, or Matt Easton or anyone else ever say that. Never in a museum, never on youtube HEMA channal. Not by Knigh Errant.
They had a different construction method. Coat of plates had larger plates, it laso had less of them. Coat of plates developed into Brigandine and plate. To me they are two different things. Like a Battle rifle and Assault rifle.
Underdogs and naysayers tend to get things even more wrong than those who assert themselves from the top of the social pyramid. You'd be better off by looking for a just decision made by a King than by a weak, resentful have-not scoundrel. And the objective ones, the disinterested folk has no grasp on how reality functions anyways, they live in the world of abstractions.
This "West Centric" view of the world does not wish to put the other above himself and desires for itself to remain the dominant force. Every single healthy culture put itself first, that includes historical achievements because they often form the fundament for the contemporary culture. Every single Turk, Arab, Chinese, Japanese and African gets it. But somehow we don't since 1960s.
Anyways, here is a good article; http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/armor
"For the next century or so our knowledge of Persian armor fashion is dependent on further miniature paintings. This raises problems since the illustrations may have followed earlier styles rather than contemporary fashions. However, the following features seem reasonably certain. By the end of the 14th century handguards had become part of the arm defense, attached to the vambrace, and by the early 15th century armor for the knee joint had become more complex, with plate discs for the knees set in mail surrounds (e.g. illustrations in the Šāh-nāma of Ebrāhīm Solṭān in the Bodleian Library) (Figure 22). Mail aventails with plate ear-pieces attached to the plate helmets were also standard pieces of equipment by now, and surcoats commonly hid the body armor. Long mail coats are occasionally depicted. From manuscripts from Herat of the early 15th century one might summarize standard as follows: plate helmet, mail Timurid armor aventail, plate ear-pieces, plate vambraces with handguards, short lamellar coat, plate knee plates and greaves with mail joints, and plate shoes."
A whole multitude of stuff. You can pick any element of 14th century European Armour and proclaim that it was inspired by something just because it had existed elsewhere. When you see a copy you know it. Some Slavic armors were in fact copies of Ottoman Armour. That I will not deny.
Imo we've simply started to cover ourselves in iron once we realized that mail was not sufficient. Arabs and mongols had a lot of different types of Armour but somehow we manged to copy the best without using or incorporating any cheaper alternatives..No I don't think so. Coat of plates being a copy of Hatagana? Not on my watch!
Syllabear3
Member
LOW FANTASY
OW FANTASY
W FANTASY
FANTASY
ANTASY
NTASY
TASY
asy
sy
.
