Battle fight!

**Larus marinus** · Posted On: 6/03/2011 6:20pm

Originally Posted by Lu Tze

Medieval.

The European middle ages encompassed a thousand fucking years of history, you really can't generalise like that at all. So don't.

The English longbowman, as an example, was an incredibly well trained peasant. It was in fact mandated by law that every able bodied man practice with this weapon, because it took so much time to master.

It's not that they didn't want well trained and equipped armies, it's that it was expensive as all hell, especially arms and armour. A mail hauberk in modern terms cost as much as a house.

Wow. How much would a full suit of plate armour cost then, you reckon?

I'm not uninformed enough to believe that there was a point in time when everyone was clanking around on the battlefield like ye olde knights of olde, dressed from head to toe in steel - but who typically would have been wearing that?

**Lu Tze** · Posted On: 6/03/2011 6:29pm

I'm not an expert either, but as far as I know mail and full plate are from different periods.

Full plate is more advanced, not necessarily more expensive. Think very carefully how a pre-industrial society would have to make something like a mail shirt.

**Permalost** · Posted On: 6/03/2011 6:36pm

Originally Posted by Lu Tze

Full plate is more advanced, not necessarily more expensive. Think very carefully how a pre-industrial society would have to make something like a mail shirt.

Well, you start with a big spool of wire...

Oh ****.

**Larus marinus** · Posted On: 6/03/2011 6:47pm

Originally Posted by Permalost

Well, you start with a big spool of wire...

Oh ****.

Indeed. Must've taken them absolutely ages - and I don't suppose that learning how to fabricate mail in the first place was easy either...

It's something that I've never really thought about.

**dwkfym** · Posted On: 6/03/2011 7:43pm

I don't know if anyone brought it up but the OP failes to realize that select few people survived the battle of thermopolae and even then no one from that era is even close to being alive. That alone makes this post really stupid.

**All Dice** · Posted On: 6/03/2011 9:06pm

Originally Posted by Larus marinus

Yeh, but the guys back then may have been far more skilled in sword-fighting than even the most enthusiastic resurrector of battlefield arts long since forgotten by the rest of the world - and know exactly how to deal with a larger, stronger, but less technically-sound opponent...

Or not. Weren't many historical armies largely composed of peasants who were recruited on the spot, as and when required (and given a few days of training?)? Dunno - I'm not a history buff.

Depends on the time period, in medieval Europe it was mostly peasants on the front line, archers would be a bitch though, same with Calvary. In rome I'd be fucked as they had professional armies.

**ProfessorChaos** · Posted On: 6/04/2011 12:08am

Originally Posted by Larus marinus

Wow. How much would a full suit of plate armour cost then, you reckon?

I'm not uninformed enough to believe that there was a point in time when everyone was clanking around on the battlefield like ye olde knights of olde, dressed from head to toe in steel - but who typically would have been wearing that?

Rich douchebag knights at the joust tourney.

**P Marsh** · Posted On: 6/04/2011 1:00am

Originally Posted by Larus marinus

Wow. How much would a full suit of plate armour cost then, you reckon?

I'm not uninformed enough to believe that there was a point in time when everyone was clanking around on the battlefield like ye olde knights of olde, dressed from head to toe in steel - but who typically would have been wearing that?

Suits of armour were either really expensive in the early years of medieval iron working when what little iron came from Russian and Scandinavian resources to much cheaper with the discovery of English pig iron and other western sources as well as coal smelting and other improvements on smithing technology.

And a full suit of armour would only be worn by someone riding a horse. Full suits were not only heavy as **** but incredible inflexible and hard to see in with a visor. Some ass with a mace or club could easily beat you silly while wearing a helm and you couldn't do **** about it. If you would be fighting on the ground I would assume a single breastplate or chain shirt would suffice and the rest would be tempered leather.

**Bneterasedmynam** · Posted On: 6/04/2011 12:38pm

Originally Posted by P Marsh

Suits of armour were either really expensive in the early years of medieval iron working when what little iron came from Russian and Scandinavian resources to much cheaper with the discovery of English pig iron and other western sources as well as coal smelting and other improvements on smithing technology.

And a full suit of armour would only be worn by someone riding a horse. Full suits were not only heavy as **** but incredible inflexible and hard to see in with a visor. Some ass with a mace or club could easily beat you silly while wearing a helm and you couldn't do **** about it. If you would be fighting on the ground I would assume a single breastplate or chain shirt would suffice and the rest would be tempered leather.

There was a good video in another thread posted on armor use, I believe it was a video done by Mike Loades. It showed that the armor back then wasnt as inflexible as people think and actually was at least for the most part easy to move in. I think the big problem would have been armor doesnt breath so heat exaustion would be a big problem.