News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Are asymmetrical suits of armour viable?

Started by Martinus, April 02, 2011, 04:23:45 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Martinus

What the title says. There is a recent tendency in fantasy / pseudo-medieval iconography to have wildly assymetrical suits of armour (like a huge thing on one shoulder). Is this viable or would this fuck up balance of the fighter?

The Brain

Asymmetrical suits have been used historically, so strictly speaking yes they are viable. The insane ship-on-the-shoulder type armors of computer games etc not so much.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Josquius

They make sense to an extent, your sword arm and shield arm have very different neeeds.
Not really something I've ever paid much attention to though.
██████
██████
██████

Slargos

If 2000 years of the evolution of plate armour didn't produce gigantic oversized shoulder plates, I think it's a safe bet to say they weren't really very useful.


Viking

Most kinds of gladiators seems to have had asymetrical armour of some sort.



Seems to be primarily useful when you know where the enemy is and what kind of weapon the enemy uses. Probably useless in real combat.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Richard Hakluyt

I've certaintly seen plenty of asymmetric sets, eg in the Tower of London. But I think Viking may be right, the armour I'm talking about was for jousting........ie pretend warfare with rules.

Siege

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 02, 2011, 09:44:51 AM
I've certaintly seen plenty of asymmetric sets, eg in the Tower of London. But I think Viking may be right, the armour I'm talking about was for jousting........ie pretend warfare with rules.


This. The only asymmetrical armour suits I have seen are early rennascence josting armour, in which the shield have been replaced by a big shoulder plate, and the sword-hand gauntlet is part of the jousting lance's oversized shield-like hand-guard.

They appear to be highly especiallized and highly inneffective in actual combat.



"All men are created equal, then some become infantry."

"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't."

"Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même!"


Siege

Definitively not something like this:



Or this:



"All men are created equal, then some become infantry."

"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't."

"Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même!"


Admiral Yi

What I've read about the reinforced left arm/shoulder is that they were a rational replacement of the shield which allowed the wearer to hold the reins more efficiently.

I think what might be confusing the joust/battle issue is the fact that by the time this development showed up armored cavalry had already lost its place as the queen of the battlefield.

Siege

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 03, 2011, 02:49:58 PM
What I've read about the reinforced left arm/shoulder is that they were a rational replacement of the shield which allowed the wearer to hold the reins more efficiently.

I think what might be confusing the joust/battle issue is the fact that by the time this development showed up armored cavalry had already lost its place as the queen of the battlefield.

No self respecting cavalryman uses the reins in combat.
They train their horses to go left or right by putting preasure with their knees, and to go forward or stop by the adjusting their body weight in the saddle.

Reins are for amateurs.



"All men are created equal, then some become infantry."

"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't."

"Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même!"


Admiral Yi

Quote from: Siege on April 03, 2011, 03:01:09 PM
No self respecting cavalryman uses the reins in combat.
They train their horses to go left or right by putting preasure with their knees, and to go forward or stop by the adjusting their body weight in the saddle.

Reins are for amateurs.

Seeing as I don't personally know that many medieval knights, I will have to conclude that you're talking out of your ass.

BTW, you deployed now?

Tonitrus

Quote from: Siege on April 03, 2011, 03:01:09 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 03, 2011, 02:49:58 PM
What I've read about the reinforced left arm/shoulder is that they were a rational replacement of the shield which allowed the wearer to hold the reins more efficiently.

I think what might be confusing the joust/battle issue is the fact that by the time this development showed up armored cavalry had already lost its place as the queen of the battlefield.

No self respecting cavalryman uses the reins in combat.
They train their horses to go left or right by putting preasure with their knees, and to go forward or stop by the adjusting their body weight in the saddle.

Reins are for amateurs.

Let me guess, you were crushed to find out the Army's announcement of the cavalry Stetson as the new official headgear (to replace the beret) was an April Fool's joke?  :P

Slargos

Quote from: Siege on April 03, 2011, 03:01:09 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 03, 2011, 02:49:58 PM
What I've read about the reinforced left arm/shoulder is that they were a rational replacement of the shield which allowed the wearer to hold the reins more efficiently.

I think what might be confusing the joust/battle issue is the fact that by the time this development showed up armored cavalry had already lost its place as the queen of the battlefield.

No self respecting cavalryman uses the reins in combat.
They train their horses to go left or right by putting preasure with their knees, and to go forward or stop by the adjusting their body weight in the saddle.

Reins in combat are for amateurs.

FYPFY. Professionals use reins all the time. Cattle drivers, jockeys, performance artists, royal guards and etc and etc.

Hell, I'd be surprised if there's NOT a proper use for reins for cavalry as well.

I know how to propel a horse in several directions at multiple speeds without the use of the reins, and I assure you I'm no professional rider.  :P

grumbler

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 03, 2011, 03:11:00 PM
Quote from: Siege on April 03, 2011, 03:01:09 PM
No self respecting cavalryman uses the reins in combat.
They train their horses to go left or right by putting preasure with their knees, and to go forward or stop by the adjusting their body weight in the saddle.

Reins are for amateurs.

Seeing as I don't personally know that many medieval knights, I will have to conclude that you're talking out of your ass.
Yeah, his statements certainly don't seem to make obvious sense; a cavalryman in combat is going to be shifting his weight and using his knees for combat, not for the edification of his horse.  You are trying to bash someone out of his saddle, and he is trying to bash you out of yours - the last thing you need to be thinking about is what signals you are sending to your horse via body language while fighting for your life!

Maybe there is something here I am missing, though; anyone who has fought as a mounted knight can jump in and correct any misapprehensions on my part.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Neil

What would Siegebreaker know about pre-modern combat?  Until the US created Israel, the Jews were a laughingstock when it came to matters military.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.