>western orc

>I dont think the video is still up on youtube but Mike Loades demonstrates that you can kill someone through plate armor by hitting a breastplate on a block of ballistic gel, showing that the kinetic energy can be carried through it while the breastplate contorts and returns to its original shape to cope with the energy hitting it and not breaking
I have no idea what kind of thin plate he was using and why he was putting it directly on a gel block. Actual soldiers wore up to two more padded layers beneath the plate, making these sorts of experiments pointless from the beginning.
>I'll personally always prefer using swords but it is true that they lack mass for causing that kind of damage
That's also bullshit. A one-handed sword is as heavy as a as one-handed blunt weapon. Mass is completely irrelevant here, because all blunt weapons were designed to be extremely light so you can swing them fast and more than 2 times.
>Many a historic record recount knights carrying blunt weapons as an anti-armor sort of too
More bullshit. Knights were 100% mounted during battle and carried blunt weapons only as side arms. The Rabenschnabel was one of the more popular ones, and it was designed to be held by a mounted soldier hitting people on their heads. There is no historical documentation of full plate foot soldiers carrying blunt side arms. The common tactic was not to hit with a blunt weapon against plate, but to topple the opponent, then stab him in the armor gaps with polearms.
>The issue with blunt weapons isnt that they arent effective against unarmored enemies, its that theyre extremely unbalanced
Jesus frick, NO NO NO. Blunt weapons weren't unbalanced! What kind of blunt weapons are you fricking talking about? Warcraft Paladin sledgehammers? Wooden clubs? Whatever you are thinking of, it was not used by anyone expect maybe some piss poor peasant who got drafted in the last minute and just brought whatever he was currently working the field with.

mordhau

completely forgot it was a game kek

>that's wrong. I used longswords
knightchad I kneel

>polearms got quickly replaced by pikes and halberds.
I meant poleaxes. you get the drift.

That's what that other anon mistakenly reffered to as "unbalanced" but the other anon sperged out instead of explaining to him that Maces aren't unbalanced they have more mass at the end, just like an axe that translates into more force at a the point of the impact.

>Crossbows and Longbows
I'm pretty sure I've seen plenty of videos demonstrating that nor bolts or arrows were effective against plate sturdyness or deflection, mostly lucked out between gaps.

Perhaps lowest quality ones from.the late middle ages, but high quality reinforced cuirasses and half-plates could withstand musket shots, and an arrow would not stand a chance.

>Nothing. That's the point of fricking plate metal armor.
Wrong. Nothing beats a good comfy shield in combat. Doesn't matter how much fantasy metal you'll put to cover your belly, le good ole arbalest bolt to the helmet or legs will make a quick job of disposing of a homosexual like you.
Even in the close melee combat protecting your foot/leg is way more important, because the bones in your leg will be broken or your foot will be cut off, you'll fall to the floor or even kneel an that will be the end of you.
Shiny Thick Plate was only ever good on a horse in a mid-late age of tournies tournament to keep you relatively safe against a special wooden weapon, that people had to use. Because they didn't at the beginning and the tournaments were an injury fiesta and a death shitshow while using regular military weapons.

if you make a shield strong enough to give better protection than expertly made armor, then it's too heavy to lift. you use shields for formation fighting, and even there they eventually decided to just stop using it since fighting with 2h weapons is just outright superior. only problem with massed 2h formation is that when e.g., your two pike blocks walk into each other, everyone instantly dies, and people usually aren't hardcore enough to walk into certain death in battle.

don't know, it'd hurt like a fricking b***h regardless

>Point is, even weapons specialized against plate do worse against plate than they would against weaker armor or no armor
Well yeah, what can demolish a house can do at least the same amount of damage to a shed.

>(your pierced/cutted/etc right through it)
So there'd be no difference in how any of these interacted with the armor itself?

>just like nunchucks
Anon why the frick would farmers have two sticks attached by a chain lying around? There is literally no situation where a nunchucks outperform just a sturdy long stick.

I don't need a "source" to know the physics behind being hit by a solid object makes it more effective than being hit by an object that will bounce off me. The video is just so mongoloids like you can see it with their own eyes.

>why is a total novice like Shad shit at using a nunchuck? It must be because it's a shit weapon.
morons like you should be shot.

There is zero (none (not at all)) evidence for nunchucks being used in large scale organized violence of any kind.
It is entirely a bullshido weapon, and basically should only be used for the martial themed yoga east asians love to pretend is a combat discipline.

See [...]

[...]
I don't disagree with how stupid this is, but it doesn't mean some c**t didn't have their skull caved in by a broom handle. The frick you think axes were mainly used for?

Wood felling axes and people felling axes are different weapons. You didn't bring a wood felling axe to a fight. You'd honestly rather bring a big stick, as its more balanced and better to defend with.

It doesn't matter who makes the video, the only important part is the part where he compares a big strong guy hitting with a nunchuck vs hitting with a solid stick.

>moron comes in snivelling about realistic depiction of weapons in the most insufferable homosexual terms
>such a homosexual they go out the other sideof just flat out criticising over romanticised weapons and armor and denying they exist despite clear historical references
Fricking knew you were a shadversity fan. No one is that much of a snivelling nerd about medieval weapons.

>guy who made the video in his backyard jerking off his mall ninja understanding of shit being debunked by a frickload of actual historians repeatedly notwithstanding
Lol, lamo even.

>you reference homosexuals
>i reference not homosexuals
So because there are homosexuals here your appeal to authority is somehow more effective?

I admit, I have no fricking idea what that is. Still, the handle looks far longer than the typical nunchuck so already that gives you the reach necessary for a weapon to be useful.

>Its definitely not nunchucks.
Yes, that was used in Europe, but I assume that nunchacks would be used for a similar purpose in China or wherever.

>American MMA
>originating in Japan and Brazil first
It was just called mma in America, they didn't start it up

Is not autistic when shooto and pride leagues are older than UFC and still exist

>all the stories about MMA fighters getting punched out in bars because weight classes and rules aren't out in the real world.
Always good for a laugh.

that's a very specific seethe

>have you ever talked to a juijistu practitioners
I was a student for ~16 months, and taught kids for ~4 months.
The first advice, often repeated, is to run away. Someone wants to fight you? Run away. Can't run away? Try to engage, and first chance you get, get up and run away. Its a running joke, pun intended.

They don't take it far enough in my opinion. You need threat assessment skills to avoid getting into a fight to begin with.
>avoid eye contact
>be aware of surroundings
>avoid being in sprinting distance with shady characters
>avoid being in bad areas
>avoid being in night
Etc etc. I never had to run away despite living in Detroit, because I follow these rules. I looked god damn moronic, sometimes I would cross busy streets just to avoid a homeless guy or something. But I never got stabbed

>bodyfat percentage correlates positively with the speed at which someone clicks "fit person gets hurt" articles.
You mean negative, nobody wants to read about anon's getting beat up

MMA is a bare fist fight as a sport. a lot of eastern forms were formed with the context that you're applying this in the real world where someone else could have a concealed weapon. It made both parties generally more reluctant to engage and explains why the less aggressive styles all flunk out of MMA.
Im sure a lot of them got stuck up their own asses with the mysticism, but its like comparing historic fencing techniques to HEMA. HEMA uses armour, rule sets, blunts and all kinds of limitations as well as expectations of it being a sport to work at all. it doesnt emulate the real deal well at all.

just the fact a weapon is sharp can influence how it handles with certain techniques.

Anon, if you tried to do aikido in a fight, you'd get worse results than if you just tried to walk forward with your arms in front of your face, and then grab the person with one hand and punch them with the other.
Your instinct, when you have zero martial training, is to grab and hit. Its to close distance, grapple with one hand, punch with the other. Literal caveman shit. And this outperforms 90% of east asian martial traditions.
The ones that do best are the ones that transitioned to sport, and during that transition, threw out most of their moves and cleaned up into some variant of judo or karate.

A lot of people seem to be unaware that a lot of these "mystical eastern martial arts" are modern as shit as well.
Karate was literally invented in the early 1900's (pretty much), and it was invented specifically so that the super nationalistic imperial japs could have something to brag about because they had no equivalent to european boxing.
Judo as well was invented in the first decade of 1900's (though it was developed from jujutso which is much older).

>Karate was literally invented in the early 1900's (pretty much), and it was invented specifically so that the super nationalistic imperial japs could have something to brag about because they had no equivalent to european boxing.
I thought they pinched it off the Ryukyuans after they conquered the island kingdoms since imperial law forbade them to carry weapons and practice swordsmanship. Same reasons for why the sai and kama made their way over as ninja weapons elevated from basic farming tools. It wouldn't be the first time that the Yamoto took inspiration from their neighbors before absorbing them.

Don’t forget martial arts we’re also brought to east Asia by Aryan monks

mma restricts a lot of moves from eastern martial arts, of course boxers will win against them

>but the modern american sport of MMA
Only work because it's 99% ground grappling, which will get you instantly killed in a group fight.

Unless you outnumber then, in which case everybody can pile on and immobilize them.

Actual "real fight", as in war, will see far more grappling than punching or kicking. And in the fantasy medieval settings being discussed here, this is even more pronounced.
Although it would mostly be upper body work, grappling for a weapon, pulling and pushing. The kind of group grappling you see in team sports, like rugby.

> MMA basically showed that all east Asian "martial arts" simply do not work
You don't know shit about MMA.
What are Muay Thai and Jiujitsu? They are basic martial arts that most MMA fighters train. Less common, but also used are karate and judo.

>You beat the wheat plants with it, so they drop their seeds.
should have been an actual first quest instead of rats in the basement

>you will never have a 6'4 friend whose a sir

You wouldn't get knighthood if you could?

I have no idea he just called him sir and I accept it

>I WAS WRONG.... visible
>.... or was I? if you open it
>I WAS WRONG on thumbnail
>lol no nunchucks are still dumb if you hover over it
Good use of YouTube mechanics for trolling,desu.

Fails are an agricultural tool that could, in a last ditch resort situation, be used as a weapon.
Is it a first choice? No. But I can guarantee that people have been beaten to death with em before.

>almost quoting already debunked shadversity favgotry verbatim
Just stfu and do a Google search already you hapless weenie.

why would you wear decoration under your surcoat, also there are theoriers that linothorax could be also made from leather.
and buff coats aren't leather jackets those are thick and heavy.
do you think you can make a soldier wear 3kg of useless gear without them discarding it at the first chance

Also, these existed and served a purpose of protection and decoration.
But yeah, you would hardly see a cuirass of pure boiled leather. It would be reinforced with metal of some kind, otherwise It would not be very useful against more direct thrusts and strong slashes

>after renaissance
people were shooting each other. with all kinds of curious devices, such as arquebus or petronel, including all of the earlier and later analogues of them, including but not limited to a simple musket.
Most kinds of armor is pretty useless against that. How thick do you believe the real armor plates were? People had to be able to carry them on their bodies, you know.
TL;DR: Yeah, no shit a simple chainmail tunic fell off, but so did most kinds of armor, including plated. Because they're useless against cannons and bullets.

Cavalry is something different than foot soldiers. Plus, it's just mitigation of most bullshit accidental risks. In reality it didn't matter much whether they wore a plate at a shootout. Because horse, head, legs, etc always were more vurneable, but causing just as much damage, as a knife to the belly. Both ultimately resulted in death. Also, read more about plate below. And even cavalry wasn't safe from cannons. I know people often use movies, videogames, fan fiction as references to the warfare, but the reality was different. Cavalry has always had a limited use in warfare. It was extremely expensive, very limited in numbers, and required a very good commander to be used effectively.

yet people still used breastplates a form of plate armor during that time up to the 19th century

not people. c**ts in homosexual ruffle shirts, who would be able to buy such an item. Plus, it didn't really protect them either. Sure, it could deflect a slow bullet, or save a bruise from peasan't club, but it is not effective against a cannon ball.
Besides 19th century is Napoleonic Wars. So, the warfare changed completely, because regular state-wide conscription became a thing (yeah it wasn't during darkest feudal middle age times). Which meant that tens of thousands of people were involved in the military, making wheels, and teaching homosexuals discipline became way, way more important than a piece of plate. And no regular musketeergay (in thousands) wore a plate. Ever.

read this

those shitty round balls weren't that aerodynamic, you can stand far enough away to be able to shoot and kill an unarmored man while being invulnerable to his return fire. the spanish (?) had those weird pistol riders with mass-produced plate armor, who would ride up to formations and fire their guns into them at close range before riding off again to reload, they probably weren't wearing the armor just to make their horses run slower

Nothing. That's the point of fricking plate metal armor.
Steel plate armor was the pinnacle of personal protection at the time, and it was basically invulnerable. The only real option was to aim between the gaps in the plates or try to hit the head. It wasn't just the durability of steel either, but the shape of the armor. Blows would merely glance off rounded edges instead of biting into them. Using a mace or warhammer was basically a must if you were going up against a heavily armored combatant, and even then you would be aiming for the head because it was the most vulnerable part.
If Guns hadn't been invented, steel plate armor would still be king.

Yeah, but my point, for some anons larping as historians here, is that artillery became a thing way before personal handguns became a thing. Because the initial point of artillery was to demolish the structures. It's just so happened, that even a trebuchet, loaded with a dead infected cow and loads of human feces was more effective against plate than people imagine.

if we're talking about real warfare to shit on fantasy nonsense, then ofc they do. When do you think people began using cannons in battle? It was in the medieval period, believe it or not. Along with chainmail, platemail, and everything else.
TL;DR: In the context of the IRL history, ofc they are. Because cannons existed alongside of the Plate Armor homosexualry.

because they're silly. Even when the crossbow came along it wasn't considered a good/honorable/christian/whateverthefrick weapon, because it was so damn fricking effective. Granted, relative short range (compared to light arrowed bows) and slow reload speed (compared to 3 shots per minute with a bow) might be seen as drawbacks. Reality, however, as usual, is different to fantasy, because IRL arbalest fricking obliterated everything, if it was used correctly. Esp in battle.
The outcome of a medieval battle, in general, never came down to the type of armor a random gay was wearing.

also, just for lulz, do you what was the main defense of a crossbowgay IRL during a battle? A shield. A big and rectangular one (sort of), granted. But those gays planted their shields in front of them and then shat on everybody else with their crossbows.
History, btw, knows all sorts of events. There was a battle, that commanding homosexuals were too eager to start (France - England so called 100 year medieval war) the battle. They didn't give their own troops time to prepare. So the crossbowmen, left all of the shields behind in the supply wagon train, because nodoby carried those fricking shields on themselves during the march ofc. Anyhow, French homosexual was too willing to catch the lesser English troops, so that he sent all of his mercenary crossbowmen and other troops into the battle right away, first. And they have sucked massive dick against British bow and longbowmen without their shields. Huge losses for that "french" company that day.
Another time tho, British were fricked, because crossbowmen had their shields and planted them.
TL;DR: Reality isn't homosexual fantasy at all. That's all I'm saying. People should educate themselves before praising some kind of weapon or some piece of armor in general. The only type of armor that stood a test of time (over a fricking millenia) is the chain mail (tunic). Even that fell off in the late medieval period tho.

It is relevant to the most important thing: Warfare IRL.

It wasn't about shields tho. Exclusively anyway. I just thought I'd mention their shields. The point I was making was about crossbows in the first place. How they shat on anything and everything. Bowmen whether eastern light cavalry
>ride close
>shoot
>run away
tactic homosexuals or british longbowmen were quite effective against heavily armored troops too, including heavy armored cavalry (known as knights).

>crossbowmen and archers would also get get plate armor if they could afford it.
Not a single plate, because it might limit the movement too much. Plus, a really good helmet during medieval times always was way more important than a breastplate. Chain Mail did just fine. Even those, depending on size, might have been too heavy and uncomfortable in certain situations.
>brigandines and corrazinas are also form of plate armor
Yes ofc. Plate pieces sewn onto or rather tied to the frame with the leather bits also were a thing.

>c**ts in homosexual ruffle shirts
French cuirassiers where feared by other countries soldiers.
also other countries also employed cuirassiers
>Sure, it could deflect a slow bullet
that was enough for most most soldiers better than dying or being injured

Literally thousands.

TEN THOUSAND

after and during the renaissance a cuirass is a lot cheaper compared malile.
mail is very time consuming to make a cuirass take less time but requires skilled labor.
so as technology improves plate becomes cheaper.
napoleon had 16 regiment of cuirasiers so that means at least 1600 armorerd men in the 19th century in France.
other countries also had cuirassiers and during WW1 some soldiers had breatsplates for the trenches

>Literally thousands.
never.
>Literally thousands
would have be economically impossible to train, equip, upkeep, and pay for. No King could do that alone. No "country" during the Renaissance or right after it could afford to do that.
A combined might of multiple regions/feudals/castles amounting to 2-3k cavalry men for ONE battle might have been possible during the medieval period. It was an immense force to be reckoned with, however. One of things games like Mount & Blade does right is limiting the amount of active troops of most lords to under a 100. Because that was the reality. You just usually couldn't collect more cavalry troops at once.

Fricking moron.

And let's not forget the absolute madman.

A good one that I have seen was from a mod for Kenshi. It was essentially solid polished ball on the end of a rod. Exclusively employed by Skinbandits and they were strong enough to donk right through a samurai helmet. Great weapon for taking slaves without the risk of knocking a limb off. They called it a Falling Star.

Its becomes a mace when you take the spikes out.

A morning star is just a ball shaped mace with spikes and was really effective.
A spike ball on a chain linked to a wooden handle is a form of flail that exclusively exists in decoration because only a suicidal frick would actually risk fighting with it.

This tends to be the most common idea of a fantasy flail, even though that anon posted the realistic flail which is a long stick with a rope "hinge" carrying another stick covered in spikes.

That's why I posted the meteor hammer, because it really was a ball with a chain or rope that you'd swing around, the difference being is it had no handle.
With enough rope or chain you could pretty much swing the thing around without much risk for hurting yourself.

The Meteor Hammer is what Gogo Yubari uses in Kill Bill, which people mistake for a flail. Some of the techniques such as the neck wrap are actually what people with the meteor hammer did to control a strike.

So which ones were swarming fellowship party? Goblins or orcs afraid of sun?

He has everything.
>goblins and goblin King, who are just nasty fricking homosexuals.
>underground little shitty middle earth orcs, who are basicly undead, who are afraid of sun and pretty much the only race because very friendly with goblins and evil overlords
>evil Saruman uses the shitty little underground middle earth orcs as slave labor to create the Uruk. Who are magically imbued undead not fearing the sun anymore.
>then you have the northern orcs, who also have sub species. some of them are little homosexuals, some of them are almost like Uruk.

This is entirely wrong, they are all the same things : orcs.
There a just small ones you see everywhere and bigger ones that Sauron and Sarumane purposely breed like dogs.
Sarumane even cross breed them with wildmen

No, you're confusing different orcs, so you're wrong. The orcs swarming in Moria are the orcs who fought against dwarves for eternity and eventually killed them and settled in the Moria. After Sauron is banished, again, by Sam and Frodo, the Dwarves gather new forces and take Moria back from those little shits. That's like 4th age.
The Uruk that were chasing the party after Moria are a different group, that was sent separately.

[...]
[...]
This is entirely wrong, they are all the same things : orcs.
There a just small ones you see everywhere and bigger ones that Sauron and Sarumane purposely breed like dogs.
Sarumane even cross breed them with wildmen

>they are all the same things : orcs
their properties differ too much to consider them being
>same thing
>There a just small ones you see everywhere
yes, like "natural" orcs by the time the 2nd and 3rd age come around. They inhabit all kind of caves and other underground places all over. North, Mordor, later also Moria.
>Sauron and Sarumane purposely breed like dogs. Sarumane even cross breed them with wildmen
Yes. Saruman also reveals that they're undead in the movie. And imbues them (genetically changes them) to not fear sun/light anymore.

Eoten is the old English word for it. I think if we want to use a Greek word the Titans are more similar to the Jotun than the Gigantes, I think they all come from a common root that also gives us the Asura vs. Deva war in Hindu myth.

not blins either there a girl in Windwaker that was saved and got rich thanks to a moblin and there is a chief in TP that stop doing evil stuff since you beat him.
I think the implication is that they just come from hell and have to obey the dark lord but can be whatever