Search results

  1. Blackthorn

    New Armour that you would like

    Microcosm said:
    I would like to see different varieties of armor, for instance various styles of plate armor, maybe differing with each faction, more types of mail armor, mail over boiled leather, mail shirts, chainmail hauberks, just more variety to make each item less common. More helmets would be nice too; great helms, half helms, etc.

    IOW: I recently read Game of Thrones. Please Game of Thrones Armours. KThanksBye.
    :wink:
  2. Blackthorn

    Analyze the name of the poster above you.

    An Aragorn-clone prone to rusting.
  3. Blackthorn

    Archers; Too heavily armed

    Maybe people will be more willing to listen to you if you did not speak like a massive ass.

    ... whereas you are both clearly witty and a gentleman. I salute your ability to mash at the keyboard with bile and ignorance. That must have taken your keyworker a long time to teach you.
    x x x
  4. Blackthorn

    Archers; Too heavily armed

    Archers are people too!
    Again, read back, and there's a distinct difference between a militia archer (someone who has turned up for annual service with a bow or a crossbow) and a proffessional (a seasoned veteran who also shoots a crossbow or a warbow). The proffesionals will have been sparring with other troops, and seen their fair share of battlefields; siege warfare was a 12th-13thC staple, and a man who couldn't fight once the walls were reached weren't much use. Therefore expect veteran proffesionals to wear armour, wield shortarms and be about as useful as their infantry compatriots in melee.
    The first troops Richard I raised for the Third Crusade were mercenary crossbowmen, because an experienced commander knows that a bunch of well-seasoned hard-hitters with bows can form the backbone to a decent army. Pretty much the evolution of warfare led to the ranged troops taking up more and more of the battlefield until they took it all.
  5. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    Most medieval laws and ordinances that ban weapons don't cover swords or daggers; they're simply considered items of polite dress for gentlemen. For instance, carry a wood-worker's handaxe on your belt within an Anglo-Norman city that's suffering a bit of public unrest, and expect to be 'gone over' by the local militia. Walk down the same road with a sword belted on, and expect them to step aside and bow. Welcome to the world where the social status of the sword awards it's own 'right to bear arms'- IE- I carry this, ergo I have the right to. It's why the banning of bucklers was so hiliarious- it's the begining of the tide turning against 'young gentlemen going armed'; within a few hundred years decent gents like myself wouldn't be allowed to wear swords at all...
  6. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    OgrE_LusT said:
    Yes,but i was saing about ancient times not medieveal ones two handed swords like those in the vid are pure medieval warfare,also those guys where no mach for shield armored foes,the best use of them was to kill light armored foes and also pikemans.And imù sorry if you don't belive in history..
    And Imu Sorry you don't believe in spellcheck. Seriously, kudos for arguing outside your native tongue, but that's why I don't post on French boards.
    Go and Google 'Falx' and lo and behold! One large hooked two-handed weapon that is neither slow nor cumbersome. I don't know what point it is you're trying to make, but it seems to be entirely centred around dual-wielding being useful because Romans use magical shields. Forgive me if that's not the case...
  7. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    Berserker1066 said:
    I just cant stop laughing about some of the posts.
    This is the point we agree on.

    Berserker1066 said:
    For example that in history no one has fought by dual wielding weapons and that it would take away realism in mount and blade and its just fantasy well you should check the history again because Vikings were known to fight with dual wielding axes also. Certainly theyre most of them got shield on the right arm because they used shield wall but there were some of them who used dual wield. And in one of the first posts one guy said that in dark ages no one would use the dual wield because they wanted to survive the battles so they picked the shield but Vikings went in a battle with thought that they will die because in theyre religion if they would ide on battlefield they would enter the Valhalla(paradise) so they had no fear of dying on battlefield.

    *facepalm*
    Right- let's find some sources for some of it, eh? I mean, ''Vikings were known to dual-wield axes'' is not quite the argument you may believe .
    Also- ''Vikings didn't fear to die because it was in their religion" would be an excellent argument for Saxons not being afraid fighting back tides of angry pagans who ransacked monastries- equally that'd be a good reason for 'going to heaven'. The main sources claiming Vikings as unstoppable killing machines who felt no fear in battle (or, as some would describe that, Uruk-hai) were the same Saxon sources that then list a series of battles where they were bought off, beaten, or routed. Frankly speaking, what you've posted is a series of common myths, believing you're dispelling them. Most Danes of the Great Army (the period that really gained the Saxon's attention and led to the 'Viking myth') were either shield-and-spear wielders or sometimes long-handled axe-wielders. Explain why two axes would somehow be immensely useful, other than as a demonstration of utter stupidity before being run through. Especially amongst combatants who were fighting in limited front combats with little scope for latteral movement and dodging. But never mind all that. *cough*

    I hate the internet.
  8. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    Simple combat stancing; 2 hours tution, expect full development and fluid movement at fourth session, developing to full weight management and balanced attack and defence postures by the fifteenth. Complete mastery within a lifetime. :wink:

  9. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    Welcome to the 'novelty' end of history, where anything 'different' is poked up the ladder of commonality to 'FREQUENTLY DONE' and packaged to keep people interested. It's wonderful because 9/10ths of the time the stuff they're bored of hasn't been presented correctly or in a format that interests (really explaining the skills and the approaches to sword and shield, for instance) and just means people wander around with some new exciting fallacies about medieval Ninja types. Japan suffers from the 'novelty history' horribly, because it's how their historical culture was marketed in the 1980's, and there's still a HUGE number of people who don't realise the realities behind the ''NINJA SWORDS" they bought and smacked on the wall.
    *sigh*
    /Rant.

    Thanks for the welcome back, btw. :grin:
  10. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    Alpha said:
    Miyamoto Musashi... nuff' said.

    Miyamoto Musashi himelf labeled the style impractical and did it as a demonstration of extreme skill only.
    'Nuff said.
  11. Blackthorn

    Hiding Behind a Pavise Shield.

    AWdeV said:
    Blackthorn said:
    Or, historically, send in the SHI.

    Super Heavy Infantry?

    Yep. :smile:
    SHI: Dismounted knights, usually. :grin:
  12. Blackthorn

    Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

    brognar said:
    1. there were no people who dual wielded to break shield walls
    2. it's not that hard to get two good swords

    1) 100% True. All 'Viking' dual wielding evidence is civilian fights breaking out during otherwise peaceful situations, and the most common description is a spear and 'blade'- suggesting the sword is held in reserve, or even the spear is thrown. Not a 'berserk' at all, the evidence for whom is sparse enough as it is without adding in the 100 tonnes of Bullsh!t.

    2) The fact that people would even consider dual-wielding over dual-handed techniques demonstrates the two-handed AND shield dynamics need to be worked on, rather than ''we need two weaponz!" In real life a spear is so much deadlier than in M+B where it is the worst ''hook a duck'' device available.
  13. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    Other than the other one would require it to be maille cuisses... and the other cuisses have no padding marked on them...
    The one I'm talking about (Eustace's) clearly has one band at the bottom of his maille, and ANOTHER at the top of his chausse.

    Small point though; I HAD already mentioned cuisses in the post below the one you quoted. Thread-read and all that jazz. :wink:
  14. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    Yeah- the one major thing that's useful about the Tapestry is the frequent instances of bordering maille with a band of other fabric to show an 'edge'- the drawn facsimilie above shows the 'line' clearly visible at the top of the shin on one of the knight's chausses, demonstrating that in one case at least, it stops at the knee.
    They're essentially 'outdated' compared to the rest of my gear. Though the Villard D'Honnecourt image shows they remained in use for what would seem to be relatively light gear, though it could also be showing some upper-thigh armour worn OVER full chausses; thigh cuisses were known but it would be their first major depiction (after the one blink and you'll miss it instance in the Triumph of Virtues over Vices in a German manuscript) in Western art, and without any of the usual 'padded' image indicators.

    They're a halfway compromise between full chausses and not wearing any leg armour on foot (which some people still insist on)- I'd argue that the fully enclosed foot is a better virtue if you're mounted (they stick out at infantry strike-height!) but far less important on foot (putting a shot way down there is possible, but difficult).

  15. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    GodHandApostole said:
    I meant the feet, actually.. I never saw shoes wore over chausses :wink:
    Ahhh!
    William_Duke_of_Normandy_accompanied_by_Eustatius_Count_of_Boulogne_and_followed_by_his_Knights_in_arms_Military_Dress_of_the_Eleventh_Century_from_Bayeux_Tapestry_said_to_have_been_worked_by_Queen_Matilda.png
    But yes- my full leg ones will also include the foot; essentially maille leggings, with open backs to allow lacing them tighter, with a 'built in' leather sole. Basically those are my 'light chausses' in a more 1066 style, worn as basic leg protection, because on foot the weight's a killa.
  16. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    GodHandApostole said:
    How do you wear those mail gloves? Are they attached to the hauberk?

    P.S. get yourself proper chausses :razz:

    Yeah- 'flaps' as per the Winchester bible figures, but with the addition of leather gloves to prevent finger loss. :wink:

    P.S.- Research
    220px-Westminster_Knight.jpg
    and
    Villard_de_Honnecourt.jpg
    Note the 'extra' half legs on the mid 13thC figure, and the half-chausses on the right-hand early 13thC figure. Want ketchup with your words? :razz: I do plan to have a set of fulls as well, but that's a project for another day...
  17. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    Skot the Sanguine said:
    *Facepalm...and so, despite the "razz" and "laugh" smilies, someone thought I was being serious.

    I saw the url on the picture after I already posted it, so I figured I would make a joke about it.  :wink:

    By the way Captured Joe, those helmets on the Bavarians look like a mix between a "Bobby" and a raider's mohawk from Road Warrior.  :mrgreen:

    The plan was to make you giggle. As you pause to do so- they shoot you. Cunning, really...

    292072_10150410375334741_506434740_10667430_2611284_n.jpg
    *sings* Ahm so vaiiiiin, I prob'bly think this thread is about me.... */sings*
  18. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    Roach XI the Magnificent said:
    Indeed. Which my opponent simply forgot out of hand. Covering one's retreat, it's called, he hopes to flee with a bit of internet-honor remaining. Which is funny, since this is all anonymous, and there is no logical reason to do that apart from one's social instincts.

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with your half of this little skirmish- you yourself have ret-conned posts, ammended them, and added in images post-discussion to reinforce your points (even when the conversation was a tad erroneous) and corrected mistakes emphatically that I didn't in fact make. :wink: A little less belligerence, mayhap? :razz:
  19. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    Too many exposed throats and necks... I could have a field day...
    For humour value- WWI German in heavy trench armour. Steampunk's wetdream...
  20. Blackthorn

    Best-dressed Warrior

    JScott17 said:
    Weren't those introduced because of some kind of weapon the Thracians, Dacians, and Illyrians used?
    I think it was called a Rhomphaia or something.

    Yeah- a lot of people overestimate the cutting power of single-handed swords, even the longer and heavier types. Romans used to suffer some limb injuries, but even a small amount of wound fabric or leather around the wrists prevented severe injury, and superficial cuts could be stitched quite effectively. The second two-handed bill like weapons enter the equation, the number of debilitating limb wounds means that you lose a LOT of combat-effective men very quickly; hence the sudden adoption of limb armour. Something similar can be seen again around the late Carolingian/Early Norman crossover- as larger axes and more polearms appear in Western Europe, mailleshirts rapidly expand to give full sleeve protection as a standard must-have. When the bill continues to develop the limb armour continues to improve rapidly; first boiled leather and steel splinting and poleyns, and then slowly fully enclosed plate segments.
    And as a personal note- having been hit with fully blunt, lightweight bills, you gain a respect for the power of a big blade on a two-handed stick- cracked a shin or two in my time...
Top Bottom