>Arrow penetrates plate armor I know this is a world where

Arrows could penetrate plate armour extremely easily. Fuck, they could pass straight through shields and still kill the person holding them. There's a reason why generals shat themselves over a good troop of longbowmen.

>>116287394
no they didn't.

>>116287394
You mean chain armor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk

>>116287394
>Arrows could penetrate plate armour extremely easily.
No it couldn't.

Japanese arrows can penetrate through any armor because the tips were made of specialized steel and folded over a thousand times.

>>116287394

No, they couldnt. Youre actually retarded, stop talking about shit you dont know about.

>>116287303
It's technically possible for an Arrow to penetrate plate but that plate would have to be both poor in its quality and structure.

At a glance, from the pic, the arrow should have been directed to the left of the guard rather than penetrating.

>>116287394

You know plate armor was developed almost specifically to prevent piercing from major war sources.

Like swords, spears, halberds, axe swings, javelins, oh and, arrows.

>unless you're just intentionally rustling up some jimmies then rustle on.

>>116287768
People still say rustle jimmies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk

dude the guy is using a magic bow

>>116287394
>this is what arrowfags actually beileve

>>116287394
A bodkin arrow from a longbow shot at nearly point blank range will have enough energy to penetrate SOME plate armors, yes, but it won't have enough to penetrate any quilting underneath the plate, never-mind bone.

A bolt from a heavy crossbow might do the trick, depending on how thick the armor is.

>>116287846
The real question is if the arrows are magic.

>>116287303
There's a reason everyone looked at Tigre in awe and praised him when that happened. Even in the world of magical Europe shit like that is still incredibly impressive to them.

Besides, this whole show is mythical warfare. Not only do you have magical people but you also have humans pulling off near impossible feats of strength.

>>116287900
> but it won't have enough to penetrate any quilting underneath the plate
It won't even touch it, the arrowhead will be blunt after going through plate armor and and only the tip will actually get stuck. Even if you're not wearing chain armor underneath, you will take no damage.

How the hell English won the Battle of Agincourt?
France is full of lazy nobleman with a plate mail

>>116287801

I thought I was being cheeky using "old" internet lingo to dispute old weaponry and armor.

>forgive me, sempai.

File: 1355386636226.jpg (63KB, 744x415px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 744x415px

>>116287394
Troll on sir

>>116287303
This is coming from the guy who shoots at the same spot in a shield multiple times instead of just firing a delayed second arrow which would arrive after the guy lowers his shield

He plays to impress

File: kek.png (365KB, 633x458px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 633x458px

>>116288160
>>116287896
>>116287768
>>116287670
>>116287546
>>116287451
You are THIS mad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-Xp56uVyxs

>>116288225
lold. Get rekt platefags

File: 1353481745069.jpg (49KB, 592x648px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 592x648px

>>116288225
inb4 shitstorm

>>116288225
A shit load of them bounced off, one went through after it was already weakened. You just proved our point.

>>116288225
>but how can a tapered steel tip penetrate a flat steel surface??

>>116288074
First of all, the best armor in that period would have been a coat of plates over chainmail, a bascinet with a houndskull visor, with some mix of plate armor and splinted armor on the limbs. Full suits of plate would not appear for about another century.

Second of all, armor of that quality would have been only present on a few heavy cavalry forces, not the bulk of the army, and barding for their horses would also very rarely be of that same quality.

File: 1413662528791.jpg (61KB, 800x1073px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 800x1073px

>>116287545
>>116287814
This is the late medieval variant though.

This is what earlier plate armour would have been like - before superior heat treatment was invented: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRXwk4Kdbic

Still protective, but at really close distances it could be penetrated.

>>116288074
The effect of longbows is generally overestimated. The golden age of the longbow was during the battles with Scotland.

>>116288225
That doesn't really look like a properly made armour though. Also, historical sources and accounts don't mention longbows to easily penetrate plate. I'd rather go with the video I've posted and >>116287545, which seems like a more properly set up experiment to me.

>>116288343
>even the ones that didn't stick left large, clearly visible holes
>"bounced off"

Platefag defense force is here

Why are medieval fags autistic as fuck?

>>116288365
This anon knows his shit

>>116288343
To be fair, there is ONE other large whole that might have done something maybe. The rest are just jokes.

>>116288394
You do realize that in order to do damage, the arrow need to actually touch your body right? None of them did, they can put dents on armor but they can't penetrate easily. Also, arrowheads are pretty much blunt after going through it.

And that was just 3 guys. Imagine an entire detachment of archers raining hell down on people throughout the battle.

>>116288225

Thread over nothing more to see here. Move along people.

>>116287647
kekd

>>116288402
Just /k/ being /k/

File: article-0-1555797B000005DC-424_634x462.jpg (88KB, 634x462px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 634x462px

Oh this thread on /a/ again.

I'm going to tell you the short version :
Yes, arrows COULD penetrate plate armor.
The right arrow combined with the right arrow head shot out of a bow with a strong enough pull force made short work of any sort of armor used at the time (when people wore plate armor).

-respectfully, /a/k/

>Arrowfags being retarded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCywaYlQxWE

>>116288402
Because the only people who study medieval weapons on this site are 200 pound neckbeard fa/tg/uys who read up on this shit so they can have more "realistic" games.

Armchair weapon experts of the worst variety. I'd bet none of them have even touched a sword or piece of armor in their life.

File: Chu-Ko-Nu_Crossbow.jpg (77KB, 706x499px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 706x499px

>longbows
Get with the times, grandma

>>116288590
>Because the only people who study medieval weapons on this site are 200 pound neckbeard fa/tg/uys
>While ´posting in an anime imageboard
Okay

File: fredo.gif (548KB, 245x176px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 245x176px

Why don't they just aim to the body parts not protected by the armour?

File: 1309459783138.jpg (107KB, 679x930px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 679x930px

>>116288659
That doesn't look like it would pack enough of a punch. Better try this one.

>>116288554
>tubby slavs firing weak shots with blunt arrows and shitty bows
Wow you really told me.

>>116287909
Or if the bow imparts some of the magic to the arrow, like a temporary "you can penetrate plate armour now" enchantment.

>>116288659
>using weapons made by shufags
Absolutely fucking disgusting

File: Italian_-_Sallet_-_Walters_51580.jpg (2MB, 1134x1799px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1134x1799px

>>116288709
>

>>116288343
Read the video description, the armor being used was of higher quality than normal medieval, and the bows were on the lower end of quality. The bows they used were 80-100 lb draw, medieval archers used ones that were 120 or more.

File: 1333331378325.jpg (550KB, 1848x2551px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1848x2551px

>>116288554
>made short work of any sort of armor used at the time (when people wore plate armor)
Complete nonsense.

First of all what is armour of "that time"? Longbows have been in use for centuries - way before plate armour.

Second, no. Armour - including chain armour and padded clothing - provided a reasonable defence against arrows, assuming they weren't point-blank shots. There are countless historical accounts describing armoured men looking like pincushions from all the arrows stuck in them.

Thirdly, late medieval armour was pretty much arrow proof. During battles like Verneuil or Patay, the cavalry DIRECTLY charged at the archers and only suffered minimal losses. At Patay, the archers didn't get to set up their fortifications, so they had to rely on the power of their weapons along and they were unable to stop the cavalry charge with arrows alone but were completely devastated by the attack.

How did Crusaders not cook to death in their metal ovens when they fought in the desert in the middle of the day?

Come on, what's the fuss here? Anyone with common sense could tell you that armor isn't a perfect defense, but it vastly increases your chances of surviving.

A lot of factors are involved and not many arrows will strike armor at an optimal angle for penetration.

>>116289179
no humidity?

I was thinking they use crossbows against armor...

>>116289179
I thought astronaughts had built in air conditioners.

>>116289189

People arent arguing that armor isnt a good defense its just that people seem to think that having armor means your somehow invincible and that everyone at the time had armor. Which is in fact bullshit considering a proper suit at the time was probably worth about as much as a modern house when you try to compare anything.

To say that armor makes all bows useless is total stupidity but thats what some people are saying here in this thread. Is it good protection against arrows? Sure. Does it make you an unwoundable god versus arrows? Hell no.

>>116289179
Things like white tabards and chaperons over their armour to prevent it from getting too hot in the sun. Lots of water.

Also, full gothic plate wasn't a thing yet during the crusades.

>>116288365

people tend to think of medieval warfare as a bunch of knights on horses slamming into one another with bright fancy plumes and flags and shit

I dont think people understand that most armies were made of conscripts (who were lucky to have their own blade) who wore little to no metal armor at all.

File: 1324763245049.jpg (482KB, 2173x2906px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 2173x2906px

>>116289179
By not having worn plate armour back then.

During the crusades plate armour wasn't worn yet.

>>116289179
I think they just wore lighter armor and bunch of chainmails.

>>116289602
It depends on what you mean by "medieval".

During the late middle ages, you wouldn't see that many conscripts on the battlefields but rather professional soldiers hired as mercenaries.
But even during the high middle ages, a lord would try to avoid conscripting peasants. They had to take care of the land after all, and when they're dead nobody would be there to do so.

>>116288225
Though there were a lot of small holes, none of the shots fired at first would have been enough to get through the thick padded clothing traditionally worn under plate armor. It would probably bruise like hell though. Any arrows that got through would likely be superficial damage, especially if they come up against a rib. Painful, but better than the alternative.

It wasn't until later when the arrows started piercing through, mostly by hitting the smaller puncture marks a second time.

What this shows is that, while capable of protecting the wearer from initial shots, plate armor isn't really capable of dealing with sustained fire. Though, if this were an actual combatant, in proper plate, the armor would be properly tapered in the front in a way that would force the arrows to glance to the side, rather than absorb the entire force of the projectile, and the wearer would be moving.

TLDR; experiment was poorly set up, still demonstrates steel plate's ability to temporarily protect from concentrated ranged fire.

File: most of them are not even wearing plate armor.gif (189KB, 502x512px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 502x512px

>>116289008
That's interesting an all but can you now tell us of the battle of Agincourt where the french lost 10000 men to English longbowmen?

>There are countless historical accounts describing armoured men looking like pincushions from all the arrows stuck in them.

And there's accounts of most of the same men dying after the battles. Bleeding exists.
Plate armor provided defense sure, but not enough for most men to survive a longbow barrage.

The French won ONE battle by surprising the English before they set up their positions and that somehow makes longbows ineffective?
Pffff. Get your head out of your ass. By the late 14th century plate armor was already just a burdensome symbol of European technological stagnation.

File: 1288074864398.jpg (79KB, 486x800px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 486x800px

>>116289634
Another misconception about the crusades is that the Muslim forces used sabres.

In fact, the crusaders and the Muslims used almost the same types of equipment. Both relied on chain armour and mostly straight blades.

>>116288225
damn platefags got BTFO

>>116287303
>Arrow penetrates plate armor
I will leave this here.
http://youtu.be/D3997HZuWjk

Would the shape of the arrowhead affect its impact on plate armor at all?

>>116288225
>Took like 10 arrows before it shot through.

>>116290044
Yes, arrowheads greatly change according to what you are going to be shooting at.

>>116289634
Honestly I think the crusaders looks really nice. Look at them Knight Hospitaller, they are pretty badass looking.

File: arrowheads.gif (38KB, 439x271px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 439x271px

>>116290044
Yes

>>116290060
Considering a soldier in plate armor would be outnumbered around 5 to 1 or more typically, I'd say that's a realistic estimation of what would happen after 30 seconds of running at the enemy like an idiot.

>>116288225

>bowman/archer shooting, reloading, readying, and shooting again the same general area of armor during actual combat 10 times in a row.

Yeah man, platefags sure got rekt.

File: 1324763572282.jpg (581KB, 1853x2585px) Image search: [Google]

581KB, 1853x2585px

>>116289798
>The French won ONE battle by surprising the English before they set up their positions and that somehow makes longbows ineffective?
I mentioned two. Verneuil and Patay. During both battles the archers were simply charged by cavalry and had no way to do something about it. Had the longbows been that deadly, why didn't they just shoot the cavalry?

Fact is that longbows alone weren't all that useful. They needed proper fortifications. Also, what many people disregard is that the British knights particularly enjoyed fighting dismounted. You can even see it reflected in their armour. Unlike French and Italian armour, British armour - just like German armour - was usually symmetrical, which made it easier using two-handed weapons like long swords and pollaxes. And the British used these knights to protect their archers from people who'd get too close to them.

Also, as I said earlier: British mercenaries also fought in service of Italian mercenary princes. How do you explain that nobody bothered to take note of the impact of the longbow or decided to adopt the weapon had it been such a knight-killer? Yet the accounts mostly talk about the shiny armour. Not much about deadly longbows of destruction.

Certainly longbows had their uses, but they weren't the ultimate tool to defeat knights. Had they been the ultimate tool to defeat knights, then certainly others would have jumped the hype train as well and used them, but during the 15th century, the time of the longbow was almost over.

The golden age of the longbow was against the Scots. The Scots had lightly armoured infantry fighting in formation. Against such troops a longbow is a devastating weapon - not against a fast moving heavily armoured guy on a horse.

>>116290207
>What are shields
>What are other soldiers without plate armor

>>116290181
How does the crescent do anything with that curve? Wouldn't that negate some of the impact by watching onto something blunt?

File: o24sewF.jpg (60KB, 613x559px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 613x559px

>>116290181
If you were hit in the legx by a war arrow and it fully penetrated would you be better off amputating, pulling it out, or pushing it all the way through?

>>116290044
>what is a bodkin versus a broadhead

>>116290310
Its for hunting. It makes animals bleed out more and devastate organs. Makes it easier to track them in case they aren't killed out right.

Bitch please it's a +10 bow

>>116290364
Snap off the feathered end, pull it through. Obviously.

>>116289798
>By the late 14th century plate armor was already just a burdensome symbol of European technological stagnation.
By the late 14th century full suits of plate armor were a brand spanking new development, if they even existed at all. Plate armor continued to be widely used well into the 17th century, through about 200 years of guns being fairly common, and about 100 years of guns being the primary ranged weapon on the battlefield. What the fuck are you even smoking?

>>116290364
Push.

File: heavy13.jpg (188KB, 897x1000px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 897x1000px

>>116287303
GETTIN' REEEEEAL TIRED OF YOUR SHIT, MADAN NO OU

>>116287394
There were some special arrows that if fired from good range with precision by a trained marksman could penetrate heavy armor. But its not that easy not every single archer could do it and there is a lot more to it than just firing an arrow, quality of the arrow/armor and the distance and strength of the marksman counted a lot.

Its was not a common thing to happen and in medieval times when an archer actually managed to kill a heavy armored knight he would get the piece of plate that was pierced by the arrow and hang in front of their camps as a warning and a way to brag.

>>116288225
damn son, look at how many arrowsluts had to throw themselves at that plate before they got through. Point blank shit too. like bouncing off that shit. Not to mention the chain mail and thick jerkin underneath.

arrowsluts and bowfags just mad they aint platepiercing like superior boltbros and crossbow alpha males.

>>116290277

And if longbows decimated plate so well, then why did they invent the crossbow or the gun in order to acclimate to the advantages plate armor had?

>>116290427
How cruel. Which one of those would do the most damage against plate?

>>116290364
Theres a tool that can be used to pull it out since doing so without it causes greater injury.

You push it out if possible.

Dunno if it's been mentioned, but the entire reason crossbows were a thing was because the bolts were strong enough to pierce the heavy metal troop armor of the time.

Also it's anime, the bow has the soul of some fallen god in it, and the arrows are being fired by the MC. It's going to break the laws of physics, period.

>>116290578
Bodkin - armor piercing arrows.

File: Zweihander.jpg (58KB, 400x649px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 400x649px

How practical were those things?

>>116290364
You would surgically remove the arrowhead by cutting it out. Pushing it though and yanking it out are two ways to cause MUCH more damage than necessary. An amputation might still be a good idea though, because nobody wants a gangrene infection.

>>116290543
Crossbows had actually been around since the antique. They didn't "succeed" the longbow but they accompanied them. Guns had been around for quite some time too. Crossbows stuck around longer than bows on the battlefields, guns stuck around longer than crossbows, but it wasn't really a sequential development in the sense of "we need something better now".

>>116290543
I thought the gun and crossbow became popular because you don't need much skill to use them.

>>116290364

Theres a reason some arrowheads were four sided; pulling out the arrow was intended to do even more damage

>>116288225
>>116290277
bowfags BTFO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk

>>116290578
Also bodkins are bigger and heavier than most arrowheads and you need heavier bows to shoot it.

There are Feet bows that can shoot bodkins at massive distances..

>>116290702
They take less strength but you still need to aim.

>>116290617
The shots from a bow are not necessarily weaker than that of a crossbow, even if the crossbow has higher poundage. This is due to the fact that crossbows are more compact and require a higher poundage to achieve the same force behind the arrow.

A big advantage from crossbows came from not having to manually keep the mechanism drawn and ready to fire. In sieges, you could reload in safety and pop out to shoot for example.

And yes. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned somewhere that the black bow MC has is hax in some way.

>>116290702

Yes, thats true. It also took a VERY long time to train a longbowman because you had to pull a specific way. It was really nothing more than an oversized bow, but knowing how to pull it and being strong enough to pull it meant you couldnt just take mr random peasant farmer / sustenance hunter and put a longbow in his hands.

>>116287303
Pretty funny how this show's threads become medieval history threads

>>116290661
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiD3cI3RqJU

>>116287303
Fuck man, I'm tired of seeing all these muscle-for-brains, sword-swinging knight wannabes as medieval anime MCs. It's nice to see a bowman for once.

>>116290908
Muskets weren't really "aimed" so much as "pointed in the general direction of the enemy"

Crossbow here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-G86vNxuIB0

Bowfags are like the planet fitness or the flying projectiles. try not to hurt yourselves with your bow, girls. wouldn't want to crack those polished nails.

>>116290543
Because an archer to be useful in combat required years of training and very good upper body strength. England won a lot of their battles by the simple fact that people were taught to use bows to hunt from young age. Crossbows and Guns are popular because they require almost no training at all.

And yes with advances on technology guns eventually became stronger and more efficient than bows. But Longbows for a long time were the bane of a lot of armies out there.

Hell Khans almost conquered the world because Mongols could use a bow while riding a horse. Shit was literally impossible to deal with and even the roman empire shit their pants when they knew about them.

>>116290459
>By the late 14th century full suits of plate armor were a brand spanking new development

14th century is the "pinnacle" of the full plate.
Yes the pinnacle is when it was developed.
15th century is when they slowly but surely realized a 100 full plate knights prancing around when the enemy has 10000 troops won't win you a war and moved to mass produced cuirasses.
By the beginning of the 16th century only parade armor was full plate and I don't even need to say parade armor was rare as fuck.

>>116290985
>Listening to Lindybeige
>Ever

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oxsol6J1HLU

>>116288074
muddy fields, the french trickling into the battle and the french horses getting killed by the arrows causing the knights to get stuck in the mud where they eventually fell due to exhaustion. most of the men killed were killed not by arrows but when the british stormed the plains and stabbed any mother fucker who was too exhausted to defend themselves.

Agincourt wasn't about longbows as it was about properly set up positions.

See Patay. the longbows don't have the advantage of prepared defenses or muddy terrain and they got slaughtered by the french vanguard.

>>116290661
Very good for breaking spears. Not good for anything else.

>>116288225
No one stopped and questioned the quality of the plate. Why it isn't tapered or if the plate is hardened or made of steel and what not.

File: Not cool.png (72KB, 515x359px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 515x359px

>>116291045
>no padding
>shitty butted mail
>a fucking watermelon
> R Lee Ermey

Why didnt they just make armor out of katanas folded 10000 times. Then nothing could penetrate it

>>116287394
No they didn't
They can pierce chainmail but not metal plate armor

>>116291079
>By the beginning of the 16th century only parade armor was full plate and I don't even need to say parade armor was rare as fuck.
No. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximilian_armour

>>116288225
My dick could pierce that glorified piece of aluminum foil>>116288225

>>116291079
Mass produced cuirasses are still plate armor you dense motherfucker. If they couldn't even stop a damn arrow nobody would have used them at all.

Also, that's just plain wrong. People who could afford to buy lots of armor went into battle with lots of armor on. What a fucking concept.

>>116290490
>all those uncovered joints

This is barely better than bikini armor.

File: 13_2.jpg (565KB, 1600x1314px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 1600x1314px

>>116291018
You had to take aim in the same sense you'd take aim with a bow. If you look at historical depictions of people firing arquebuses (rather than muskets - given the time period), you'll see that they attempt to take aim not very much unlike people do with a modern rifle.

>>116291221
You cannot shape it into plate without making it too brittle. It just defeats the purpose of folding 10000 times.

>>116291427
renaissance is so gay

File: Battle_of_Pavia.jpg (395KB, 1114x744px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 1114x744px

>>116291262
Which was mostly parade armor.
Pic related what the German troops were wearing during the period.

>>116290661
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyA8odjCzZ4

File: 1309461985789.jpg (203KB, 920x903px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 920x903px

>>116291687
Maximilian armour was most certainly worn on the battlefields too though. It was obviously mostly affordable to the military elite of course. But during the late 15th and early 16th century, heavy cavalry still wore full plate armour.

File: vf9ej.jpg (95KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1280x720px

Can't seem to find any solid data on the effectiveness of plate armor against ballistics. but isn't that because there would have been an arms race between the weight of armor versus the draw weight of bows? the men in armor would have wanted it to be as light as possible, but thick enough to protect against the popular bow used by the enemy.

>>116291687
Gaaay.

That's a really strong bow. A bow from the crusades had a draw weight of 200lbs. No archer today can make use of it but the archers from that time did.

>>116291687
>That guy in white.

Wait, is his dick supporting the sheathed sword?

>>116291974
How accurate could they be with such bows?

File: 1280px-16th_Century_Artillerie.jpg (215KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1280x800px

>>116291355
At that point arrows were of little concern, faglord.
The thing is full plate became a thing when artillery was rare - but existent. By the 15th century it wasn't rare anymore.

>>116292007
Thats what the call a purse in those days sheath and money bag hanging from one belt.

>/a/ - Medieval Warfare

>>116288834
Pretty sure they already existed during the Seven Warring States

Alright /a/, you're transported to Rome back when it was at it's height of power and you're allowed to bring only one kit:

An SKS, 200 rounds of ammunition for it, and a fire loli.

A motorcycle that needs no fuel to run, an over-under shotgun with no ammunition, and an ice loli.

A working zeppelin, an M1911 with a magazine worth of ammunition, and a lightning loli.

File: pier.jpg (64KB, 672x910px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 672x910px

>>116291974
>A bow from the crusades had a draw weight of 200lbs.
I'm not too certain where you get that number from.

Renaissance longbows have been found from the time of Henry VIII on a ship that sunk (Mary Rose).

The draw weights were estimated between 100lbs - 185lbs.

If there ever was a bow with such a draw weight, it was by no means the average but an upper boundary - where it may even be questioned whether it was actually used on the battlefields or just made by someone for the heck of it.

File: Codpiece.jpg (24KB, 320x188px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 320x188px

>>116292007
Well yeah. It's the best place to hang your sword isn't it?

>>116292315
Plate armor is sexy. Plate armor on cute girls is sexy.

File: Fleches-japonaises-p1000615.jpg (894KB, 2220x1848px) Image search: [Google]

894KB, 2220x1848px

Japanese arrowheads are so smal compared to medieval counterparts.

>>116292363
working zeppelin, M1911, and the lighting loli, zerp to drop rocks and shit on my enemies, who can touch me when im beyond bow range.

File: 1384437291055.jpg (471KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1280x720px

>>116292375
This.

File: _DSC3885a.jpg (165KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 800x800px

Fire arrows

>>116292363
>Shotgun with no ammo
For what purpose

>>116292544
You gotta make it yourself. Shot is the easiest shit to make and it's why most people in downtrodden countries make homemade shotguns more often than automatics; the ammunition is easier to make plus it's just a fucking pipe with a hammer.

>>116292373
I read that later longbows salvaged from Henry VIII's ship The Mary Rose have been estimated to have a draw weight of up to 900 Newtons; which is roughly 200 lbs. Archers from that time must have been beastly strong, they trained with one-handed pull ups and all.

>>116292509
Its so annoying to watch them joust without shields. Thats just stupid.

File: 1275689047461.jpg (25KB, 488x332px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 488x332px

>>116292509
>Fiona

I'm playing the VN right now, and I can confidently say that I'd like nothing better than to hatefuck the shit out of her.

>>116292639
>estimated to have a draw weight of up to 900 Newtons; which is roughly 200 lbs.
Estimations might differ, but if anything that was an upper boundary not the average or the median.

>>116290587

what tool, I need to know this in case I get sent back in time and need to make it for an operation

File: Fiona3.jpg (43KB, 328x328px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 328x328px

>>116292713
>no Fiona route
>ever
>you will never get to assfuck her until she ahegaos and pees herself

File: Falkreath_Guard.png (928KB, 508x1080px) Image search: [Google]

928KB, 508x1080px

>>116287303
BY THE GODS, NO.

>>116292812
Seriously. She's worse in the VN than she is in the anime. I didn't even realize that was possible.

>>116292840
Ebin

>>116292840
No! Don't bring it back!

What annoys me about this show is that he always keeps his bow stringed. Even when it was up on the mantle.

File: 2014-11-01_00001.jpg (265KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1600x900px

>>116292840

>>116292885
But if it isn't, how will people know that it's a bow?

>>116292729
True, but isn't Tiger's bow is supposed to be like god-tier?

>>116292943
That might as well have something to do with magic rather than super high draw weight.

>>116292943
He shoots the same range whatever bow he uses. Even shitty ones like in the first episode.

>>116291819

Pure archers get fucked in Dark Souls in pretty much every way possible.

Where are my Brodhoks at?

>>116292840
I wonder why other forced "memes" don't die like this one.

>>116293066
>doesn't pull the string all the way back
>arrow still goes soaring
I understand if it's a super strong bow, but seeing him do that with a shitty twig bow just ruins it.

>>116293762
It's not about the bow, Tiger has god-like ability no matter which bow he uses.
The only advantage that magic bow has is that he can use the Vanadis's power as an arrow.

File: 1329256598694.jpg (1MB, 1280x2014px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x2014px

This whole thread should read pic related instead of bickering among yourselves

I used to be an adventurer like him, then I took an arrow in the knee.

>>116289723
Even so, most of the regualar army didn't have plate. They only had leather and chainmail. Most of the fully decked out plate wearers were full knights in heavy cavalry regiments, which there weren't as many of as you would think. MAYBE, 100-200 guys per army. Even most of the cavalry were non-knighted light cavalry,with light armor, who couldn't afford a suit of plate if they saved up their entire years wages.

File: 28205.jpg (117KB, 773x2722px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 773x2722px

>>116294001
Plate armour parts were actually cheaper than chain armour. What made full plate armour expensive were the intricate joint mechanisms. Most of the common men would have been equipped at least like this during the late middle ages (pic). Breastplates were also far from uncommon.

File: Duerer_-_Studie_Reiter_1495.jpg (113KB, 1000x1283px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1000x1283px

>>116294001
>>116294239
When it comes to cavalry, there's actually a nice picture by Albrecht Duerer, which he made as a study for one of his works (Ritter, Tod und Teufel), showing a common mercenary on horseback. It is safe to assume that he depicted the man as he saw him, because in the actual work he added further armour parts and made them more elaborate.
While he doesn't wear the most expensive plate armour one could buy for money, he could clearly afford a decent set of armour - as one would expect from a professional warrior fighting from horseback.

File: 1324762555564.jpg (279KB, 1000x1370px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1000x1370px

>>116294239
It should also be considered that the armour depicted here isn't just "leather", but more something like this (pic).

>>116287303
I guess his knighthood is all over as soon as he took an arrow in the knee.

It's fantasy with magical fantasy bows and arrows.

Would you complain if an elf did the same with enchanted arrow or something?

>>116294970
How can the elf fire arrows when she's busy being raped?

File: 1412011018376.jpg (53KB, 417x500px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 417x500px

Haven't you guys read berserk? Armor literally has no purpose because miura subscribes to the idea of "katanas cutting through tanks", except he gave guts a twohanded sword.

>>116295093
Fucking elves live so long and yet they don't learn.

>>116287394
Crossbow? Yeah, then again it was bolt, not an arrow.

Bow can't pierce an armor.

>>116295157
But it was a really fucking big sword so it works.

>>116295093

This is no hentai doujin Anon. I'm sorry to say but these doujins are actually just venting human's frustration at elf superiority.

>>116295242
You're retarded

File: 1412905019898.gif (2MB, 288x540px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 288x540px

>>116295258
>it's bigger that means it's sharper

Ignoring the fact that guts was carving guys were thrice the size of a normal human being who were wearing armor tailored to fit?

>>116295408
A heavier dull blade is better than a light sharp one, unless you are a little girl.

File: 1412929924015.jpg (220KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1280x720px

>>116295574
So he can carve a clean cut through men wearing plate armor of the same material as his sword because his sword is dull?

A lot of sense is being made here, l&g

>>116290286
yeah worked really well in agincourt

>>116295677
I said his sword is heavy, and he is already pretty strong so it helps.

>>116287303
It can perectly happen.
It happenned to lots of overconfident platefags.

That's why bows were considered "not weapons a real man would use" by nobles.
Because any farmer with a bow could fuck your noble shit from a safe distance.

File: 1414283463307.png (598KB, 613x591px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 613x591px

>>116295773
I can dig it if he's strong.

I can dig it if his sword is blunt.

What I can't dig is the fact that his sword is going through these men in plate armor.

It would have been better if he was knocking these guys aside like using a huge baseball bat instead of CLEAVING RIGHT THROUGH THEM from helmet to crotch. That's what's most likely to happen. He kills them through blunt force trauma because of his strength and weapon, not fucking going through them like he was using a lightsaber.

>>116290543
because muh second amendment