>using chainmail in warfare, as a suit of armor is a stupid

>>1649165

Ok, I hate Lindy and I think his videos are generally stupid, but unless I see a source to the exact statement, I refuse to believe he said that. Put up or shut up.

he can't keep getting away with this

>>1649165
Did he really say that or are you paraphrasing it? Would surprise me either way considering its Lindybeige we're talking about.

>>1649170
It's a parody of his "cavalry is a stupid idea" video. which is probably the most clickbaity video I've ever seen. The entire video can essentially be summarized as "cavalry is a stupid idea... unless you can breed horses that are large and strong enough to carry a man and his armor... unless you use chariots...actually cavalry is a pretty fucking good idea... p.s. I hate the French".

>>1649473
*Wouldn't

>>1649474

Or "Unless you use your cavalry for something other than shock value, such as scouting, making it easy to identify the leader, horse archery, messenger running, carrying your crap, or literally anything other than being the knight in shining armor"


Plus, at least the size thing seems not to be true, given bronze age horses were about 12-14 hands high; smaller than modern horses by a good deal, but honestly on the small end of AD 1200 European warhorse ranges, which were able to hold armored men just fine. They weren't dog sized or anything.

>>1649474
it's more like "cavalry seems like a stupid idea when there was no successful cavalry around"

>>1649489
The most retarded part is probably where he states that the cavalry of Homer's works wasn't actually cavalry but charioteers. If he wasn't so busy frothing at the mouth whenever the French are mentioned, he'd probably know what "cheval" means and that chariots are indeed cavalry.

>>1649165
>>1649474
>parody

why do you shitpost?

sage

>>1649474
not a parody, lloyd actually said this

>>1649556
Show me where he says this about chainmail.

>>1649474
It was more like "who was the first man who had the idea to climb on a animal and ride it into battle?"

>>1649698
But that's neither the title of the video nor what he spends most of the time talking about. Most of the video is how for the longst time it was simply unviable to ride on top of a horse and that's why cavalry was a "stupid idea".

Less clickbait, less incoherent rambling and more getting to the point would make it a solid video. But if I wanted that I'd watch schola gladiatoria.

He actually thinks mail armor is pretty cool and comfy.

File: 1472185030083.png (300KB, 347x431px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 347x431px

That horse video was unmitigated trash.

File: trippy apache.jpg (86KB, 800x530px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 800x530px

>>1649520

Which is still a stupid premise when you consider that cavalry still exists and still performs the same basic functions. It just uses helicopters instead of horses. The horse became obsolete, not cavalry.