How do you beat a knight in full plate armour?

With a nuke.

stab him in the eye holes

Push them over

>push sir cuck over
>rekt

You sold him.

>>1681019
>>1681020
Good luck getting close enough before you get sliced in half.

File: serveimage.jpg (99KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 800x600px

with a mace

>Pour boiling oil on him
>Set oil on fire
>????
>Round winning kill

File: BX9WOcKCAAAXWBL.jpg (25KB, 509x378px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 509x378px

>>1681091
use a reaching broom then

>>1681013
With an assault rifle.

>>1681013
Wrestling and stab in face, groin, armpits.
Or a dense formation of halberds, your baddies tangle his weapon and you whack him on the head with an 8 ounce axehead on a 7 foot stick.

Use heavy crossbow

>>1681013
you outrun him until his horse tires or pike formations

>>1681013
Heavy blunt weapons.

>>1681019
A full plate harness is actually far lighter than a modern soldier's backpack and combat gear and it's distributed over the whole body.

>>1681013
9mm should do the job

>>1681013
With a muddy hill
Worked for the English at Agincourt

>>1681013
if you have strong information, knowledge logistics, and mounted gunpowder, you cant loser to anything, behind the buffer of logistic relay you have a strong economy heavily geared to BTFO manufacturing. pretty unbeatable strats. not much room left on the earth for its equivalent style minus a couple of
pockets

FVEY

File: Antoine-Fauveau-Cuirasse.jpg (55KB, 700x500px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 700x500px

>>1681013
Canonfire, if it worked against cuirassiers in Waterloo, I doubt it would fail against plate armor.
>Lodovico de Medici btfo

tie his shoelaces together

>>1681267
AJAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAJDSKLDFDSDLGIJDFLVJNEROTJWIORTVHJOTDHI9SF897V4897560568

>>1681013
With maces and other blunt weapons

>>1681237
That and welsh longbows making sure they stay there

blunt weapons to the dome

fuck his wife

File: Kitchen-Modern-Can-Opener.jpg (449KB, 3000x1600px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 3000x1600px

>>1681013

>>1681091
OP didn't specify if the knight was armed

File: Untitled.jpg (42KB, 481x269px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 481x269px

>>1681381
>OP didn't specify if the knight was armed

File: bsb00007894_00544.jpg (1MB, 1500x2105px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x2105px

>>1681013

File: 1406878406042.gif (785KB, 269x199px) Image search: [Google]

785KB, 269x199px

>>1681377

File: 1407208397158.gif (650KB, 350x204px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 350x204px

>>1681094
>googles: pictures of a mace
>posts first thing

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


A longbow.

>muh plate invisibility

>>1681446
err... have you watched the video?

>>1681458
20 meter range can pierce the plate armor. Just not the internal softener.

Imagine 100s of longbows with greater force behind it at 200+ meter range, anyone riding the plate armor would be dead/injured

File: 1411199467032.gif (1MB, 410x174px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 410x174px

>>1681248
Nice little hints you're dropping, kinda why such a crazy nation like NorthKorea or even just china feel intimidated in the first place. But i hope you don't feel the urge to talk up the worth of your country, we're all still just ants

>>1681013
Depends on its metals but a solid enough swing with a sword will incapacitate/kill him. The same theory whilst being close enough to make him lose his footing somehow and fall would be advantageous to you and your combatants. It's just a bit of common sense, they'd all be aware of this during that time

File: cimg3370-armor-suit-with-bullet-hole.jpg (166KB, 421x750px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 421x750px

>>1681013

Guns

>>1681262
I can't even imagine the mess that made

>>1681439
As opposed to
>having historically accurate mace photos saved on PC

>>1681019

>2016
>still not getting a Victorian joke

>>1681237

>a hill
>at Agincourt

No.

>>1681471
Just because you pierce the plate it doesn't mean you also pierce the layer under it.

File: 1469410241607.jpg (142KB, 615x640px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 615x640px

>>1681590
Chainmail and padding helps but won't be able to prevent the skull from fracturing or puncturing. Same thing for your foot or hand, how combat effective are you gonna be with an injury (like he implied) of any kind against someone ready to go you to the death

>>1681521
>a solid enough swing with a sword will incapacitate/kill him
I can't even describe how wrong that is. It's near impossible to to any damage with a sword to someone in full plate armour unless you precisely hit an unprotected area.

>>1681708
Good thing you can't pierce a helmet with an arrow then.

File: 8ef59afc75ad3b85827365e869b1dcd8.jpg (828KB, 733x4516px) Image search: [Google]

828KB, 733x4516px

>>1681578
>yes

>>1681013
Shoot him with an assault rifle.

File: 1472279129251.jpg (69KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1024x768px

>>1681712
You have the misconception it's the invincibility suit. Have you tried something vaguely similar to these situations other than just read about it? Not all plate armour is made equal, which ever it is you're referring to. There were tactics like it's weak spots used against someone wearing full plate obviously. Falcata is a good example but from a different time period. And the mace is what you would worry the most more specifically. Don't get upset, eeverie-thing is gonna be alll alright, rockabye.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR0wssl9fWo

>>1681864
Fuuck. Wrong link.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1WZLVZYBwQ

>>1681439
Why is >>1681094 not accurate?

>>1681889
Didn't say it wasn't accurate

>>1681471
The video makesit very clear that the bow is ineffective

>arrow
>Fracture skull
I don't think you understand what arrows are


>>1681864
Jesus fucking christ. Go buy a falcata and fall on it, you low information meme poster.

>>1681762
that's a big mace

>>1681446
this meme really needs to die

>>1681277
underrated

>>1681538
that's sad as fuck in an obscure way.

File: MeetTheEngineer01[1].jpg (159KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1280x720px

>>1681013

With a gun.

And if that don't work.....

More gun.

File: 1444778042529.jpg (77KB, 600x650px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x650px

>assemble 1000 musicians
>they all play the brown note on their old timey instruments
>oncoming knights need poo poo
>take off plate to do poo poos
>CHARRGGEE!!! :^)
>????
>i win.

name ONE problem with this.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 1920x816px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x816px

With a very long spear to keep him at a distance

See >pic related

>>1682539
10/10

Napoleon, is that you?

>>1681013
with my farts

>>1681013
Throw them to the ground and stab gaps in the armour with a dagger, or use blunt force with a weapon such as a poleaxe, mace or even the hilt of a sword

>>1681347
>teh welsh longbowman meme
The Welsh may have developed the longbow, but most of Henry V's army was English

>>1681013
This is easy. Warhammer or mace.

English longbows.

File: 4459353701_826a3c120d.jpg (126KB, 489x400px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 489x400px

>>1681347
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CULmGfvYlso

Gunpowder weapons.

>>1683393
>>1683395

File: 1590ad354654654.png (818KB, 676x945px) Image search: [Google]

818KB, 676x945px

>>1681590
>Just because you pierce the plate it doesn't mean you also pierce the layer under it.

The layer underneath would be regular clothing, they weren't wearing thick padding or chainmail under the plate armor.

>>1681013
Polearms, mass/impact weapons (Maces, battle axes, picks, hammers), firearms, or through techniques that target the gaps of the armour (Armpits, crotch gap, eyeslots, etc).

>>1681381
Still have a better trained, better fed and better armoured professional killer, covered in jagged bits of metal, practiced in wrestling and pugilism...

>>1683588
>"The layer underneath would be regular clothing"
>post picture of specific padded arming garment
Depends on the period, but its near universal to have quilted arming garmets under plate, and in some periods, even light maille.

>>1682539

If they're German knights you could play the brown note all day and nothing would happen. you can't pour out an empty cup.

>>1683707
>country full of scat fetishists
>empty cup

File: 246769206_46de64c956.jpg (10KB, 500x139px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 500x139px

How would this do?

>>1683756
Fucking terribly.

>>1681013
A pipe bomb

File: 16-4.jpg (24KB, 540x403px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 540x403px

>>1681708
It had ballistic clay behind. If there was meaningful force going into it there would of been a noticeable mark in it. Also Bascinet helms were very good causing hits to glance.

>>1682205
for you.

Even muskets can shoot through a thin plate of steel. Why else would plate armor be irrelevant today? If primitive guns can kill a knight in plate armor, then guns are better.

File: 1224356.png (51KB, 731x191px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 731x191px

>>1681578

Get a load of this fucking pleb. Literally lmaoing at your life.

File: 1449198800095.jpg (99KB, 401x477px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 401x477px

>>1683913
Pls upload somewhere

>>1681366
Brilliant strategy, his wife probably isn't armored at all! It's his most glaring weak spot!

>>1683724
Well, if they're a country full of scat fetishists, won't they be perfectly comfortable shitting themselves, if not even aroused?
Now you've got an knight with shit-filled armor and a raging erection chasing you.

>>1681013
A bulldozer

>>1683395
This. It wasn't the longbow that brought down the French, it was running through a muddy field in full plate while being constantly hit by arrows. The French were too exhausted to fight the English by the time they reached them.

>>1681013
not a single idiot here has said mass cavalry

>>1684188
>Implying it wouldn't be painful to get a boner in full plate

>>1683756
enjoy your injured wrists

>>1684481
mass infantry would work just as well, numbers beat equipment

>>1684622
Not if he has a double handed sword

>>1683937
>>1683913
this, do it anon.

>>1684622
no. I don't mean having superior numbers.

I mean a force composed purely of cavalry will defeat superior numbers of footsoldiers every time. it has to do with logistics, the ability to decide location and timing of battle, the ability to force confrontation or disengage freely, raid settlements, supply lines, and fortifications, etc.

full plate was only useful against foot soldiers, and it was invalidated everywhere by cavalry forces such as the mongols, north africans, etc.

File: 1356281421164.png (2MB, 853x1280px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 853x1280px

>>1684484
>implying it would

File: 14s.jpg (21KB, 402x397px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 402x397px

Like this

>>1681446
https://youtu.be/Ej3qjUzUzQg

The results vary

>>1684188
Apparently knights shit themselves all the time and it was the job of the squire to clean it out. During a battle it was impossible to take off your armor to shit, so you just did it right then and there. (Some models of armor had a little backdoor panel you could shit out of, but not all.)

>>1685033
>spreading lies on the internet
what the fuck are you doing?

>>1684765
Aaa, but how beat the boyars?

>>1685187
/Mongols/

>>1681013
2 knights with full plate armor

>>1682539
>name ONE problem with this.
>the brown note
it doesn't exist

>>1681347
Don't forget the Irish mercy dagger lads

File: 50-4.jpg (28KB, 390x448px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 390x448px

>>1684765
Like this

>>1683328
>throw them to the ground
okay big boy

>>1681308
Did....did he stroke out?

>>1683588
Talking out of your fucking arse

>>1685033
No, no, and no
There are no references to this at all
They just didn't shit during battle, and just took off relevant parts of the armour should they finally get a chance to go

>>1685427
You do realise the vast majority of fighting in armour involves grappling and throwing people?

>>1685187
>>1685425

>>1681013
Long bow + muddy terrain

>>1683588
>they weren't wearing thick padding or chainmail under the plate armor.
except they were

>>1685443
I think what he was saying is that YOU wouldn't be able to throw a knight to the ground and if you did get lucky and managed to do it, you wouldn't be able to finish him off.

File: sophisticated weapon.jpg (80KB, 1024x800px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1024x800px

>>1681013
isnt it obvious?

File: QAdK6oc.jpg (37KB, 360x480px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 360x480px

>Anno Domini 1415 + 601
>people still think that arrows could pierce plate armor
are archery fags this delusional?

>>1685585
>referencing Anno Domini 1415
>the year the franks got their shit kicked in by archers
Does it matter that arrows can't pierce a steel breastplate, if they can still annihilate hordes of stinking frenchmen?

>>1685615
The majority of armoured knights and nobility were captured at Agincourt, not killed. Agincourt does not prove arrows were efficient at piercing plate armour.

>>1681137
still heavy

>>1681013
Like we did in 1302... muddy ground, maces, clubs and daggers

>>1685736
But far from being heavy enough to make falling to the ground an actual problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUrd7d1Q

1. Rain
2. Longbow
3. Pikes
4. Fire
5. Numbers
6. More knights in plate armor than them

>>1681308
Fucking robots, man.

>>1685676
>Agincourt does not prove arrows were efficient at piercing plate armour.
No, it proves they don't need to. Its not a battle you bring up if you're trying to shit on archers.

>>1682432
funny how some gunpowder ended one of the most OP ways of fighting eh

>>1683588
fucking cowboy boots

>>1681013

I go swimming and taunt him from the water until he cries and goes home.

>>1681013
By bashing him in with a mace.

>>1685585
>are archery fags this delusional?
I think most archery fags are British, so maybe that has something to do with it

>m-muh agincourt
t. Lindy

with bodkin arrows to be the only one on the thread operating within the time period

File: hamsba ml.jpg (48KB, 353x500px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 353x500px

>>1685433
>>1685492

Battle of the Nations isnt how actual late medieval knights fought and were equipped you know.


Look at surviving armours, funeral effigies and artistic depictions. The armour is increadibly well fitted, almost skintight, with no room for thick padding.

They'd have been wearing a armouring doublet, which is almost identical to its civilian counter part, only with more laces to tie on the places.

Pic related. It's a surviving 15th century manuscript explaining to wear "a doublet of fustian lined with satin, cut full of holes".

>>1685820

Agincourt was a battle between French and English knights and men at arms. The English archers played a very minor role.

Source: The Deeds of Henry V, who's author claims to have been there.

>>1686880
the arming doublet was padded though

>>1686880
do you know what a gambeson is

>>1686880
>he actually found an example of someone NOT wearing gambeson and/or mail underneath plate armour
Wow, good job. Must have taken quite some time.

>>1686892


Were they? We have no surviving examples and the Hastings Manuscript says nothing about padding, though it is specfic enough to mention the exact type of laces to use. And again, surviving armours and effigies show there being very little room between the armour and the man itself. If they were padded, it would be very lightly.

>>1686907

Yes and it is for an entirely different kind of armour to those depicted in OP and throughout this thread, which would use arming doublets.

>>1686923

>it must have taken quite some time to find the Hastings Manuscript, THE go to text for describing how to wear 15th century armour.

Please, provide me with the apparent multitude of sources that definitively show a 15th or 16th century knight wearing a gambeson under his harness.

>>1686939
Dou you deny that Mail was basically always worn under plate armour? Look at OP's picture frominstance, it's an armour from 1450. What do you think was worn under the Mail? Nothing? Or a Gambeson as usual?
You're just trying to be contrarian at this point.

>>1686967

Yes,mail is worn under plate armour. I never said otherwise. As small, separate sections that fill in the armpits, groin and throat as those areas cannot be covered by articulating plates until the end of the 15th century. Usually refered to as voiders, a skirt/paunce or mail shorts/brayettes and a standard. The guy in the Hastings Manuscript is wearing the first two. Pic related is wearing an interesting example of a skirt and joined voiders but still has huge gaps that would be covered by plate and showing that he is wearing only a tightly fitted arming doublet and not a huge, padded out aketon or gambeson.

After the turn of the 15th century, very few knights/M@As are wearing a full mail shirt under their armour. The only exception being the Italians, but even then the depictions could simply show a double skirt rather than a skirt being overlapped by a shirt as is hypothesised.

Under the mail would be a arming doublet. There is no need to pad it out all that much. Doing so would in fact be counter productive.

File: 43d7c9b46b96df54d1c43316eb5f5a01.jpg (55KB, 415x474px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 415x474px

>>1687027

>>1686886
>The English archers played a very minor role

Five men in six were archers in Henrys army. I'd say they played a very major role, it wasn't just knights they shot at you know.

>>1687235
I think he meant that english archers shooting arrows played a minor role, which is true to a large extend
Nothing prevented them from picking up a warhammer once the French reached their lines.

>>1684666
You're at the club and this guy slaps your ass, what do you do?

>>1687309
Guess Henry had no idea about medieval warfare then-all that time and money spent on archers,when all he needed was cartloads of mud

hot sand thrown in his visor could blind him i think

toxic fume could beat a knight in his mighty armor

File: rotj_atst_smashed.jpg (70KB, 853x366px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 853x366px

just leaving this here :P

>>1687332
Archers are good for a lot of things, but killing heavily armoured knights isn't one of them
>when all he needed was cartloads of mud
In this case, pretty much

File: Hand-siphon_for_Greek_fire,_medieval_illumination_(detail).jpg (606KB, 1046x840px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 1046x840px

Hand-siphon_for_Greek_fire,_medieval_illumination

>>1687309
I think the mass volleys inflicted a lot of casualties on the infantry and horses which is what hampered further advances across the soft ground. But I'm not saying at was all about the bowmen, the battle was pretty much won in the melee but it was the archers softening up the advancing French that made it winnable.

Simple fact is we will never know, all we have is conjecture.

File: Ahlspiess1[1].jpg (166KB, 1152x864px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1152x864px

Ahlspiess

File: tmp_10245-1473223357597-1708984206.jpg (61KB, 480x636px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 480x636px

>>1681013
Crossbow

Knocking him over

Crossbow

Stabbing not armored areas(armpit)

Crossbow

Blunt force

>>1687370
The way i see it, the archers were useful because it prevented a cavalry charge and the French had to use their visors, in combination with marching through heavy mud.
Either way, the longbows didn't do the killing, which is what this thread is about

hit the knee laterally with a mace.

>>1687410
You forgot crossbow

>>1681013
>Run away
>throw rocks until he gives up and goes home

>>1681013
throw feces at him

File: 61.jpg (109KB, 491x600px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 491x600px

hammer pick.

>>1681091

>unsheathes halberd

heh, try me kid.....

>>1683888
Guns and plate competed for a while.

>>1685736
Heavy like I'll get exhausted quicker than you but not really in any other way.

>>1685425
Why does he have a dogs head on his horse?

File: ts-medhaminf.jpg (17KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 540x540px

A good blow pretty much anywhere with one of these will be enough to incapacitate or stun, if not outright kill him if you hit him in the head. Otherwise, a few follow up blows and you have a dead knight.

File: bola.jpg (51KB, 584x438px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 584x438px

And a knife

>>1684635
>I mean a force composed purely of cavalry will defeat superior numbers of footsoldiers every time.
But that's wrong.
>full plate was only useful against foot soldiers, and it was invalidated everywhere by cavalry forces such as the mongols, north africans, etc.

Are you fucking retarded? Europe had not invented plate when the mongols attacked. Nor did north africans somehow invalidate armor, nor did they routinely-or EVER-defeat a european force with plate by using an all cavalry armor.

>>1687773
north african war strategies DID invalidate armor. full plate armor emerged as a strategy for europeans to wage war against each other, since, for europeans, total war had to be rediscovered, and for a long time fighting was relatively limited in scale.

full plate never stood up to north african forces or mongols because not only did full plate never compose significant numbers of soldiers, but by the time it emerged, european organizational strategies were outcompeting north africans and steppe raiders for OTHER reasons, such as formation innovation, tech, etc.

an army of full plate never existed. all I'm saying is that if it did, cavalry would be an adequate approach. the chinese began to approach full plate armor, but it never actually happened because armored units got their shit pushed in by mongols.

I misspoke saying that footsoldiers always lose to cavalry. dense formations make charges impossible, and obviously cavalry can't stand up to that.

mass cavalry, however, can shoot them from afar, or run around them and estroy their supply lines, villages, etc, and then run away for a couple months and attack them when they're starving (this is the north african and turkish strategy.)

so they don't always win direct engagements, but sometimes they barely need to engage. they still win.

>>1687793
Full plate never fucking encountered mongols.
Europeans almost never fought in north africa, and for the short stint they did, were fighting mamlukes, who were wearing armor that is just as fucking heavy.

>not only did full plate never compose significant numbers of soldiers,
The advent of munitions plate meant that LITERALLY every soldier could afford half armor.

>the chinese began to approach full plate armor,
This literally neve roccured
but it never actually happened because
They lacked the technology to create it, and Chinese war focused on huge, centrally organized forces where individual soldiers were not valued enough to get much armor, nor was time available to armor the entire body.

This is also why they did not adopt mail.

>armored units got their shit pushed in by mongols.
No they didn't.
>mass cavalry, however, can shoot them from afar, or run around them and estroy their supply lines, villages, etc, and then run away for a couple months and attack them when they're starving (this is the north african and turkish strategy.)

You have no idea what you're fucking talking about. Look up what happened to the magyars, the second mongol invasion of Hungary, or ANYTHING ELSE Involving large bodies of lightly armed cavalry.

They get fucking shithoused if their opposition is lead competently and is prepared for war, because the world is not a flat plain, and they are not actually fast enough to run forever.

The byzantines had centuries of practice at killing steppe nomads. They armored their horse archers and brought infantry when they wanted to kill them.

>so they don't always win direct engagements, but sometimes they barely need to engage. they still win.
This has nothing to do with plate armor.


Get out of your armchair, read some history, and drink a gallon of bleach.

File: seljuk lamellar.jpg (127KB, 731x771px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 731x771px

Not the guy above, but here's the Seljuk (Turco-Persian) heavy lamellar armor, by the way. Yes, non-Europeans wore heavy armor.

File: bill nye can't believe what he just read.webm (591KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 480x270px

>>1681267

>>1687837
I'm going to reiterate, since you didn't really read my post

a full plate army never existed anywhere. by the time munitions plate came around, we had guns.

>chinese
and if they HAD given their entire army full plate, by some miracle, they still would have lost. hence, my point, that plate armor is adequately countered by cavalry strategically, but not tacticall

>chinese didn't get destroyed by mongols
they held out for a respectble time. but they still ended up getting destroyed by massively numerically inferior forces. that's why its called the age of cavalr

>hungary
the mongols had conquered nearly the entire literate world at that point. and finally, the machine petered out at hungary. go fucking figure.

also, eastern europe was simply too decentralized to make it a worthy conquest. european castles were tiny, and not worth sieging.

>nothing to do with armor
I never said it had to do with armor. what I said is that many styles of engagement completely made armor irrelevant.

warfare is strategic as well as tactical. armor is negated by strategic approaches, even if it is tactically very ahrd to counter

File: Clorox_Bleach_products.jpg (57KB, 512x366px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 512x366px

>>1687887

>>1685033
or, you know, shit right before you put the armor on.

The only instance that I could think of where this actually happened was at the Battle of Agincourt, where the French camp was stricken with diarrhea (A serious illness in those days) prior to the fight.

File: John_Waterhouse_Knight.jpg (4MB, 3443x3322px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3443x3322px

>>1681013
BY BREAKING HIS HEART

>>1688100
NTR NTR NTR

>>1685033
Isn't it from American medieval comedy with black woman in it?
Shame on you anon, shame.Taking
>American
>Comedy
as historical source of medieval times is beyond being retarded.

>>1687887
>by the time munitions plate came around, we had guns.
And? Not all guns are able to penetrate armors. Majority of fighting was still melee. Well,even in fucking 1WW and 2WW were shitload of bayonet fights.

>also, eastern europe was simply too decentralized to make it a worthy conquest. european castles were tiny, and not worth sieging.

Ahahah
Mongols failed miserably in conquering central European castles.
>muh Mongols were just bored of tiny European castles.
And somehow they decided, that even more decentralized Russia states are worthy of conquest.

>warfare is strategic as well as tactical. armor is negated by strategic approaches, even if it is tactically very ahrd to counter
Jokes on you. Because you know, Mongols and their successors never magically disappeared, so shit like this happened quite often:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hod%C3%B3w

>>1681013

Burn the villages that feed him and then fuck off to more villages

>>1681013
Knock him off his horse, beat him into submission, sell him to his family as a hostage.

File: 1337280748885.jpg (63KB, 340x565px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 340x565px

>>1685033

>he can't go an afternoon without shitting himself

>>1687628
The head is supposed to indicate that this guys sniffs out spies and traitors like a dog.

>>1687981

It was the English suffering from dysentery during the Agincourt campaign. However most if not all those suffering from it picked it up at Harfleur and we'reeeither sent home by ship or stayed there, rather than continuing overland with Henry and the rest of the army.

>>1688861

It's also cited in Worst Jobs in History, both book and tv series. No idea where they got the idea from though.

>>1681097
Oil was to expensive to use at seiges, thats a hollywood thing. Realistically they would have used burning pitch or sand or boiling water

>>1681762
For what conceivable reason could its designer possibly have decided "yes, let me just put a silly little knob on the end of it." Why not a spike? That way the head would actually be dangerous when thrusting.

>>1689875

Looks like a 19th century reproduction to me.

A spike on the top would be useless. Stabbing with it would be awkward as fuck due to the massive weight directly under it.

>>1681405
see what that mordhau got you

blunt weapon to helmet

brain scrambled

>>1683818
enjoy your 70 tons of horse crushing armor. I hope you weren't planning on walking, moving, or even breathing during the battle. Also defeated if the temperature isn't below freezing.

>>1688100
and then they spend 20 minutes undoing his armor, which killed the mood. So he went in dry and she died of infection.

Classic romance story.

>>1690221
It takes like 3-4 minutes to take off full plate armor.

>>1690302
which is about as long as it takes >>1690221 to take his clothes off his obese, greasy blob of a body

File: wrongneighbourhood.jpg (199KB, 1214x900px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1214x900px

>>1681013
Generally this came down to two broad approaches in a fight to the death.

-hit him with something really hard, like a poleaxe, polehammer, or close-range arquebus. Even if the blow doesn't penetrate the armour, a big enough impact won't be completely absorbed by the padded gambeson underneath and could stun, bruise, knock out, or even kill the man inside, depending on placement.

-wrestle him down (preferably with buddies helping), and then stab him in an area that the armour does not cover - eyeholes, joints, etc.

Keep in mind this is also only if you're fighting to kill. Forcing a surrender can happen as the result of a lot of different things, and taking a knight captive was generally preferable for all sides involved - the knight got to keep his life, and his captors got a nice ransom.

>>1681013
Run him over with a truck.

>>1681013
Same way they beat each other. With a halibard or lance.

>>1685568
Jesus no.

>>1690437
>tax peasants
>some other peasants capture you
>pay those peasants with the taxes you collected from other peasants
gapitalism

>>1681013
encircle them in fire. watch as the metal heats and makes a human oven.

>>1681013
or you can do what the Brits did to the french and just use long bowman. hit the metal enough and the metal will collapse his chest. or skull

>>1681013

Shoot him.

>>1690302
>>1690307
Love you too gents.

>>1688861
after taking ap euro in high school, the state of american history is honestly shameful.

>>1685568
"Nothing personnel, Sir."

File: c0cb9ca8e4c2e8683650a1705673098a.jpg (74KB, 564x611px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 564x611px

>>1686880

Hi, I work as a military historian specifically focused of military technology at a few different museums, as well as fight ACL/IMCB and study historic fencing, with the 15thC being my personal focus.

Allow me to say with 100% certainty, as a professional, that the image you posted features an arming coat with voiders, but with artistic interpretation from a man who is an artist, not an armourer.

Here is an arming coat with voiders from the exact same culture and time period as the miniature you posted. Note the quilting. its not thick, but its dense. Padding, from textile to buff leather, was the rule, with almost no exceptions.

Please don't talk about what you don't know and act like cock when you get called out on it.

>sell your house to afford armour
>partake in an upcoming battle to gain honour and glory
>it's raining
>stumble and drown in mud before you can get close to any enemies

File: polyak4.jpg (47KB, 533x800px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 533x800px

>>1692903
i like you, guy

what's your favorite type of helmet and why?

>>1692903
have you ever pooped or peed your armor

File: FB_IMG_1473858879446.jpg (33KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 540x540px

>>1693470
Late 15thC Italian transitional sallets. Pic is my personal helm.

What about you? Whats your favorite?

>>1693488
Nope to both. Historic clothes tend to force you into a regular cycle, as you're laced in. Poop before you armour up.

Peeing isn't really a problem either. Aside from the fact that the cod of my hose/breeches (as applicable to my kit at the time) is readily accessable under my skirt/faulds, when you are under extreme exertion, your body draws as much moiture as it can, even if you're heavily hydrating the whole time. That lack of water is why your urine is dark and minerally after dehydration.

That all said, I have puked in harness. I got a hell of a nut shot from a rising J-hook with a falchion, hard enough to dent the modern stainless kickboxing cup I wear under my historic stuff. Thankfully, I was wearing my old Corinthian Barbuta, so I didnt get the strainer effect from the vomit.

>>1689000
Why does he have a broom over his shoulder?

>>1692903
>Please don't talk about what you don't know and act like cock when you get called out on it

/his/ in a nutshell.

Also I want your job, jelly as fuck.

File: c883dece72732a55b31291a1b3c11c38.jpg (46KB, 360x640px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 360x640px

>>1693546
i'm a fan of armets/close helms, doesn't matter where they come from, as long as they look similar to this
they also have to have breathes, that's important
however, i could never turn down a hounskull bascinet or the classic sallet/bevor combo

File: 80e13211bd74db255093db743c695853.jpg (82KB, 564x782px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 564x782px

>>1693578
here's a guy who actually attached his bevor to his helmet

>>1693570
Im at an 18thC American Revolutionary living museum now. Not my favorite period, but its a much more stable gig. Still get play with swords and muskets though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj3-VkbRSKQ
GG EZ

File: misericordia.jpg (29KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 450x600px

>>1681013

aaaaand

/thread

>>1685736
*I* can get back up easily with full plate, and I'm NOT been trained daily with it for years - only once a month. If a weekend warrior can do it with ease, an actual warrior can do it even better.

>>1681381
Fair point.
Wrrestling armored knights to the ground and choking / stabbing them was actually a thing back then. Hey, you could do that EVEN if they were armed. Weaboo "ours are the only martial arts" propaganda has made us forget that they had actual martial arts back in Medieval Europe - they had whole treatises about how to deal, unarmed, with an armed knight. Back when Italians still were a thing, militarily speaking.

>>1682400
Stop answering your own posts. Medieval shoes had no shoelaces, you baka.

>>1681405
Bonus "fuck you" points - lefty used righty's own dagger to shiv him in the fucking face

>>1681864
>posts stainless steel falcata with fuller
As a Spaniard (Falcata's country of origin) I can't help but point and laugh

File: oscarvomit.jpg (124KB, 621x621px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 621x621px

>>1693546
wow, really makes you think

>>1686880
Reenactor here. If I had been given a cent for every different interpretation I've ever heard of what that "cut full of holes" line meant, I'd be fucking rich.

This whole long ass thread, not a single result for fucking NETS. You throw NETS on the knights and pull them down, then you go in with spearmen and stab them all to death

>>1687887
>massively numerically inferior forces that's why its called the age of cavalr
Mongols basically sent a big Chink style foot army down to Southern China during the Song-Yuan wars.

>>1693770
Yes try to get close to the walking tank with your tiny dagger.

>>1681446
I don't think plate armor was ever invisible

File: M-P_Rondel03.jpg (400KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1600x1200px

>>1693770
A tiny court stiletto made to be worn as man-jewelry with court clothes? Edgeless, triangular bladed daggers are fine, but get one long enough and made for battle.

File: Fd3sfzt.jpg (318KB, 736x1106px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 736x1106px

you can't.

File: 79737912.jpg (302KB, 700x556px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 700x556px

>>1696268
Actually....

>>1692903

>its not thick, but its dense

It's almost like... that's what I've been saying all along. That were were wearing closely fitted, strong arming doublets, not waddling around in gigantic gambesons AND a full mail shirt over that AND a full harness over that, like was being suggested.

>>1685749
>falling on a ground is not a problem
>literally all killing blows in the video are due to the enemy being put on the ground first

Mmmkay

File: Italian mid 14th.jpg (45KB, 432x576px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 432x576px

>>1696427
Except that you were saying it wasn't padded.

Also, mid 14thC was all about the full maille shirt over gambeson under plate.

Also:
>They'd have been wearing a armouring doublet, which is almost identical to its civilian counter part, only with more laces to tie on the places.

Stop talking out your ass.

>>1692903

Also, you are aware that isn't a 15th century garment, right? It's mid-late 16th century, at the earliest.

http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/71390.html?mulR=245762788|1

File: 1455DonorPortraitofDonInigodeMendozabyJorgeInglesDuquedeInfantadoCollectionMadrid.jpg (25KB, 238x311px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 238x311px

>>1696445

>being so autistic as to focus on one sentence

Yeah, you do work in a museum afterall.

Notice how later I said maybe they were, we don't actually know? There's zero surviving examples that are conclusively a 15th century arming doublet, so art is all we've got to go on, and art shows them as just tightly fitted doublets, just like civilian doublets, but with extra points. Maybe they're padded, maybe they're not. The artwork doesn't show.

Oh look, it's a doublet with points on the sleeve!

File: 14801500RevcaSlowakeiLaurentiuskircheGeielungdesHlQuintinus.jpg (135KB, 575x567px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 575x567px

>>1696474

Hey look, another close fitting doublet!

>>1696453
I most certainly am, hence why I matched the garment to the miniature you posted, anon.

You were painting with a big brush that no one ever wore gambeson>full maille> plate. I am simply saying that they did for a good chunk of a century. You never specified an exact period.

>>1696474
>>1696480
>Not being able to identify the aspect of artistic interpretation being a fault in documentation of armour, as they are not armourers.

And its obvious you're uneducated swine.

No one is arguing that civilian militant fashion didn't exist, or that arming garments were not close fitting, but the point is that artists of the period barely had anatomy and depth of field in their art, and would routinely draw battle scenes in jousting armour. You cannot take medieval art as a complete documentation of shape and form.

Please, learn how to properly research and correlate per-rennisance secondhand documentation.

>>1696481

>matching a mid 15th century miniature
>with a potentially 17th garment

File: 9067638_orig.jpg (161KB, 800x528px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 800x528px

>>1696474


>>1696499
you beat me to it, but yeah, don't trust art or tapestries for anything accurate, as artists weren't experienced in how combat was

according to this guy, you could just cut right through helmets and mail like it was nothing

>>1696499

>multiple artists from different decades and geographical locations all depict a garment in the same way
>in a way that perfectly mirrors the surviving armour the garment would work with
>in a way that modern people can reconstruct and use extremely successfully

>they can't POSSIBLY have been drawing what an arming doublet actually looked like
>it would be just impossible for someone commissioning a pieces of art, to show the artist what they wanted to be drawn or for them to have own such a garment themselves
>afterall, their artistic conventions didn't have 100% anatomical accuracy or proportion so it must be nonsense

>>1696518

No, according to that guy, in the Old Testament story hes being paid to paint, people cut each other up and hacked open helmets, and that is what he is drawing except in contemporary fashion.

>>1696509
Nigga, you a dumb.

>>1696518

Also

>artists weren't experienced in how combat was

Where has this idea come from. Warfare and violent death was endemic all across Europe for most of the middle ages. Why wouldn't an artist not know what a sword can do or what armour looks like? Dominic Mancini wasn't a knight or soldier, but evidently had enough common knowledge to be able to compare the equipment of English soldiers to their continental equivalents.

File: Jezus_pred_Pilatom.jpg (2MB, 854x1380px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 854x1380px

>>1696509
>one of the most famous and complete sets of voiders and textile armour in collection of the late 15th early 16thC.
>"Possibly 17thC Garment"

Stop typing

>>1696530
>What is removed artistic reference (artists copying another artist)
>What is stylization

Should I even bother pointing out that the image is an anachronistic transliteration of a biblical Roman saint?

>>1681013
800 peasants with spears circling his house until he starves to death.

File: bullshit1.jpg (218KB, 547x596px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 547x596px

>>1696554
>Where has this idea come from
probably from shit like this

File: bullshit2.jpg (219KB, 547x596px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 547x596px

>>1696574

File: bullshit3.png (1MB, 654x582px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 654x582px

>>1696576

>>1696564

Arming Doublet

Artist/maker unknown, European. Repaired c. 1937 by Leonard Heinrich.

Geography:
Made in Europe

Date:
c. 1550-1650

>it's a 15th century arming doublet in my mind

They're entirely different depictions of different events. We're not talking about some guys copy Avicenna until the medical forceps turn into zigzag decoratiion because they artist doesn't know what they're drawing. They're clearly showing an arming doublet being worn by a knight being armed, a wounded knight being carried and a knight/saint being stripped.

>anachronistic transliteration of a biblical Roman saint?

Yes, portrayed in contemporary late medieval fashion

>>1696574
Besides the sword in the gut guy, this one isn't to bad. A little dramatic, most deaths were from heads and far out limbs. Stuff you can't keep behind a sheild.

Ok yeah this isn't really correct.

>>1696574
>>1696576
>>1696577

All three of those are from the Maciejowski bible and are depictions of bronze age battles but with medieval clothing and armour. They're not meant to depict what actual medieval battles are like.

File: 14c.jpg (17KB, 207x253px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 207x253px

>>1696589

>>1696564
...Is that fucking Dracula?

>>1696583
Jewyork fag here. Thats currently on display in the Met, and marked circa 1480 to 1520 or around that. I'll get a pic next time I go.

File: 487ade240672136283346ea5958f9b68.jpg (36KB, 561x427px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 561x427px

>>1696592
That the Bible took place on the bronze age?

>Still want one of those dope orc blades though.

>>1696583
Site your source faggot.

>>1696599
yeah but did those reeaaaally exist?

File: seax_haithabu_hedeby_knife_replica_b.jpg (214KB, 1000x649px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1000x649px

>>1696605
Hmmm.... maybe the long knife looking one. I bet it was entirely on acadent though.

>First Google image of a long dead I liked.

File: otm28va&b.gif (471KB, 895x506px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 895x506px

>>1696592

...

It's litterally the Maciejowski bible. Each painted miniature is accompanied by the matching section of the Old Testament.

Pic related is David and Goliath. Goliath is depicted with greaves even though they hadn't come back into common usage, because that's what the text says.

>>1693546
Who made your helmet, friend clown?

>>1681013
Tell him his cousin claimed his fief in an inheritance dispute.

>>1682539
Knights adapt by taking a pre-battle poo poo. Then during battle they crush you with sphincters wide. What now?

>>1696594
That is indeed Dracula.

File: 2ae13fffb3215eb99019ecedc0f11ca0.jpg (85KB, 564x752px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 564x752px

>>1693546
how do i get better at telling where a certain harness or single piece of armor is from? i can nail what part of a century it's from, but i still can't get the regions
is there some literature i can find?

>>1697913

Just look at lots of armour and check where it's from and you'll pick it up eventually.

Basically if it looks like a cathedral, it's German, if it looks like a sports car it's Italian and if it's a bit of both and/or organic looking, it's English.

>>1698199
Amount of armor can actually tell you a little about a harness. The English tended for more complete coverage than anyone else, for example.

File: Net Gun.jpg (33KB, 500x234px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x234px

>ctrl+f
>no "net gun"

none of you are trve understanders of strategy

>>1681574
At least the poor bastard died quick, right?

>>1681013
make him run

The golden age of knights and chivalry ended with plate armor when swords became irrelevant.

>>1681405
>Excuse me, I think you have something in your eye.