Plate armor doesn't restrict your mobi- https://www.you

>>33768561
FITTED plate doesn't restrict mobility.

You'd need to tailor the armor to the wearers proportions to get the full effect.

we better get out and tell those fencers they're doing it wrong

and conversely, Doctor Daniel Jaquet, a Senior lecturer of the Department of History, University of Geneva and a former lecturer at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, has done biomechanical studies of armour and its mobility, and the conclusive result of that are that, properly fitted, for the actions needed for fighting, plate harnesses do *not* impair mobility.

there are reductions in flexion, in torso mobility and putting arms above the shoulder... but not in any ways which are regularly repeated in actual use.

>>33770599
Fencers have been doing it wrong for more than 200 years.

>>33768561
Anyone else confused by ye olde bearings before you clicked the thumbnail?

>>33768561
>implying armor and human variability doesn't exist
>implying elbow flexion to that degree is significant in battle
>hurr hurr one video proves everything
>inb4 hurr hurr you lost a couple of angles you lost significant amounts of mobility

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-bnM5SuQkI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RR6I-BLKbQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzTwBQniLSc

>>33768561

Plate armor is like an old bow.

The armor has to be fitted to it's wearer, the bow has to be specifically strung for the man using it.

>>33770917
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-bnM5SuQkI
wait... were the backs of thighs not armored? (serious question)

>>33770951
Looks it, might be a great way to get ham-stringed if you're on foot. Then again, just use mobility and skill to not let your enemy get behind you or hook around your leg.

>>33770951
It depends, but you'd probably be wearing some chainmail, and possibly be sitting on a horse.

Is there a pant version of a gambeson?

>>33770951
Suits if armour for fighting from horseback may not have had protection for the back of the thigh, but suits for fighting on foot often did.

>>33770574
Pretty much.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUrd7d1Q

>>33770951
Plate armor was designed to deflect blows, you'd wear it over a gamberson and chainmail where you expected to receive one. Mounted knight probably didn't expose the back of their thighs very much.

>>33770574
KnyghtErrant has pretty much best fitted plate than anyone has out there. I bet anyone trying to repeat such test will come short after him.

>>33770917
You know that if you have 110 degrees ROM in the elbow joint you can get disability bucks, right? Putting armor on turns you into cripple. Literally.

>>33770951
You grip the horse with that part of your thighs. A completely enclosed leg harness prevents you from being able to do that.

>>33770951
>wait... were the backs of thighs not armored?

I dunno how they trained their horses then, but today you use your thighs/knees in some horseback riding commands. The horse can feel it through the saddle if you don't have it propped up too high.

Example: Squeezing both is a signal to slow down/stop. Squeezing one or the other is a signal to turn the body left or right. IE, squeeze left and the horse will turn right (goes in the direction you're pushing), and vice-versa.