257d21 No.13860696
Tell me anons, what do you prefer, slutty armor or realistic?
72379e No.13860709
Realistic.
Pornheads need to get out
257d21 No.13860721
>>13860709
This doesn't appeal to you anon?
000000 No.13860729
honestly, realistic is best. porn armor is played out way too much, and most often just looks ridiculous
4a2cfe No.13860732
>>13860696
>being so autistic that you'd rather shit up your vidya with ridiculous slutmail and (((bikini armor))) so you can play with your smelly little turgid penis, rather than keeping your vidya grounded in reality and tabbing the fuck out to masturbate to actual porn
I seriously hope you guys don't do this.
000000 No.13860738
>>13860721
honestly, no. my only thought is "if she gets stabbed anywhere other than the tits or shoulders, it's game over"
f59478 No.13860742
Slutty armor is realistic as a woman would better serve as a cheerleaders than actual combatants
257d21 No.13860748
>>13860732
How could bikini armor possibly be jewish? Is the crotch plate circumcised or fucking something?
000000 No.13860752
>>13860748
I think it's more pointing out how synonymous with gratuitous fanservice it is
257d21 No.13860758
>>13860742
What about Joan of Arc?
>>13860752
Jews did not create fan service. It's a ridiculous false equivalency.
4a2cfe No.13860764
>>13860748
>ruining fiction by sexualizing everything
<how could this possibly be jewish?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
e2c7ea No.13860777
>women warriors
>zero attempt at plausibility
>retarded fanservice for neckbeards too horny to look up porn
>shit aesthetic anyway
Worst of all of the worlds, to be honest.
f59478 No.13860783
>>13860758
>What about Joan of Arc?
257d21 No.13860785
>>13860764
Fiction has always been sexualized. Post proof then if you're so sure it's the "jews" doing it. Unless you're another false flagging faggot trying to ruin another thread while pretending to be /pol/. Which by the way, doesn't trick anyone, just so you know.
4e46da No.13860786
>>13860732
>grounded in reality
>magic
>dragons
>women physically competing with men
3910ba No.13860791
I like realistic armor for fetish reasons.
50463f No.13860798
Best Armor coming through. Shows off Samus figure be being slim in the waist with wide hips and a large upper chest area and long legs. I get hard every time I'm thinking about it.
000000 No.13860799
>>13860758
>jews created fanservice
that's nowhere near what I said
4a2cfe No.13860806
>>13860785
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12119-011-9093-2
Now which race has wildly disproportionate control of the media? Hmm…
>>13860786
>wild false equivalency to justify your disgusting masturbation habits
This is exactly the shit I was talking about. You animals would rather shit your vidya up with terrible porn, than play great vidya and look at great porn separately.
3910ba No.13860817
>>13860798
My absolute nigga
257d21 No.13860823
>>13860806
archive that shit first. Do you not even know the rules of the site?
99543a No.13860824
I vastly prefer realistic armor. Medieval armor was absolutely gorgeous.
>>13860786
I would vastly prefer a medieval fantasy game where women couldn't physically compete with men, too.
4a2cfe No.13860828
>>13860823
>archiving a study
You're too young to realize why we started archiving shit in the first place.
257d21 No.13860832
>>13860828
I know full well why we started when we came. Now are you going to archive it or not?
583e2b No.13860838
>not relying magical forces and charms to provide divine protection, allowing you to go into battle butt-naked
b127d4 No.13860839
Powered, whether that's sexy or otherwise.
583e2b No.13860843
60e985 No.13860863
Realistic. It's the only way it should be done.
And medieval games need to start taking armor into actual count. A simply sword thrust or slash will not even dent an armored plate, yet alone penetrate it. Same goes for chainmail. Combat was much more complex than simply slashing like a fucking retard.
We have milsims that take ballistics into account and yet we don't even have one medieval game with realistic armor and combat.
ae79a2 No.13860864
>>13860696
Realism isn't fun.
I mean, if these games were at all realistic:
>Plate Mail dropped from defeated enemies should have massive penalties to your agility and dexterity, as the armor was not properly fitted by an armorsmith.
>Your character should not be able to easily equip a full suit of armor entirely on their own, and would require aide from companions or subordinates
>While (properly fitted) armor is easy to move around in, it's still a lot of weight to carry around, and as such your character should become more exhausted quicker.
>You'll have to clean and maintain your armor regularly, otherwise it will lose it's effectiveness in battle.
>Semi-related, but female characters (or at least human females, in instances in which there are multiple playable races) should have massive physical penalties, as in real life female Olympians can barely keep up with athletic teenaged boys.
Nevermind that armor is made for the battlefield, and not for spelunking around ancient ruins and caverns. That immunity to slashing damage isn't going to do you a lot of good when the rickety old bridge breaks and you sink like a rock in the pond below because you couldn't swim.
Like if you want to play as a character who resembles a realistic knight, more power to you. But don't shit up your argument with demands for realism.
4a2cfe No.13860871
>>13860832
You obviously don't, so here, I'll explain it to you. We started archiving articles about really ridiculous shit, because as soon as we'd get to them, they'd blow up and then the articles would be edited or deleted in hopes that they could be memory holed. This eventually evolved into depriving "hostile" sites of clicks, and it stayed that way for a while.
After hotwheels pulled his little freddit breddit stunt, we had a massive influx of outsiders who didn't understand that particular part of board culture, and would post articles from those websites without archiving them. They'd be rightfully shit on by anons for not archiving, and eventually wordfilters were added for said hostile websites. The newfags being newfags, took this to mean that all articles must be archived, even those from neutral or even friendly websites. This is what you're doing right now. So no, if you want it archived, you can fucking archive it yourself you dumb fuck. Your pathetic attempt at damage control after I blew you the fuck out is noted, though.
60e985 No.13860877
>>13860864
>I'm absolutely braindead when it comes to medieval armor and maintenance - The Post
99543a No.13860878
>>13860864
>That immunity to slashing damage isn't going to do you a lot of good when the rickety old bridge breaks and you sink like a rock in the pond below because you couldn't swim.
No, swimming in armor is entirely doable. It's no harder than swimming in modern military gear.
ae79a2 No.13860890
>>13860878
>No, swimming in armor is entirely doable. It's no harder than swimming in modern military gear.
Oh, really? I would have figured all the extra weight, especially from the layers of cloth becoming soaked, would have made it near impossible to swim.
>>13860877
Cool rebuttal
9c6c48 No.13860893
>>13860696
>what do you prefer, slutty armor or realistic?
good looking is enough.
that excludes 90% of slutty armor, but also a big portion of the realistic ones too.
26deff No.13860897
>>13860798
Overrated garbage.
>>13860842
Every fighting force worth a shit had actual armor on, not bikinis. There's a reason we evolved from cloth to mail to plate armor throughout the years. Moving in armor was also quite easy as it was often designed to distribute weigh on your shoulders and hips. Bikini armor is retarded in any setting that isn't just porn.
257d21 No.13860910
>>13860871
No, i'm demanding an archive because you linked some site I dont know, which for all I know is a honeypot I.P harvesting site, while you spout ridiculous nonsense about bikini armor being made by jews. And your repeated insistence on not actually doing the simplest act, which almost everyone else has evolved to do only makes it more suspicious. But of course I should click on all the suspicious links you post.
4a2cfe No.13860936
>>13860910
>b-but muh honeypot ip harvesting site!
Where the fuck do you think you are? With every post you reveal you're even more of a newfag than previously expected. Keep going, next you'll admit you've only been here for a few months.
>>>/sudo/27745
e28d0d No.13860945
>>13860696
Wtf is that helmet on fourth pic?
Was it designed by Rob Liefeld?
257d21 No.13860960
>>13860936
Yeah, that's what I thought. Rather than prove your point you avoid doing a simple task and try to call newfag as a defense. A task everyone else has no problem doing.Fuck off back to neofag.
>>13860945
Looks like a wolfshead.
>>13860893
True.
>>13860890
You'd have to be a titan of strenght to possibly carry over 100 lbs on you while swimming, not accounting for sword and shield.
4a2cfe No.13860967
>>13860960
>reveal you're an abject newfag who doesn't understand why we started archiving
>doesn't even know about sunshine
>deflects from being wrong by whining about an archive for a neutral site that hosts studies when he could copy-paste the link in archive.is himself
>better post a smiling cartoon, that'll show em XDDD
New. As. Fuck. Get the fuck off my board.
99543a No.13860971
>>13860960
Heaviest known armor was ~80 lbs and it was bulletproof armor designed for use from horseback. Most platemail is in the 40-60 lbs range.
If you can't swim with 50 lbs on your chest you're unfit like fuck.
257d21 No.13860976
>>13860971
You're not accounting for gambeson or padding underneath the armor which becomes wet, as well as chainmail, and the gauntlets and boots.
99543a No.13860985
ae79a2 No.13860991
>>13860890
I found a video on vimeo in which a guy actually experimented with swimming while clad in armor. And, yes, it is feasible, but the conditions would have to be heavily weighted in your favor.
Honestly, sword and board, with side daggers and a bow and arrow, with leather armor would be your best bet for surviving in a dungeon.
257d21 No.13860994
32bb31 No.13861009
>>13860758
Joan offered advice and inspired men in battle to bravery, she was not a combatant.
>I loved my banner forty times better than my sword. And when I went against my enemy, I carried my banner myself, lest I kill any. I have never killed anyone.
2b52a3 No.13861014
Slutty. women fighting is already quite unrealistic unless its modern day (And even then its unlikely) so it might as well just be for show. My favourite is when all the women are mages and they all wear tight robes and pointy hats.
210840 No.13861018
>>13860806
>Rolling Stone
Ah, yes, the famous japanese magazine
dfd6d5 No.13861022
>>13860742
wtf I hate female full plate now.
9ff874 No.13861024
>he doesn't revel in the satisfaction of slowly revealing the vulnerable core of the heroine and the intimacy of her allowing you to remove her armor before taking one another following the stress of day-in day-out skirmishes so far from home
it should be obvious, realistic armor
dc9152 No.13861028
>>13860897
How come the Marines don't wear platemail if it's so good anon?
132865 No.13861029
>>13860842
>guerrilla is all that matters
>believing sun tzu, man that died because instead of being wary of his enemies, he was writing a book, in which he wrote to never take your eyes off the enemy
>all this disinfo in just one picture
Whoever who made this was both a faggot and a dumb nigger who would never be a good commander or anything relating the military. I want to punch his head in for also being a disgusting fag that likes women that look like dudes.
The reason that people didn't wear armor in the 17th century was that guns pierced it with ease. If you showed 'em kevlar, they would be creaming their pants, everyone would be wearing kevlar vests that would make only the big cannons useful for killing. The fag who made this is the armor equivalent of a noguns fag.
4a2cfe No.13861037
>>13861018
The references section, anon.
204ef5 No.13861038
>>13860709
>>13860729
>>13860732
And for once, OP is not the biggest faggot in his thread.
>>13860878
It's no harder than swimming with baggy camoflage, a bullet proof vest, a helmet and binoculars, multiple firearms, and several days worth of field rations strapped to your back
2a67fd No.13861049
>>13861029
I'm not sure if I can believe you, since you've never been any melees.
7dd379 No.13861060
I like both.
chainmail bikinis can be for battle mages, goddesses or warriors who are confident in her skills.
with full plate armor, you can polish the armor and listen to the chainmail chafe against eachother.
99543a No.13861063
af3d8a No.13861065
>>13860742
this is correct,if you're doing the fantasy setting one might as well go all out.There's no point pretending for the sake of muh realism
fb713c No.13861069
>>13860696
>>13860824
>>13860786
I wish we could have a game where man do manly things and women do feminine things and that was reflected in the clothing.
>play as cute teenage girl collecting herbs and learning to create tinctures, healing creams etc. from her granny
>be a lords wife and have to plan and host a banquet
>have some princess maker like mechanic where you have to properly bring up your children
All that while wearing elegant, appropriate clothing!!! I don't really mind chainmail bikinis and the like, but I wish games would give me more mature, classy clothing for women more often rather than ridiculous slutty clothing. The japs are the worst when it comes to autistic lewd clothing tbh. However when they try they actually can produce nice female fashion.
257d21 No.13861075
>>13861069
I dunno anon, I like playing as a girl with a nice butt.
808792 No.13861081
>>13860696
I prefer realistic armor on men and no armor on women because they don’t do the fucking fighting, you stupid feminist.
808792 No.13861090
>>13860823
>archiving is a rule
Go back to sucking cock, please.
>>13861018
>le genetic fallacy
Thanks for admitting he’s right.
7dd379 No.13861093
>>13861081
>women from video games are the same as real life
26deff No.13861108
>>13861028
Because guns became a thing, and force beats armor. Even then, the latest iterations of plate armor could even stop lead balls from early guns, hence why they were in use until the middle of the colonial era.
Also, there is no such thing as "platemail".
257d21 No.13861119
>>13861093
If it's not like real life why does the armor need to be realistic?
>>13861090
You offering?
210840 No.13861124
>>13861037
There is only one article that refers to Japan, and half of the other articles look like bullshit
>>13861090
>genetic
I wasn't the one who said bikini armor was jewish
799bc8 No.13861129
>Daggerfall still has the best Aesthetic
>Has graphics no better than Dooms
How come none of the other Elder Scrolls games are as sexy?
ae79a2 No.13861133
>>13861081
>no armor on women
Kinky!
>because they don’t do the fucking fighting, you stupid feminist.
Oh.
Well, that's not strictly true. You won't typically find any women on the battlefield in any official capacity, yes. But sometimes you don't have the privilege of turning away a pair of hands that could be holding makeshift weaponry.
I mean, if your choices are between you and your daughters and young sons being raped and your farm being burned down, and picking up a scythe that's been modified for combat and killing a motherfucker, your gonna kill a motherfucker.
98722e No.13861142
>>13861133
Mixed-gender units perform significantly worse than single-gender units because male protector instincts kick in.
799bc8 No.13861154
>>13861009
Is there literally any case at all of a female being a good or even decent soldier? I mean you see women fighting all the time in any fiction to the point where it is just considered normal.
fb713c No.13861160
>>13861133
Don't think anyone's disputing that, but you'd probably still be very useless and would get killed. Women under perform in every aspect on the battlefield. The only thing women can apparently be better at is aiming(there was a norwegian study a while back), but that still doesn't mean anything because they handle stress worse than men meaning they'd still aim worse in actual combat.
>>13861142
Also women are weaker, handle pain and stress less well and a lot of other things.
257d21 No.13861161
>>13861009
Yeah I was waiting to see if any anon would point it out. Last armor thread we had a while back an anon mentioned she was more of a bannerman or page for other knights and warriors, just used to inspire the men.
895094 No.13861167
Slutty. Armored women should only exist as pin-ups.
98722e No.13861173
>>13861154
The closest thing to a good female soldier were a few female snipers during ww2.
c40674 No.13861174
Depends on the girl, her style and fighting style.
Also weather.
ae79a2 No.13861183
>>13861173
Spies.
Also, you know, suicide bombers.
263630 No.13861185
>>13861173
Snipers whose killcounts were greatly exaggerated in Soviet propaganda.
26deff No.13861190
>slutty armor or realistic
I prefer something that makes sense. Slutty armor is ridiculous and only good for porn.
>inb4 women don't wear armor because they don't fight in real life!
No shit. It's fucking videogames, who the fuck cares.
67552e No.13861200
>>13861154
women were never used as soldiers, at least not formally, by any fighting force we know of until modern times. You could likely find women along the ranks of brigands, bandits, pirates, maybe even some sea raiders, but they were rare even in those contexts. Really, even african warlords knew better than to send their only way of making more people out into the battlefield to be killed and raped.
That said, a woman, armed with guns or a sling, could make for a decent ranged fighter in a militia or guerilla fighting force. Women can kill, they just can't go toe-to-toe with a man in a melee.
In terms of armor, a woman would have a very hard time finding a blacksmith to forge her a suit unless she was rich and did it specifically for ceremonial purposes, as the process would take months and the smith would likely prefer to make a suit for a man than to have to adapt multiple key steps to get it to fit a woman's figure. Chainmail, padding, or scales could technically work but chain in particular would cause back problems due to the woman's shoulders not being wide enough to bear the full weight, and the weight likely also pushing down on the breasts.
2b8b87 No.13861209
I like most armor honestly.. but I really prefer to see your MC carry a backpack full of gear on them rather than having them seem they carry everything in their pocket. You then buy a bigger backpack so you can carry more shit. Or you put bigger packs on your horse or donkey or hire someone to carry shit around.
1781be No.13861213
>>13860864
>fitting plate armor takes time and resources making it perfect opurtunity to make it feel like a ultimate late game item (which it basically was)
>not wanting to have a cute squire sidekick to be robin to your batman
>thats issue of scale, moving in it for days would be too much but wearing one for whole battle shouldnt be an issue
>what are sidekicks and peasants for
anima a best
ae79a2 No.13861214
>>13861190
No shit. It's fucking videogames, who the fuck cares.
Exactly why I like Slut Armor
67552e No.13861223
>>13861209
the best part about Lord of The Rings Online was that you could make your character have both cosmetic and skill armor sets, so in your cosmetics you could make him run around with a giant fucking backpack . I also really like the backpack mods in the TES and later Fallout games. All games should have backpacks.
799bc8 No.13861226
>>13861190
>>13861214
All that matters to me is that it fits the games aesthetic well and looks nice. This all depends on the game and what they are going for.
e0e2eb No.13861252
Realistic. A full suit of armor looks cool on men and attractive on women, because it spurs your imagination instead of handing you everything on a plate.
I think it's mostly an issue of dissonance. I have no problem with bikini armor in barbarian settings and such, since in those men typically wear just as little as women.
7dd379 No.13861255
>>13861119
I prefer the term "practical armor" over "realistic armor".
1781be No.13861264
>looks boss as fuck
>easy to move in
>protection on the level of plate
a best! BEST!
257d21 No.13861273
>>13861190
She looks like emma watson.
67552e No.13861283
>>13861252
>I think it's mostly an issue of dissonance. I have no problem with bikini armor in barbarian settings and such, since in those men typically wear just as little as women.
I think that's the big issue for me as well. It just doesn't fit to have men run around in full plate and power armor and have women, who are supposedly just as useful and powerful in that setting, be in bikinis, as if they ran out of funds.
The problem is even more apperent when it supposed to be a unified army or nation, and they have completely different gear instead of a set uniform. Reminds me of the Russians in the Napoleanic and WW1 times where they'd send guys out with brooms and sticks, or ammo but no gun.
fd96ab No.13861289
I think women belong in the kitchen.
4a2cfe No.13861297
>>13861214
You like slut armor because you've been conditioned to crave sexual stimuli in all of the media you consume.
>>13861252
> I have no problem with bikini armor in barbarian settings and such, since in those men typically wear just as little as women.
Sensible answer.
ae79a2 No.13861311
>>13861297
>You like slut armor because you've been conditioned to crave sexual stimuli in all of the media you consume.
… Okay? And?
b9adb3 No.13861313
>>13860696
I prefer cute armor to both.
>>13861154
There are very rare instances like Joan the Hatchet or the countess who "wielded a glaive as well as any man" mentioned in Froissart's Chronicles. Usually, the only time a woman would be on the battlefield, in medieval Europe at least, is if she were a noblewoman who had to lead an army into battle on the behalf of a male member of her family(usually her husband) who had been captured, killed, or otherwise unable to do so himself. In cases like this the woman probably carried a weapon for personal defense but the chances of her using it were a million to one.
e0e2eb No.13861316
>>13861283
Exactly. I really appreciated the Souls games in that regard, a female character wearing the same armor as a male one is visually almost indistinguishable. The only difference you're going to see is that their shoulders aren't as wide and their animations are different, but it's not immediately visible.
>>13861297
Thank you.
0d544f No.13861320
>>13860798
If I was at home, I'd post the "Prime below the hips" picture I have. Take Prime 1's lower body design and combine it with 2's upper body for the best armor combo.
1781be No.13861324
>>13861200
>women were never used as soldiers, at least not formally, by any fighting force we know of until modern times.
well sarmatians might have used them, but when you are bordering mongols, huns, tatars, turks and even worse things every war becomes total war
4a2cfe No.13861365
>>13861311
And that conditioning is responsible for your shit taste, and is it spreads, devs see you as a viable audience to exploit, so more games are shit up with your "fan service" trash. Why do you think the "THICC" nigger meme took off here, when both europeans and asians overwhelmingly find overweight women to be disgusting? Because you fucks are being brainwashed.
67552e No.13861370
>>13861324
aye, even in the few cases where they HAD to be used, they weren't used as formal soldiers, but rather as guerilla type troops to harass, or as a last moment defense line where if anyone gets to them you know its already over. No nation would purposely train and equip women and then send them to the front lines, it was always forced because doing so was the manpower equivalent of tipping your doritos bag over for the crumbs, and could mean not only loss, but enslavement and rape of those women, meaning your nation/ethnic group would be wiped out completely.
c8bc63 No.13861371
>>13860696
Either slut armor or stylized practical armor, i don't see the appeal of female knights with realistic armor because at that point it might as well be a man and it would make no difference.
I do prefer stylized female armor though. Armor designs that do a good job of accentuating the female figure without showing much skin are rare, but usually pleasant to look at.
cf43a3 No.13861378
I prefer my fantasy fighting females to be wearing practical and logical outfits, full dresses for magi and full armour for fighters. The only time that it's acceptable for her to be showing skin is if she's an acrobat or a dancer, which are both situational as adventurers.
808792 No.13861387
>>13861093
>oy vey goyim our propaganda is fine as long as it’s in media
>ignore that the human brain can’t differentiate a television program from reality ha ha we can show incest and casual sex and pedophilia all we want and you don’t have to worry
>it’s just fantasy lol
Try again.
>>13861119
Your board owner is the one offering.
>>13861124
>doesn’t know what a genetic fallacy is
799bc8 No.13861410
>>13861387
This. Because of Tom and Jerry I shot up my little brother and had him drink water to see the water pour out of his holes.
72ff89 No.13861411
>>13860696
Depends, OP. If I want to look at something pretty, I'd go with bikini. But I'm a staunch realismfag and I like my historically accurate and common-sense armor. I also would rather not see women on the battlefield.
365a62 No.13861417
>>13860696
Oh fuck me, not this again.
>>13861313
>I prefer cute armor to both.
This is actually my preference too. Marcy is top tier in this regard.
1781be No.13861433
a better question:
which one is better?
personaly i prefer milanese. these one-piece large but functional pauldrons make me hard
7b9f44 No.13861440
>Realistic
Wholesome human women accompanying their beloved human husbands, fathers, and brothers on journeys, expeditions, and quests, adorably insisting that they can help fight and being generously granted the coup de grace on the various feral non-humans they're accosted by in packs, though never allowed by their guardian to be put in any real danger
>Slutty
All the barbaric, uncivilized, and sex-crazed non-humans such as orcs, elves, giants, beast races, etc. who are barely a step above wolves or pigs in civility and mental capacity, but serve decently enough for relieving stress on long, lonely journeys
3a1149 No.13861453
I like all varieties of armor so long as it works with the settings. If the developer is going for something or claiming to be realistic then I'll be put off by flashy armor and bikini-mail. If the setting is very high fantasy I won't mind and likely enjoy it. and when it comes to female knights well honestly i'd rather see the 6 foot tall shredded lady in bikini mail than the "realistic" counterpart who couldn't even be fighting with them men and is likely only written into the game so the devs can get good ally points
704c90 No.13861454
No slutty armor in winter settings. That shit is cold
ae79a2 No.13861460
>>13861365
Ah, yes. That must be it.
By the way, I should note: while I, myself, do prefer female characters in sexy armor, I don't hate historically inspired or practical armor, nor do I think that there isn't isn't a place for it. I am, in fact, perfectly capable of enjoying something that doesn't have heavily sexualized female character designs, and I able to respect those that prefer that sort of depiction as well.
2a2af6 No.13861466
e2c7ea No.13861468
>>13861433
Gothic is qt. For me it's the helmet that makes it.
3a1149 No.13861469
>>13861362
It works in soul calibur because what the characters wear is a large part of their personality and i would very much fuck both hilde and ivy full force
22463a No.13861483
>>13861154
The only societies that would ever consider using women as soldiers are those that are either batshit insane (usually this means communist, but not always) or incredibly desperate. Even if women were capable of doing well at the job (which sometimes they are–the Soviets definitely got some use out of them), sacrificing women's lives in battle is usually not a price worth paying.
4b5646 No.13861498
>>13860729
I dont think "porn armor" is inherently bad, the problem is most games are way too inconsistent with them so you end up having huge muscular people armored from head to toe in thick bulky gear that get their shit wrecked by some DYEL chick in her underwear.
3a1149 No.13861503
>>13861498
>that get their shit wrecked by some DYEL chick in her underwear.
MUH SUPERIOR SPEED
7b9f44 No.13861509
>>13861454
>Implying bracing temperatures don't harden and extend the nipples, increasing effective range and ability to perform parries
22463a No.13861521
>>13861460
I actually do hate devs who put female characters in "practical" premodern armor that makes them look indistinguishable from men, unless the woman is actually disguising herself as a man. Women as warriors already makes your game unrealistic. There is no reason not to stylize their armor to look feminine. It doesn't have to show a lot of skin, you can easily go with something like >>13861371.
3a1149 No.13861533
>>13861521
you don't like reverse traps, nigga?
>ser faceless the short sure is a good warrior, but never see him fraternizing with the men
>i will consult him about this
>[removes helm]
>ser faceless was no ser at all and now i get to dick down this might warrior too
4a2cfe No.13861561
>>13861521
>women in combat is already unrealistic
>might as well add bikini armor and ayyliens while we're at it!
Can we not?
>>13861533
Excellent taste.
be4420 No.13861576
>>13860696
It depends on the genre and the context.
If you're talking about a setting that's Swords and Planets, where the men walk around in loin-cloths, seeing women in bikini-wear is pretty much a necessity. Half-naked space princesses is the name of the day. Or, in other words, the Gurren Lagann aesthetic.
On the other hand, if the men are going around in suits of plate armor, I'm going to want to see the women in something more akin to this:
>>13861371
Full boob plates just look stupid, but something with an elegant design comes across pretty nicely. Even something that looks a little silly, like Saber's metal skirt, can work well in that regard.
The main key is consistency. If something sticks out like sore thumb, that's frustrating. But if everything is consistent, that's good.
f90e33 No.13861590
Whats up with all the muh slut armor bitching?
3910ba No.13861643
>>13861342
It's a crime to make a piece of metal this sexy.
491bd0 No.13861647
>>13860786
Women do compete with men. By roiding up the ass. But hey, as long as it works - you don't really care about the means to achieve the ends in the middle of the battle.
08c402 No.13861658
>>13860721
Armor is for defense. If you're going to show so much skin, you might as well be wearing cloth.
776bc5 No.13861676
Slut armor.
Sorry, but weighing down a 110 pound female with twice her weight in armor is taking a partially effective combatant and making her completely worthless.
Keep it a bikini to keep weight down as much as possible, and make it chainmail entirely to show that the person is a combatant. And if I can see that the woman is sporting actual muscle tone I'll have to actually treat her like a threat.
Honestly if a woman were wearing any kind of actual armor the most effective way to deal with them is a slight bump off their center of gravity.
2200f0 No.13861682
>>13860696
If she is not cute or sexy while wearing it there in no point to having the character there in the first place that can be more realistically be portrayed by a man. Realism fags need to fuck off back to thier non fantasy if it triggers them so much.
491bd0 No.13861689
>>13861676
>weighing down a 110 pound female with twice her weight in armor is taking a partially effective combatant and making her completely worthless
But weighing down a 110 lb female with 110 lbs of slut armor is fine.
776bc5 No.13861692
>>13861689
That's a really, really big bra.
12bf5e No.13861695
>>13861658
Little armor is still better than no armor.
1781be No.13861697
>>13861590
>sexy or realistic
why not both?
12bf5e No.13861699
>>13861689
>110 lbs of slut armor
What the fuck would this even look like? How big are those titties?
d821c4 No.13861701
>not a single image of realistic female armor in the whole thread
Here, let me help you out.
2200f0 No.13861702
>>13861695
Cloth is actually good enough in most cases.
491bd0 No.13861703
>>13861699
>>13861692
You niggers REALLY underestimate how much solid metal plating weighs.
1ff801 No.13861705
>>13861697
that looks fuckin dumb
776bc5 No.13861709
>>13861703
So, like, padding the slut armor bra with lead weights? Ok, I can see that.
12bf5e No.13861711
>>13861702
>Cloth is actually good enough in most cases.
It isn't good enough when someone is swinging a metal sword at you, which in a fantasy adventure is "most cases" so no you are wrong.
>>13861703
I think you overestimate it because you have low testosterone.
2200f0 No.13861713
>>13861703
Full plate is 40 or 60 tops. But even that is too much since the average man is 60% stronger than any woman.
4a2cfe No.13861717
>>13861676
>mail bikini
>instantly killed or disabled with a single blow to the torso
Why not just make it fucking leather in that case? Or give them a leather bikini with a linked mail tunic where you can still see flesh underneath?
3a1149 No.13861721
>>13861701
I thought naked apron was supposed to look good, the fuck is this. also in fantasy settings it's the only place where women can be useful, fun, or interesting so why add the sad realistic truth of them into our fantasies?
bc32cc No.13861722
>>13860842
>2nd pic
Actually I think the real reason we moved away from armor and shields was because the weapons that were coming out at the time heavy bore muskets and cannons could probably fuck up the wearer, and in the case of cannons, pierce right fucking through whatever armor you might be wearing, so people just traded it for absolute mobility instead because let's be honest, even though the myth that heavy armor slows you down to a half jog has long been dispelled, I doubt it would make you as fast as someone completely unimpeded except by their musket and the clothes they were wearing. That said, the fighting style was huge regiments shooting at each other anyway so I guess mobility wasn't really at stake, it was just the fact that steel could be put to use making more cannons and weapons instead of armor. That's just my take on it though.
>>13860696
As for the OP, with dudes I prefer realistic armor, and for females I sometimes appreciate realistic armor, but there are some times where I just want to see sluts wearing slutty but functional armor. And maybe on the very far end of the spectrum I just want to see armor plated g strings.
>>13861362
Underrated post and this tbh.
>Hilde's Heels
Unnecessary
>>13861433
>1st Pic
STOP RIGHT THERE CRIMINAL SCUM.
The others are fine though.
>>13861703
>https://www.quora.com/How-much-did-medieval-suits-of-armor-weigh
Stop being a retard.
2200f0 No.13861724
>>13861711
Go watch some cutting tests, you dumb nigger. Swords dont work like anime katanas.
491bd0 No.13861730
>>13861713
A single AR500 plate weighs 20 lbs and covers grand fuckall of body area. Pic related.
1781be No.13861737
>>13861730
these are much thicker then plate armor was tho
12bf5e No.13861742
>>13861724
Are you seriously going to sit here and tell me that metal armor is obsoleted by cloth and that I need to watch videos to prove it? Why did knights bother looking like they did if apparently all they had to do was put on a fucking shirt? Why the fuck do you think people started coating themselves in metal in the first place? I am genuinely disturbed by your stupidity.
491bd0 No.13861748
>>13861737
That really depends on how much protection you want. 1 mm "plating" would barely strong enough to stop limp wristed sword strike. 3 mm would be pretty heavy.
2200f0 No.13861757
>>13861742
They are called gambesons. Look it up, faggot.
4a2cfe No.13861758
>>13861742
Not obsolete, but thick cloth armor was pretty great against slashing weapons.
467d71 No.13861760
>>13861483
>Falling for commie propaganda 80 years after the fact
Lmoa
12bf5e No.13861770
>>13861757
You mean those things they wore under a breast plate? That also didn't do shit against a sword unless they were studded with, you guessed it, metal?
>>13861758
Swords have points for a reason.
491bd0 No.13861776
>>13861770
Studded armor didn't exist until 21st century.
2200f0 No.13861782
>>13861770
They wear them under or alone. Slashing it not effective. It absorbs the blunt force too. Only concern is stabbing.
445055 No.13861784
>>13861772
>axe helm
>axe wound
It's like poetry.
4a2cfe No.13861787
>>13861770
Of course, but stabbing is much riskier than slashing.
>>13861772
>heels that would sink into the ground, catch on stones, and be all around awkward as fuck
You had one job!
1781be No.13861790
>>13861770
>You mean those things they wore under a breast plate?
yeah basically you need something to stop force coming at you (plate) and something to prevent hit from mauling you.
most medievel soldiers (depending on period) wore these because its a fucking cloth and as such is cheap as fuck. it works fine on its own
>Swords have points for a reason.
you cant stab in every possible situation.
776bc5 No.13861795
>>13861717
I guess you can do that as well.
Though I would like to see a woman arms expert HAHAHAHAHA don different levels of armor and fight for extended periods of time. Then we could have actual measurements of just how much speed/stamina is lost and even better see how effective the armor is against blows.
Actually that would be an interesting thing to see, has anyone already done it?
12bf5e No.13861798
>>13861782
Someone who couldn't afford a breast plate would wear it alone. Is it really so hard to admit that "cloth is good enough in most cases" is a fallacious statement? Especially when your argument to support is relies on gambesons that were often reinforced with leather and metal.
491bd0 No.13861802
>>13861798
You sound awfully autistic, trying to prove a point that no one really can because nobody had used that kind of armor for well over 3 centuries, so the mankind will never know for certain.
4a2cfe No.13861805
>>13861795
I have no idea, and I'd honestly be highly suspect of any such "tests" being released in today's climate, where everything seems to have an agenda.
1781be No.13861812
>>13861802
and you sound like buttblasted faggot that lost argument but is too proud to admit it
12bf5e No.13861815
>>13861802
Are we not supposed to discuss things on image boards now? I'm not even trying to prove anything, I'm arguing against a point someone else made. You might have noticed that had you not gotten emotional about the argument.
491bd0 No.13861818
>>13861812
Lost what argument? About some shit you (or someone else) made up using vagues of hunches and loose interpretations as proofs? M8 pls. That wasn't even me you were arguing with.
1ff801 No.13861826
>all these fags who don't know what a gambeson is
445055 No.13861827
>>13861802
>nobody had used that kind of armor for well over 3 centuries, so the mankind will never know for certain.
Luckily we have writing to preserve knowledge now. If only they had invented that by the 18th century.
7f328c No.13861836
>>13860842
You have a point with that first picture. Women love to look sexy, even if it doesn't have much of an effect and is painful as fuck. Hundreds of years from now, maybe we'll be saying it's unrealistic to draw women with high heels because "there's no way a woman would subject herself to that kind of pain and danger".
776bc5 No.13861837
>>13861805
That's for damn sure. I can just see some feminist channel editing a video to show a woman just doing a single jumping jack, and a bunch of cuts to imply that she's been running around in the armor for hours only to have her take off the helmet to show she isn't sweating and her makeup is still perfect.
Sad though, it would be interesting to get that kind of raw data. There might actually be a breakdown of how much armor you want a woman to wear and what kind of weapons she should use in those situations.
491bd0 No.13861845
>>13861827
Yeah because information in books is infallable, last instance truth. Always, invariably. In a book from the times when people believed vermin just spawned out of thin air if you leave groceries unattended. Besides, why do you think such debates even have place? Because nothing concrete was written even in those hardly reliable sources.
808792 No.13861850
>>13861410
Thanks for admitting that everything I said is accurate and that you can’t refute it.
12bf5e No.13861856
>>13861845
So if you acknowledge the importance of debates such as this why do you barge into the middle of it just to throw around insults and derail it?
491bd0 No.13861866
>>13861837
Having women allowed in combar roles is all you need to know about modern political climate.
>>13861856
Because you insist that you have some last instance truth and the other guy is absolutely certainly wrong. Which is clearly isn't the case, because you're both wrong. Nothing is correct until it is proven to be correct, no proofs exist currently and might as well never to exist in the future.
d7f614 No.13861876
>>13861836
The difference is that high-heels are distinctly not for combat but for fashion
People might think high heels are stupid in the future like those cage-dresses women wore before
We know why they wore them, but it seems pretty silly in hind-sight
And high heels are pretty stupid looking when you think about it
491bd0 No.13861891
>>13861876
They are retarded but they serve to increase apparent height of the waman in question. It's a muh dik equivalent.
0c6941 No.13861898
realistic armor with sexy things underneath
d7f614 No.13861903
>>13861891
i think its supposed to lift up their ass or something
i don't know how people find them sexy though
b0673b No.13861923
>>13860696
It doesn't matter, because female fighters aren't realistic to begin with. So, I am fine with either of them. It does depend on the setting, though. If the game takes itself somewhat seriously, and everything else tries to be at least a little bit realistic, then I guess women should wear functional armor, or just not fight at all, if you want full realism. If it's supposed to be historical, then women shouldn't be involved. Of course, this mostly applies to humans.
445055 No.13861929
>>13861903
It's for height and to make their ass/hips sway when they walk you dummy.
491bd0 No.13861943
>>13861929
They sway naturally, when walking without any ridiculous footwear. However awkward they make the locomotion to be, it's fitting. A woman can't run for shit either way, so not being able to do so in high heels is hardly detrimental. And when you see a woman in high heels, you immediately know she'll put up with a lot of abuse just for some meaningless brownie points.
7a60ae No.13861960
>>13860732
>play with your smelly little turgid penis
>masturbate to actual porn
speak for yourself
445055 No.13861967
>>13861943
>They sway naturally, when walking without any ridiculous footwear.
And they sway more in high heels. For someone that complains about people being argumentative you sure have an inability to concede any point.
491bd0 No.13861975
>>13861967
I'm not the one claiming some specific properties of some objects based on absolutely nothing, that would be you.
808792 No.13861980
>>13861891
>>13861929
Which is idiotic. I don’t want to be with a woman who lies about her appearance AND is masochistic enough to wear shoes that are designed to damage your body.
d8557c No.13861987
>>13861975
Okay, I can say from experience that women CLAIM it's a mandatory fashion accessory that accentuates their height and stride. Even after said heel breaks off when stepping off a bus to the sidewalk and the woman in question has to hop all the way home with a dislocated ankle that required three weeks in casts before it was fit of use. Even then heels remain an integral part of 'certain' women's lives.
7f328c No.13861993
>>13861876
>high heels are pretty stupid looking when you think about it
>>13861903
>i don't know how people find them sexy though
That's my point though, if there were many woman in combat on a large scale, such as in fantasy settings where the world is full of "adventurers" and mercenaries. There's sure to also be a large amount of women wearing slutty armor, despite how stupid you think it looks.
491bd0 No.13862002
>>13861987
Women can't survive without peer approval. They'll do anything if it elevates them in eyes of others. E.g. covering up her own rape because she's an rapefugee welcome girl.
fd07fa No.13862009
>>13861772
Is that supposed to be a Grey Warden from DA?
3a1149 No.13862011
>>13861987
>Even then heels remain an integral part of 'certain' women's lives.
Women like to make their own lives more difficult, mostly to spite other women. It's like wearing make up, gotta take 2 hours out of your day to make yourself look acceptable because without makeup your an acne ridden mess with no eyebrows. This ironically is caused by excessive use of make-up. Most men would still fuck them if they wore sneakers and did basic skin-care but women fool one another into ruining themselves so much that things that should be occasional like makeup and heels become overdone
d8557c No.13862023
>>13862000
Nah, that's blubber man. You use harpoons to pierce through to the vitals, and then string it up to drain all the blood out.
>>13862002
>>13862011
Eh, I've met women who are quite levelheaded about this shit; I just hoped that I'd never have to face true retardation in my fellow (wo)man. Worse, I'd have thought I'd set a better example.
993bb8 No.13862029
WHEN GIRLS WEAR ARMOR I LIKE IT WHEN THE ATTRACTIVE PARTS GET EXPOSURE
You could always have another piece that goes on it battle but you gotta use your appeal when not getting shot by arrows.
5df855 No.13862030
>>13862000
Doesn’t bring squishy give you a blunt damage reduction?
90fc06 No.13862039
Females aren't meant to fight. They're in to please males so the answer is obvious. Only a western homosexual or cuck will want a full armor.
3a1149 No.13862052
>>13862023
>I've met women who are quite levelheaded about this shit
I would hope so, I still feel like a lot of "womens hardships" like wearing uncomfortable shoes is something they brought upon themselves at this point
b738b5 No.13862066
>>13862000
>regular enemy has a fat variant
>it's stronger, deals more damage
d7f614 No.13862080
>>13860696
You know, in a way armor itself is effeminate. Wearing less of it is masculine, displaying you do not need it. (But no army IRL can effectively live up to this standard)
Women who wear impractical porn armor and do not die are being depicted in a more masculine way than the men with equivalent status armor.
I mean what is the most masculine class of all? The barbarian. And he just wears a loincloth to prove it. Every slutty chick is basically a macho barbarian.
>>13861993
Men are the ones who do stunts to prove themselves the best among their peers. High heels don't really put you in any real danger in normal life, they are just uncomfortable, so women would probably not wear them in combat.
3910ba No.13862090
>>13862039
What if I want full armor because it makes my dick hard?
4e46da No.13862092
>>13860806
I don't like skimpy female armour either so nice try.
I just don't want women in armour because it's fucking stupid to have female soldiers.
Only mages have an excuse because magic.
7f328c No.13862095
>>13862000
If videogames are anything to go by:
more armor = more %damage reduction
more body mass = more hp.
491bd0 No.13862097
>>13862080
Make no mistake though. Men do that for shits and giggles. Women do it as serious business.
993bb8 No.13862119
>>13862000
No because you can lose blood, die, and feel immense pain when your fat gets cut.
90fc06 No.13862138
>>13862090
There is a difference between full cuck armor and sexy armor. Cuck armor will be flat near boob area and can't tell differnace between male and female. Sexy full armor is alright by me.
257d21 No.13862140
>>13861772
Only problem is the high heels.
1340d9 No.13862141
Slutty armor <Spoiler] on boys :^) {spoiler))
d7f614 No.13862142
>>13862097
Men are the ones who might get killed for it.
The "shits and giggles" are part of the show, posturing and providing additional proof of your masculinity.
A womans concern about peer approval ends where their own survival begins. You see it all the time when they break down in public. This is more in line with how sexual selection works. Any act that motions towards desperation is effeminate. The more you need to be concerned about your situation, the less of a man you are.
257d21 No.13862152
>>13862141
What were you even trying to do there?
d8557c No.13862162
>>13862152
Expert bait, at a guess.
fd07fa No.13862187
>>13862152
ya been fooled lad
cf43a3 No.13862210
>>13862187
>I was only pretending to be retarded!
2200f0 No.13862215
>>13861798
It is good enoigh in most cases. Many people went into combat wearing it alone. Maybe you should stop strawmanning what my arguement was originally about so you can protect your fucking ego.
fd07fa No.13862225
>>13862210
>implying I posted the bait
Ye be responding to the wrong poster lad
a070b3 No.13862229
Slutty, as there is nothing realistic about a woman in platemail on a battlefield.
1d940d No.13862250
I like comfy looking armour.
f22d02 No.13862255
>>13860732
Whenever a women's on a battlefield period my sense or immersion is already gone so no point in caring about realism after that.
>>13861154
As far as pirates go you have the historically accurate Mary Read and Anne Bonny for pirates, with Mary Read being famous for always boarding and fighting with her sword with men.
a070b3 No.13862258
>>13861729
That vid makes it look like maces should be the weapon of choice vs knights.
64b257 No.13862278
>>13860696
For me, proper armor is much more aesthetically pleasing than slutty armor, it's not even a matter of realism for me, but rather concept in itself, slutty armor is simply too ridiculous.
>>13861154
Well, there's the soviet's night witches during ww2 and the shield maidens that would defend their homes against thieves while all the vikings were out raiding. But I can't think of more examples to be honest.
64b257 No.13862283
>>13862258
That's because it is, you're gonna do jack shit with a sword against an opponent fully armored in plate.
4013d8 No.13862296
>>13860696
I like both, but it depends on the game and the context.
If the game is stylized, or heavily favors style, then slutty armor all the way.
>TERA
>FFXIV
>Most JRPGs in general
If the game is more realistic or gritty in general, then I like being fully armored.
>Warhammer
>Mountain Blade
>Dork Souls
If I have to choose between the two, however; then realistic armor, because a woman in full platemail makes my dick diamonds.
49134a No.13862301
Jock strap and battle axe is all you ever need.
257d21 No.13862317
>>13862305
Second one was made by a rabid feminist.
f83395 No.13862319
I know this is splitting hairs in a fetish thread, but
>female armor
>realistic
The only realistic way to treat women in a war where plate and chain are relevant is to keep them as fucking far away from the battlefield as possible.
754b3d No.13862337
>>13862296
>If the game is more realistic or gritty in general, then I like being fully armored.
>Warhammer
Actually in Warhammer you actually could have working bikini armor. Through any magical or worship means you can grant yourself a ward. There even is god that would be willing to help you for wearing bikini into battle, but save wards aren't his thing.
Pic related. The wards guy most tanky bastard in table top that wears a bit of plate and a lot of clothes. Known as mandatory unit to have in 8th edition, enjoy 3+ ward and 1 rerolls.
f0555a No.13862338
>>13862258
It is, but often only as the last weapon. Knights generally had a list of weapons the went through as the battle progressed and usually the mace was after the sword, simply because it is so damn short.
>>13862283
Harnischfechten & half-swording works real well, especially since armored opponents are real easy to tip over due to the higher center of mass.
fd07fa No.13862341
>>13862317
What sense does this make?
fbc185 No.13862343
>>13860696
>Tell me anons, what do you prefer, slutty armor or realistic?
I like fantasy settings, so I need a good mixture of both.
In most fantasy settings, the usefulness of armor varies. Adventurers don't engage in battles between armies. They dive into dungeons and fight slimes, ogres, demons, and dragons. Why would you wear plate from your head to your toes when your armor is going to be your tomb if you get struck by almost anything? Adventurer's also don't march with a caravan carrying all of their arms, armor, and supplies. They have to carry everything on their person, and not across highways or paths, but through forests, up and down mountains, through caves, and sometimes into hell. In a world where a demand for lighter armors exists, and where adventurer's roaming the world spending more money on armor than most artisans make in their lives, there is no reason to be suspicious about the development of stylized armors.
That being said, there are still the occasional encounter with bandits, armed undead, soldiers, or other types of enemies that use humanoid weapons that armor is designed to counter. There are also enemies that armor would be perfectly fine against. So practical armor as we know it in our history would certainly exist. Yet, adventurers, mercenaries, and guards aren't always going to be equipped to fight other people. You'd probably find elite adventurers, royal guardsmen, or famous generals wearing more practical armors.
Armor needs to have a use. If it's not of use to someone, it's probably just fashion. Both are necessary in a fantasy world. I figured that's worth pointing out before someone gives me that spergy, "why isn't everyone just naked then" shit. None of that, "why doesn't everyone wear a gambeson" shit either, that doesn't fly, unless you're worried about the practicality of handing down undamaged armor to your up-and-coming adventurer children after all of your bones are broken, or you're pretending that the lack/weakness of professional armies in a lot of fantasy settings doesn't entail a million more spears in the world.
The only reason I can see to disagree with a balanced concept is that you either think every game has to be about rank-and-file army engagements between medieval european countries, or you think every game has to put all them big o titties out on display. It's nice that both of those game types exist, but a balanced approach to showy armor and realistic armor fits the vast majority of game worlds.
64b257 No.13862365
>>13862338
half-swording works decently enough against plate armor simply because it's the best you can do with a sword in such a situation, but a mace or a war hammer is always going to be better.
9f0262 No.13862373
It doesn't really matter to me. Whatever fits the tone of the game. If I'm playing a Queen's Blade game, I want Bikini. If I'm playing Dragon's Dogma, I want more realistic armor. Though I will say that my dick gets harder with full plate armor rather than bikini armor. But then, I'm a huge faggot who loves strong women who dominate on the battlefield, but whom secretly wish only to be dominated in bed and in their heart. Full plate armor conveys to me a sense of competence that's sadly lacking in most women, and that's a turn on. Bikini armor, especially where it tonally doesn't belong, is just superficial attention-whore cosplay bullshit.
If anything, the only armor that really bothers me is "Boob Plate" armor on anything that's supposed to be functional rather than ornamental. And even then, it's only because it's so fucking non-committal. They want to appear both functional and sexy, but accomplish neither.
From the OP's pics: Second to the Left and Second to the Right are fine. Middle pic #3 is rage inducing.
3910ba No.13862375
>>13862317
>feminist drawing women being slaughtered
I'd believe it
799bc8 No.13862383
Are there any games that are realistic enough to not have female fighters to begin with?
0efdcd No.13862386
>>13862343
>player one has to play a nigger
fd07fa No.13862393
>>13862373
I only have one gaylo waifu
9dc1ae No.13862408
>>13862383
i know some(?) total war games don't
3910ba No.13862415
>>13862393
Gay, but respectable
f0555a No.13862421
The main issue with women wearing armor is that it's heavy. And because it is heavy, it is generally going to weigh down on one or two of two spots; the hips and the shoulders. Now, unlike men, women don't have the upper body strength to be able to fight comfortably wearing heavy armor if it is on their shoulders.
The second spot, the hips, is arguably even worse, but I'll get to that a bit later. For men the hips are a far superior option than the shoulders, as with the weight near your center of gravity you can move fairly normally while having your arms unencumbered. You can see this in various armor designs; plate armor having narrow waists and corset-like designs, maille shirts and brigandines tightened around the waist with a belt etc.
Now, because women have to give birth, they have wide as fuck hips; that baby brain is fucking HUGE and you gotta push it out somehow. This means that to survive childbirth, women have to have FUKKEN huge hips, comparatively. But this makes the structurally weaker. Place a heavy rucksack on a woman and have her march and she'll wreck herself. Old women suffer disproportionately more often from hip injuries than old men, as a lifetime of wear and tear take their toll.
So having heavy armor is going to be either weighing their upper body down so much they can't do shit, or fucking their hips so bad that within a year or two of fighting they'll be walking around like scrunched up old grannies, all hunchbacked and slow.
>>13862365
Not necessarily. A warhammer, sure. It's a polearm designed solely for anti-armor combat, of course it will outperform a jack-of-all-trades weapon like a sword. But a sword is a warhammer, too when you half-sword it. A mace is too short and predictable against anyone decently skilled and will be riposted easily enough by anyone with a sword. Longer is stronger, it's a fact of life.
584022 No.13862432
I prefer it when they just wear clothes.
f22d02 No.13862433
>>13862421
>armor autist has entered the thread
9dc1ae No.13862436
>>13862421
neither armor nor weapons are nearly as heavy as they are depicted
dfd6d5 No.13862439
>>13861440
This post. sadly it was off by 8 to be heiled.
>>13861466
Checked
9dc1ae No.13862448
in real life was armor for men always so practical?
f0555a No.13862451
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>13862436
Certainly, it is lighter than modern gear and distributed upon the body in a far superior way, but that does not mean that women are capable of wearing it for extended periods of time while under continuous physical stress.
>>13862433
I am not actually autistic. I think.
f22d02 No.13862457
9dc1ae No.13862479
>>13862457
fencing is 1 vs 1, so mobility is useful. But when you are surrounded by soldiers there is much less room to move around an evade.
fd8df7 No.13862480
>>13862296
>Warhammer
>realistic
Dude…
583e2b No.13862482
>>13862448
If we are to trust the Romans, then no.
3910ba No.13862493
>>13862482
It's likely the Roman's depictions of their enemies was highly unrealistic, though.
fd07fa No.13862494
6bfb1e No.13862505
>>13861748
Please stop embarrassing yourself
3910ba No.13862538
>>13862494
Master Chief is a guy anon
fd07fa No.13862545
>>13862538
>S087
<S117
wew lad
257d21 No.13862548
ceaacf No.13862563
>>13860709
Realistic = no women in combat to begin with.
3910ba No.13862566
>>13862545
They're all Master Chief anon
Everyone there is Master Chief
>>13862552
>implying robots can't have a benis
64b257 No.13862571
>>13862563
Yes, anon, thank you, only half the people posting in the thread mentioned it already.
583e2b No.13862573
>>13862493
How unrealistic though? Are we to believe that every Gaul had his own cuirass? Or are we to believe that they all went to battle in the nude? There probably were Gallic warriors who fought bare chested.
257d21 No.13862575
>>13862341
>>13862548
And just in case a bunch of you are too lazy to check
>Artist kvecthing about women wearing skimpy armor and not men, conveniently forgetting about barbarians and other shit.
4013d8 No.13862592
>>13862480
>realistic or gritty
>or
>i don't know how to read, guys!
We know.
9f0262 No.13862595
>>13862566
>They're all Master Chief anon
>
>Everyone there is Master Chief
If you're going to be gay for a Spartan, at least be gay for a total bro like S052, not a faggot like John Self-Insert.
9dc1ae No.13862602
>>13862566
If robots do not have chromosomes does it mean they can not be male and therefore it is not gay?
64b257 No.13862604
>>13862575
>>Artist kvecthing about women wearing skimpy armor and not men, conveniently forgetting about barbarians and other shit.
She literally mentions in her second question that male armor should be functional and not "fierce".
f22d02 No.13862614
>>13862604
>she
>he was too lazy to click on a link
fd07fa No.13862619
>>13862566
>he doesn't want a barely legal supersoldier waifu
http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Kelly-087
257d21 No.13862620
>>13862604
He's comparing mens armor to womens and complaining about it being sexist. Hence all the comparisons to the mens, implying it's superior. Are you really so dense as to not realize such a simple thing? Especially in the context of the picture?
3910ba No.13862625
>>13862602
A robot can't technically be biologically male but if you're fucking a robot with a benis you are gay unless you're a woman.
3a1149 No.13862627
>>13862619
this is pretty gay bro
64b257 No.13862634
>>13862614
>>he was too lazy to click on a link
Fine, my bad on that one, doesn't change my point though
>>13862620
He's comparing functional armor with non functional stylized "armor" and then proceeds to imply it's wrong when done both in female and male cases.
fd07fa No.13862642
>>13862627
explain wherefor there be an benis anon-kun
f22d02 No.13862646
>>13862627
This reads like a tumblr OC
>she had to slow down for sparring
be4420 No.13862653
>>13862604
>>13862634
If you don't investigate crashed space-ships wearing nothing but a horned helmet, a spear, and a horned helmet, you are doing something very wrong.
257d21 No.13862659
>>13862634
Point out where he says its wrong for males. He's complaining about "cleavage". Right from the start. Men don't have cleavage. He outright states he wont make "bikini armor" either, except he's a whore, so he will but you gotta pay him more :^
64b257 No.13862673
>>13862659
>Point out where he says its wrong for males
Like I said before, literally question #2 in the image you posted before.
>2. The main purpose of a man's armour is to:
>a) look fierce
>b) protect vital organs
c8bc63 No.13862675
>>13862627
>>13862646
It really does, i was half expecting something along the lines of "she was faster than Sonic".
000000 No.13862684
>>13860696
Realistic in realistic games I guess. Warband is only one I'm aware of though (that has armored women anyway).
Slutty in all dem fantasy shit. Because fuck you it's boring enough.
Everybody who's got triggered by slutty armor are feminist kikes kill em with greek fire, my stoic friends.
257d21 No.13862698
>>13862673
In contrast to womens bikini armor as he cries about it being sexist, hence why in the entire post he talks about how he has never made it and now made a picture of an armored clad woman slaughtering women in bikini armor.
At no point does he complain about male armor, he alludes to male armor being the norm and female armor being negative and objectifying in his own post, which you are selectively pointing out when the evidence is up there. At no point does he complain about stylized male armor, only about bikini armor and alluding to it having sexist undertones. But then you're avoiding that part of the post like the plague.
4f80ea No.13862710
>>13860738
Gay or autistic
4e1040 No.13862755
>>13861154
There have been a number of graves found of women who disguised themselves as men to serve as soldiers or mercenaries but I really doubt anyone bothered to record how well or poorly a common soldier fought.
e50568 No.13862780
>>13862386
He could've picked any of the four colors. He either picked last or really wanted to be yellow.
9f0262 No.13862788
>>13862755
>There have been a number of graves found of women who disguised themselves as men to serve as soldiers or mercenaries
>Female Soldiers
64b257 No.13862793
>>13862698
Fine, if you're going to be that way, so be it, let's analyse the whole thing step by step.
1) The image: The image is clearly a woman in functional armor slaughtering without a problem a group of women in non functional armor. The critic here is clearly against non functional armor in women, as it's the most regular case of non functional armor.
2) The rant: He goes on about he's never liked the "chainmail bikini" and that he's avoided having to draw them so far, but is aware that if hired to do so, he would have to do it. So, since he concludes he'll inevitably have to draw chainmail bikini at some point, he decides to go ahead and do it "on his terms", which users of said type of armor being killed because of it's non functionality and comparing it in a direct way to functional armor.
3) The quiz: A set of several questions, of which we only see the first 5, that are actually sarcastic commentaries disguised as questions. Questions number 1 and 3 follow in the same line as the previous rant, but numbers 2, 4 and 5 are clearly male oriented, which denotes that everything we read beforehand is most likely because of his distaste for non functional gendered stereotypes rather than exclusively female ones.
So there you go, nothing was "avoided" as you put it, hope you're happy now.
000000 No.13862819
>>13861790
I'ts cloth, horse hair and a lot of work, it wasn't all that cheap by medieval standards. I guess you could get like one month-worth of turnip instead.
Some knights didn't even bother supplying infantry with gambeson let alone mail, grab that spear, wooden shield and here you go fighting for freedom.
257d21 No.13862836
>>13862793
>He's still trying to be oblivious to force his narrative.
Nigger, his entire premise for the picture and complaint is in relation to bikini armor and objectification of women. He kvetches about it for a massive paragraph at the top. He is not complaining about functional vs non functional, hes complaining about women being "objectified" and wearing bikini armor when men don't have to, hence why the men get to look fierce, and the womens curves "accentuated" , and the men get to use things normally or bigger because MEN, with the connotation of MAN-SIZED, which has always been seen as a positive, such as a MAN-SIZED meal. But by all means, try and misrepresent again, i'm sure you'll manage to try and sophistry your way out to avoid the obvious. Nonetheless, my point has been proven, and sourced.
635599 No.13862958
>>13860748
>metal nipple plates
That's probably pretty uncomfortable. I bet she'll have fun explaining how her nipples got burned/frozen off to her husband.
5b1fb3 No.13862991
I can't count the number of times we've had this sort of thread, and thus cannot count the number of times I've been among the only ones to say this: let the clothes fit the character and the setting.
Clothes and armor in fiction are much more than their real-life counterparts: their primary purpose is not to cover the body, but to tell you something about the character wearing them.
Sometimes this means that they end up being armor that, if replicated in reality, wouldn't work as armor, but goes unquestioned so long as it lines up well enough with the character wearing it and the setting that character lives in.
3910ba No.13862996
>>13862958
> I bet she'll have fun explaining how her nipples got burned/frozen off to her husband.
>Honey, have you been sleeping with that fire elemental behind my back?
<N-no, what makes you think that?
>THERE ARE BURN MARKS ALL OVER YOU, YOU WRETCHED WHORE
635599 No.13863058
>>13862996
<I-it was t-the metal plate
>Woman, what have I told you about wearing full plate with nothing underneath?
36410c No.13863078
>>13862337
And in 40k you can wear a conversion field generator that can fit into a space crucifix.
>>13862575
This guy sounds like a phenomenal whiny faggot, but I guessed that from the picture he drew.
64b257 No.13863089
>>13862836
I completely fail to see how you can see "looking fierce" as something positive when it's being compared to "protecting vital organs". It should be obvious to anyone that "look fierce" is being presented as a negative, same with "man sized" and "man bag".
But you know what? I'm done here, should've stopped a while back already.
36410c No.13863114
>>13862996
I don't think those are metal nipple plates. I think it's Sorayama-esque liquid chrome fabric.
84bfd7 No.13864050
>>13860696
None because women have no place on the battle field
serious answer: slutty armor is for plebs, realistic is the patrician fetish
313d01 No.13864076
>>13862627
This sounds like the autistic fantasies about being a shounen anime character I had as a kid but from a girl's perspective.
I can already imagine the whole story
>daughter, you were born with a gift
>you were the chosen one
>but instead you killed us all
>why?
<because I wanted to, dad
<*slices her father's head off*
<*whatever breed of metal music kids listen to these days plays on the background*
<NOW NOBODY WILL TELL ME WHAT NOT TO DO
dfd6d5 No.13866115
>>13864719
>last pic
>Yeah let me pour this flesh scaldingly hot metal incorrectly so I myself can look hot and sexy.
>Material waste is no big deal right? tee hee
>Sword casting is totally legitimate and like t o t a l l y actually makes swords instead of brittle pieces of scrap metal ha ha.
>Yes I think I will stand next to a 1600+ degree furnace WHILE wearing armor.
7b5927 No.13867747
>>13860798
Samus has ruined me when it comes to Sci-Fi body suit armor. I've yet to see space armor that is remotely as well designed as the Varia Suit.