>>64848132
japanese granddaddy.

If it's scale-like, the durability of the connections between the small pieces seems weaker than that of chainmail, so it seems like it would shift and allow penetration when hit by a weapon.

>>64848132
>What are the advantages and disadvantages of scale armor compared to chain mail?
Advanced body surfing head first down alpine course in the Winter games is better in scale tat chain. Snow chain mail is the next big safety equipment for winter assaults. Heard it here first.

>>64848132
looks like a shittier, less practical version of brigandine imo.

It's just an ancient type of armour like the laminar armour of Romans, replaced by the brigadine, plate-mail or lamellar armour.

Which one used more steel for the same area coverage?

>>64848132
>What are the advantages and disadvantages of scale armor compared to chain mail?
Disadvantages:
>harder/impossible to achieve full coverage
>not as flexible
>heavier
>harder to repair
Advantages
>more rigid: can protect against blunt impacts better
>less time consuming to make
>easier to make

>It seems to me that scale armor has practical advantages over chain mail (easier to produce, better protection)
That's largely true but consider that maille was good enough in terms of protection, and can be combined with other armors over vitals. In addition it has vastly superior coverage to basically everything else. Other armor simply isn't as flexible and can't be made like full coverage clothing.

>>64848132
>advantages
Very easy to make. Rivet scales to a leather jacket or vest. Fast, cheap, easy.
>disadvantages
It's scales riveted to leather. It has none of the durability of the other kinds, and it lacks the protection of brigandine or plate.
>why didn't it take off
Because the three kinds of armor you listed cover a period of development of over a millenia and if you're not nomadic or semi-nomadic it makes more sense to make heavier, more complex, more durable armor.

>>64848132

Scale armor did exist in Europe (late roman period), it just sucked compared to mail for how Europeans actually fought.

Pros:
– Good vs cuts
– More rigid than mail
– Doesn’t require precision-forging thousands of rings
– Looks cool (this matters historically)

Cons:
– Terrible flexibility (especially shoulders/hips)
– Weak vs thrusts, arrows, and bolts
– Needs a leather/fabric backing that rots
– Heavier for the same protection
– Noisy and awkward to move in

Mail won out because it moves with the body, spreads force better, and is far superior against thrust-heavy fighting styles. It also layers cleanly under padding and later under plate.

Why Europe didn’t adopt it widely:
– Roman + Celtic tradition already favored mail
– Medieval combat prioritized estoc, not just cuts
– Scale doesn’t scale well (pun intended) into full harness
– Mail plate is a natural evolution; scale is a dead end

Scale armor works fine in more static or missile-heavy contexts (Antiquity, Near East, steppe warfare). For medieval Europe’s mobile, close-range, thrust-centric combat, mail and then plate were just objectively better.

>>64848312
>Doesn’t require precision-forging thousands of rings
My understanding is that is not how rings were made. They're drawn wire on spindle, then clipped and riveted. It's not like they're individually forging steel into rings.

To add on to this:
>Why Europe didn’t adopt it widely:
>– Roman + Celtic tradition already favored mail
Celts are credited in historical sources with inventing maille, and archeology seems to agree. Since it was invented in Europe, it makes sense it first achieved dominance in Europe, then spread to other places.

>>64848258
>>64848274
Scale is not easier to make unless you have both precise measurements and blueprints and also semi-industrial tools where you can just shit out a lot of the same part up to spec. Scales were not all the same and like maille you have a lot of variety between big ass scales that are simple and stiff to very small scales that are about as flexible as mail but more rigid against impacts, while maille was rivetted up to different ring sizes and hoop densities Scales had to all come with attachment methods for different parts of the armor.

File: 9300630151085c415584ce3f7(...).jpg (135 KB, 857x622)

135 KB JPG

LMAO

>>64848735
>Scale is not easier to make unless you have both precise measurements and blueprints and also semi-industrial tools
What? No that's not true at all.
>b-but then the scales will be slightly different
yeah that doesn't matter.

>>64848132
Brigandine basically keeps all the benefits of scale and none of the downsides because the scales are fully encased in cloth or leather.

>>64848132
scale is just a worse type of armor that's nowhere near as protective and has poor coverage. it's also an older type of armor so it saw use before mail was invented and subsequently replaced by mail in most of the world.

it is cheaper to make and when polished looks stylish which is why Romans and their imitators made ceremonial scale armor for dat bling.

>>64848211
Well it predates it by a thousand years so it's not surprising it's worse.

>>64848806
>What? No that's not true at all.
It is unless you want to build a shambolic, non-functioning larp piece, scales would need to fit very tight to not be so absurdly bad at stopping thrusts they would have never been used at all.
>>b-but then the scales will be slightly different
>yeah that doesn't matter.
If they are different then you have either gaps or bad articulation. You need an acceptable degree of manufacture standards to make the very concept work, because shit like>>64848741 is just farcical, no one would wear shit like that into combat like no one would wear a leather jacket with metal studs no matter how cool it might have looked, they were still trusting their life on these things.

>>64848904
At risk of >implessive posting, the Chinese kept using it well into the middle ages and so did some eastern european powers, but the key difference is that those scales were sewn very closely to a stiff backing instead of just jingling freely. If that whole mountain pattern type was even real they were essentially fully rigid pieces that happen to be easier to repair than a dented or pierced solid one.

>>64849052
>scales would need to fit very tight to not be so absurdly bad at stopping thrusts they would have never been used at all.
The scales overlap you retard.
>You need an acceptable degree of manufacture standards to make the very concept work
Which is very easy to meet. That's why scale armor is one of the oldest armors ever made. It was also usually made of bronze, which is cast, making it even easier.

dumbo lol

>>64849052
>and so did some eastern european powers
there's no evidence of that. Byzantines used lamellar occasionally and so did some various steppeniggers but that's about it.

>>64848132
>And above all, why wasn't it as widespread in Europe
Scale was popular in Eurasia and Asia due to the ease of smithing small metal scales that don't need consistent tolerances, just a loop to attach it to. Ringmaille is realitively easy to cut and bend wire, even if forging the rings shut is rather tedious.
Romans had lamellar which is really big scales.

>>64848741
Notice how the scales are inconsistent in size, shape and construction.

>>64848369
>They're drawn wire on spindle, then clipped and riveted
Riveted, welded, or just crimped together if cheap and rushed. The real need is something close to modern industry, being able to reliably draw wire from steel stock.
Drawing good wire is a technological precursor to the types of blast furnaces needed for making blooms large enough for for breastplates.

>>64850271
>The real need is something close to modern industry, being able to reliably draw wire from steel stock.
Considering the Celts developed it in the iron age while living in huts and beheading eachother for sport, I don't think that's true.

>>64850671
The best steel of the ancient world was Celtic, from Noricum, that became the standard steel for Roman arms during the next centuries after they conquest.

>>64850696
Yes, that's great. That does not mean they had anywhere near modern technology. As skilled as ancient smiths were, they did have technological limitations.

>>64849974
>Romans had lamellar which is really big scales.
lamellar =/= laminar

>>64850716
I mean, the Romans did have lamellar too. Eventually. The eastern Roman Empire is very real and valid.

>>64850703
Typo of >>64850696: their conquest*
All pre-1200 (to give a date) blacksmithing was rudimentary to put it mildly besides the innovations like forge welding, hardness was all over the place and most heat treatment was simply let blades cool in air according to archeometallurgy. There're mentions of Celtic swords bending during combat and they using their feet to straighten them, during combat too.

Looks like it would be bad at stopping penetration thrusts from below that easily slip between scales. While still being a lot of metal so as heavy as chainmail.
Only thing it would excel at is downward slashes and arrows coming down in an arc from afar, and a little comfort since scales would flex well for movement.

Once you close the distance though stabs from below would be deadly. And in the time of mainly close shield combat that is going to be easy.

>>64850782
One thing that people don't realize because nobody uses sharp blades for training is that swords and other blades don't really slide off of metal. They bite into it. While I'm sure some people got stabbed by a sword or spear point sliding up a scale and into the gap, it really is not that big of a threat.
>And in the time of mainly close shield combat that is going to be easy.
How do you figure? There's a shield between you and this person covering their entire torso. A "stab from below" is going to be the hardest thing for you to pull off.

>>64850768
>There're mentions of Celtic swords bending during combat and they using their feet to straighten them, during combat too.
Beastmode. Do you know where I can find accounts of that?
Also they used to bend their swords for burial.

>>64850814
Polybius apparntly, idk exact book
>Polybius reports that the Romans began to meet the first strike on the upper edge of their shields, reinforced with an iron covering. When struck against the iron edge, the Celtic sword would bend, and the Celtic warrior would be forced to straighten it with his foot, leaving him temporarily unarmed and vulnerable to attack by the legionary. Furthermore, the legionaries discovered that while the Celt was delivering a slashing strike with his sword, they could deflect it with their shield and strike at his abdomen from underneath the shield.
AFAIK Romans had a trend of bullshiting with their enemies but there're a lot of bent ritual sword (idk if they had the same metallurgy than normal swords, probably the same)
>Beastmode
IMO all pre-guns combat was beastmode.

Honestly it looks good for easy flowing movement in ranged combat, and against enemies relying on slashing swords.
Many early cultures did use curved blades that cut flesh well but suck against armor. Curved are common from horseback too so maybe acceptable against cavalry relying on slashing.
Once straight blades from foot soldiers and spears come into the equation it would allow penetration against the direction of the scales too easily.

>>64850809
Metal absolutely rides along metal armor that is why good plate has ridges to direct arrows and blades.
Blades bite into eachother because they are sharp but they ride along smooth dull metal. You can also thrust without the sharp edge forward.
People doing that stuff for a living are going to adapt to a common enemy threat pretty effectively if they survive and talk to eachother a few battles.

>>64850878
Thx
>IMO all pre-guns combat was beastmode
You've gotta agree though that whacking someone with you sword, bending it, straightening it out, and then continuing fighting is a while new level of beastmode. Keep in mind they were probably hitting with the sharp edge of the sword and managing to bend it that way requires a lot of strength, even if the metallurgy is kinda shit.

>>64850895
Good plate armor is well heat treated and is not as soft as scales would be. Swords used in the era of full plate were often not as sharp as earlier ones as well. This is what enables sliding.
>You can also thrust without the sharp edge forward.
No, you can't thrust your sharp point into armor without the sharp edge being forward.
>People doing that stuff for a living are going to adapt to a common enemy threat pretty effectively if they survive and talk to eachother a few battles.
That's a great point, are there any accounts of this phenomenon?

>>64850904
Fair enough

File: ca39b2e2-1d7f-11e6-9d4a-7(...).jpg (48 KB, 700x700)

48 KB JPG

>>64848132
>probably more expensive due to the amount of metal used
Yeah, people always go full retard about that bit, especially when comparing mail to plate. So here's the quick and dirty: mail doesn't really use any less metal, and accordingly it isn't any lighter. (Or if you want you can say it isn't any lighter, and thus doesn’t use any less metal, the two simply go together.) Yeah, there's holes in the mail, but there's also plenty of overlap. So thick rings, thin rings, thick plates, thin plates... You can have whichever you want be the one to use less metal.

>>64850878
>idk if they had the same metallurgy than normal swords, probably the same
Most likely the same, yes. And the same as in the Roman swords, which weren’t just frequently "inspired" by the Celts but often straight up made by celts up in conquered Noricum. I'm not sure those bent sacrifices tell us mucvh about bendign in combat though, beyond that the sword could be bent a lot without snapping off, because as we can see what was done to bend them ritually was clearly quite unlike what they could suffer in battle.

>>64850923
Turn the sword 90 degrees in your grip now it slides right up between scales.
These are professional athletes not nerdy reenactors. They will adjust their style to best kill a threat they have seen more than once. If that means holding the sword 90 degrees so the cutting eded is to the side and it slides right between scales and stabs deep they will.

Real combat also has the organized lines break down once one side takes casualties and the other has a numerical advantage. 2-5 guys they may be attacking individuals. One or two guys can completely occupy a soldiers weapon while another just pins them and stabs them to death.
Medieval knights in full plate could be pinned down by a couple pitchforks and stabbed to death with daggers through their eye slots. Combat aint a duel. Professional athletes working as teams adapt and are scary.

>>64851001
No, the points just going to dig in.
> 2-5 guys they may be attacking individuals. One or two guys can completely occupy a soldiers weapon while another just pins them and stabs them to death.
Excellent point, so why would they be stabbing for the armored torso instead of anywhere else?

File: IMG_1718.png (616 KB, 562x457)

616 KB PNG

>>64848132
>>64848312
Tegulated armor existed

https://manuscriptminiatures.com/search?year_start=&year_end=&country=4&country=12&country=3&country=8&country=9&country=2&country=23&country=1&country=34&country=24&country=19&country=5&country=14&country=7&art=&tag=56&gallery=&source=&place=&artist=&page=1#results

Imagine being an autistic blacksmith
>You want me to connect 20,000 iron rings together? Don't mind if I do!

>>64851025
This is literally what they did to make Runescape players useful to society before Runescape existed.

>>64851007
>>so why would they be stabbing for the armored torso instead of anywhere else?

Fair point.
Maybe swords would bind but spears probably wouldn't and spear weilding enemies were common enough in that time period. A spear might even bite better stuck between and guided by scales.

>>64851025
No better than anything else back then. A simple shirt would had taken hundreds of man-hours to make.

>>64848132
Some scale mail was basically chain mail with scales rivetted on. Think of it like Chainmail+. More protection but also more weight.

Other times you'd see scale backed with cloth or leather. This was marginally better than chain but the backing material would slowly rot and tear. Scale armor might have been Wildly popular but because cloth and leather rot we might be seeing survivorship bias.

>>64849052
>It is unless you want to build a shambolic, non-functioning larp piece, scales would need to fit very tight to not be so absurdly bad at stopping thrusts they would have never been used at all.
The scales are hanging loose. If they were all strapped together you'd have Lamellar. Armorers overcame the gap issue by overlapping the scales and compensated for the weight by making individual scales thin.

File: file.png (1.29 MB, 1158x1032)

1.29 MB PNG

>>64851265
>Scale armor might have been Wildly popular but because cloth and leather rot we might be seeing survivorship bias
That would leave the scales. Scale armor was popular earlier in history, we know because there are scales found scattered and in burials, and they're depicted in art. After maille was invented, everywhere it went it pretty much killed scale armor, sometimes quickly sometimes slowly.

>>64848132
>What are the advantages and disadvantages of scale armor compared to chain mail?
Chain mail is better.
>And above all, why wasn't it as widespread in Europe as chain mail, plate armor, and various types of brigandines?
Because chain mail is better
> (easier to produce,
Kinda depends on your set-up, but let's say yes.
>better protection),
No.
>(probably more expensive due to the amount of metal used)
Low IQ negro.
>Do you have any sources (even online, videos, or articles) on this topic?
scholagladiatoria

>>64850904
>You've gotta agree though that whacking someone with you sword, bending it, straightening it out, and then continuing fighting is a while new level of beastmode
I think you're vastly overestimating how much force this requires. It's not a lot. I've done it plenty when a training sword gets bent (made of steel significantly stronger and also thicker than combat swords of the time). It's basically the melee equivalent of clearing a jam. It's one of the reasons why, if a warrior could afford to do so, they brought multiple duplicates or back-up weapons with their squire because there was a really good chance of weapon breakage in a big fight, especially with swords.

>>64849052
>the Chinese kept using it well into the middle ages
No, field armor was mostly lamellar with some mail. Only exception is some leather armors in the south.

>mountain pattern type
Not scale. Historical mountain pattern =/= modern definition of the Y pattern.

>>64848312
>Weak vs thrusts
meme

>Weak vs arrows and bolts
>Scale armor works fine in more static or missile-heavy contexts
Why would it be fine in missile-heavy contexts if it's weak against arrows and bolts?

>>64851523
But why is chain mail better?

>>64851301
In western Europe, sure, but we see more lamellar the farter east we go until we see Japan fiddling with butted and entwined rings basted on European imports. As far as I can tell, this is because Europe favored shields and infantry while Asia was more focused on archery and cavalry. Chain just isn't effective against narrow, piercing arrowheads.

File: mughal armor.jpg (2.12 MB, 3001x4000)

2.12 MB JPG

>>64852222
Lamellar isn't really the same thing as traditional scale armor, but yes that is true. However, there's an equal or greater abundance of maille, often combined with plates or in some periods lamellar. However, as far as I'm aware maille remained even after lamellar fell out of use. If you have information to the contrary let me know, but I do not know of any Mughal period lamellar armor, but they made heavy use of maille. The same was true for the Ottomans and Iranians as time went on.

>>64851007
>Excellent point, so why would they be stabbing for the armored torso instead of anywhere else?
Because the torso is the least mobile part of the body, the most lethal place to attack someone that isn't the head or neck and for practical reasons the torso almost ALWAYS has areas with less protection.

Assuming that your knight is rich enough to have all of the bits and bobs (tassets, faults, gorget, culet, etc.) and as such is about as protected as he can be, your best bet to kill him is to stab him in the armpit with the groin being equally appealing in terms of lethality but considerably less accessible. Remember, this isn't a mercy kill. Even if outnumbered a knight is armed, armored, trained (ie. he's aware of his vulnerabilities and what you're going to try to do to him) and probably has friends nearby.

Hollywood loves its swordfights but grappling, ground-fighting and knife-fighting were foundational combat skills.

>>64852323
anon we're talking about someone wearing scale armor, not a knight. They don't have any of that shit.

File: better.png (1.22 MB, 918x694)

1.22 MB PNG

>>64848132
>better protection
yeah

>>64852222
>Chain just isn't effective against narrow, piercing arrowheads.
Which is why plate mail became the go to armor for man at arms and knights after crossbows and longbows became popular in Europe
Other than the joints of the armor the main weakpoint was the horse which is why combat was mostly dismounted after Crecy including for example at Agincourt where the French knights and men at arms, just like the English fought mostly on foot and simply marched towards the English lines

>>64852405
>Other than the joints of the armor the main weakpoint was the horse which is why combat was mostly dismounted after Crecy
What? No, that's retarded.

File: Heuneburg Open-air Museum(...).jpg (154 KB, 1280x393)

154 KB JPG

>>64850671
>living in huts
Calling them huts seems rather inaccurate.

File: b737a55972d0da8caa2fa5245(...).jpg (1.29 MB, 2514x3329)

1.29 MB JPG

>>64851285
>The scales are hanging loose. If they were all strapped together you'd have Lamellar.

Lamellar is a completely different thing. Scale armor is built by joining scales to a backing of leather or fabric on a pattern. Lamellar is built by joining lamelles(small metal pieces) to eachother in rows, and then joining those rows.

>Armorers overcame the gap issue by overlapping the scales and compensated for the weight by making individual scales thin.

Overlapping the scales is what all scale armor does. That's literally what defines them as a distinct type of armor. You simply wouldn't build them like shit because it wouldn't work at all as protection to begin with.

>>64849146
the Polish too.

File: afd803f5aaf88877c8b98b95f(...).jpg (761 KB, 1556x2085)

761 KB JPG

>>64852342
see>>64851301

You can make a big pajama onesie of any kind of armor, it just gives yo diminishing returns because nobody's gonna be able to just reach down and hit your legs unless you're on a horse.

>>64848132
Duh an up-thrust with a stout narrow blade slips between scales and can fatally pierce your heart?

File: Kalchayan_Prince_(armour).jpg (3.09 MB, 1449x2056)

3.09 MB JPG

>>64852488
While that depiction does exist, I am not sure it is historical. Iranian carvings of Scythian armor do not depict them wearing the "scale pajama" that Roman depiction shows. Instead they are often wearing a type of laminar armor on their arms and sometimes legs. Here is a sculpture example

File: file.png (1.06 MB, 708x864)

1.06 MB PNG

>>64852545
>>64852488
Our boy in the middle is another example; he is clearly wearing a scale cuirass, but the arms are not made up of scales. This depiction is from the Scythians themselves.

File: file.png (2.65 MB, 1186x1162)

2.65 MB PNG

>>64852548
And here's a Sassanid example, later than the others. The guy on the right clearly has a scale coif, but his arms appear to have the same sort of laminar armor as the previous example.

Basically, I think some Roman got told "they wore scale armor and were covered head to toe in armor, make the carving." Though I will admit it's entirely possible the European Scythians wore different armor from their eastern cousins, I think scale armor like that would be incredibly difficult to move in.

>>64852557
>>64852545
Those sleeves are what the Romans called Manicas and they were used by gladiators and later by legionaries seeking greater protection against the Dacian Falx. Romans at that point had encountered soldiers fully enclosed in armor before(Gauls in full body mail and plates like Crupellarii), so an artist would be more likely to have a mixed type of armor in mind, not less. It's more likely they made them fully clad in scale for visual flair and to make them more distinct against Romans, much like how Romans depicted the Lorica Segmentata a lot more to distinguish legionaries from auxiliaries.


In either case, scale armor can and was used for greater coverage than strictly a short vest, including shoulders, coifs and longer coats down to the thighs. Full sleeves and pants were likely a complete oddity because they are needlessly complex for the job vs bands or just mail, but i could see a situation where an armorer in charge of outfitting a cataphract simply had an overabundance of scales and used them creatively.

>>64852159
Flexible, light, superior defence against edges and tips, (slightly) worse against blunt weapons but that is easily mitigated by simply wearing padding underneath or above, which is also easier than it is with scale.
Also, it breathes.
>>64852222
>Europe favored shields and infantry while Asia was more focused on archery and cavalry.
Everybody favoured hand-held shields, only the Nips never figured that out and that's because their warfare was extremely incestuous and barely evolved over the centuries due to a lack of outside pressures necessitating a variety of tactics.
Europe was pretty diverse when it came to warfare and had to deal with non-Europeans as well, which made for much greater evolutionary pressure to come up with superior tactics, weaponry and strategy.

File: Cone Cataphract.jpg (113 KB, 850x667)

113 KB JPG

>>64852488
There was ALL KINDS of shit out on the steppe

>>64852485
the only reason Polish used scale armor is because of their 17th century asiatic LARP

>>64852806
these drawings are completely ahistorical to a ridiculous degree and are hugely misleading

>>64852545
I don't believe this is depicting laminal armor, it's more likely to be padded armor stitched across sleeves to maintain flexibility, and their use of that is well documented.

File: pdp0w0pde5qa1.jpg (86 KB, 1280x960)

86 KB JPG

>>64852811
Unlike most forms of armor, this shit has actually been used this century, though.

>>64852829
Mail is literally used to this day in diving, food processing and even police actions.

Meanwhile this is a rigid vest made to recycle soviet washers.

>>64852823
Specifics, anon?

>>64851016
Yes of course. But it was not widely used.

>>64852839
>diving, food processing
Ah yes, military combat.
> and even police actions
So rarely that it's almost entirely a meme, and only in Germany/UK where police are paranoid about knives.
The scale armor in that pic was actually general-issue infantry armor.

>>64852840
>mail and plate >1000 years before its invention
>aventails centuries prior
>laminar armor with zero evidence for it
>widly outlandish horse armor designs based on Roman ceremonial chamfrons and 2(two) scale bardings, both in bronze, not iron.
>full suits of mail
>massive overabundance of armor in general when your typical steppenigger wouldn't be wearing any at all and the most protection he'd ever see would be rawhide lamellar
these images are disgusting bile poisoning the historical narrative, nothing more.

>>64852844
>Ah yes, military combat.
Your soviet stab resistant mockup hasn't even seen police action use, retard.
>The scale armor in that pic was actually general-issue infantry armor.
Just shut the fuck up, retarded nigger. You're more worthless and idiotic than scale armor is.

>>64848274
>It's scales riveted to leather. It has none of the durability of the other kinds, and it lacks the protection of brigandine or plate.

>>64848817
>Brigandine basically keeps all the benefits of scale and none of the downsides because the scales are fully encased in cloth or leather.
>>64851265
>Other times you'd see scale backed with cloth or leather. This was marginally better than chain but the backing material would slowly rot and tear. Scale armor might have been Wildly popular but because cloth and leather rot we might be seeing survivorship bias.


I do not understand why the problem that could arise with scale armor (that is, the rotting of the textile or leather support) would not apply in exactly the same way to brigandine.

>>64848132
It's an inside out brigandine. It depends how it's made.
Chain is really fucking heavy. This haubergeon looks like it weighs about 30 pounds. This cuirass probably weighs 10 pounds.
A sword is going to bounce off of both of them. A poleaxe is going right through both of them.

>>64852855
> C-chainmail was used in policing actions!
> N-nooo not like that!!
lmao this is your brain on reddit
Over the past 100 years, that Soviet vest saw more use with police, in riot squads, and even in combat, than all forms of chainmail armor combined.

>>64852861
>>64852864
Dude, you're arguing with a "person" who just blindly accepts whatever he reads on reddit and doesn't even think about it.
> Scale armor bad!
> I-it just is okay!?
He probably believes that flails never existed, etc.

>>64852928
>muh reddit
>muh soviet scale vest
name one case where it was used in combat, retarded communist cocksucking subhuman.

>>64852933
>so butthurt he has to beg others for approval
I guess being called out on posting ahistorical FUD really hurt that bad, huh, troon?

>>64852557
This plate is actually a modern piece from 1920s or 1930s and not a historical artifact.

>>64852273
Actually, lamellar was gradually replaced by brigadines and banded mail in most of Asia. The Guptas actually favored Scale armor.
>>64852405
Longbows were never very popular in Europe. It was only really the English since England had less land and manpower than France and the HRE. Crossbows were more popular but the Church kept trying to get them banned.
>>64852781
> superior defence against edges and tip
Scale was generally better than chain against slashes. You'd never cut through either but Scale would disperse the impact better. Likewise, chain was particularly weak against stabs. If the tip was shaped right it would slip right through the rings.
>Everybody favoured hand-held shields,
Everyone had shields, not everyone favored them. The Indians favored war elephants and massed archery. The Chinese favored two handed polearms. The Steppe Nomads all the way from Korea to the Urals favored horse archery.

Europe was pretty divisive but that was because A, the Roman Empire fell and B. they kept getting invaded by everyone who ran away from Asia. The divisive nature wouldn't start paying dividends until the High Medieval era and by that point Chainmail was being phased out.

>>64852957
>ikewise, chain was particularly weak against stabs.
Riveted mail is effectively impossible to stab through with just manpower. See tests from the knight and the blast furnace. "Mail is weak against stabs" is a myth born from people playing with modern butted mail showpieces.

>>64852957
Rattan shields are also super weak and can hardly stop slashes, let alone anything penetrative. They are very light but only protect against blunt hits and weak cuts.

>>64852861
>I do not understand why the problem that could arise with scale armor (that is, the rotting of the textile or leather support) would not apply in exactly the same way to brigandine.
Oh it did. Brigandines would require regular maintenance and repairs as did most armor. Thing is, Brigandines were mostly cloth. On one hand, this meant that repairing it would just require some rages, a needle and thread, and maybe half an hour of work. On the other, insects and rats are going to nibble on the cloth every chance they get.

>>64852933
Nah, I remember this guy. He's somehow tied European Supremacy to Chainmail and refuses to accept it was kinda shit.

>>64852957
>Crossbows were more popular but the Church kept trying to get them banned.
The same edict that tried to ban crossbows also banned other ranged weapons including bows. Likewise English widely used crossbows and Richard the Lionheart was actually such a big fan that he introduced them to his territories in France and even during/after 100 years' war crossbows remained popular weapons alongside bows. In the rest of western Europe bows still appear in literary evidence more often than crossbows in any period so it's quite silly to claim that they weren't used.

>>64852974
Stop replying to yourself with bait remarks and take the L like a man, troon.

>>64852962
I do believe I said "Slip" and not "Break". There was enough of a gap between rings for a tip to fit through.

Of course, smaller rings existed but that meant there wasn't enough material to secure the rivet. A good thrust could definitely break a ring or two.

>>64852986
Ah, the "Chainmail is superior because Europeans wore it" man is back.

>>64852974
but it wasn't though.
come to think of this, in all the previous scale armor threads i've seen, it eventually ended in a rapechink meltdown.
will this one break the cycle?

>>64852988
You can have thicker rings instead of smaller rings and have equally tight gaps that even a very fine point won't slip through and generally even if you do manage to slip a point in unless you manage to tear the ring the penetration will be very shallow and either fail to go through the padding or result in a minor scratch at worst. Military weapons aren't shaped like an auger or a needle because they need to be rigid enough to not bend after a single hit.

Next time refer to actual scholarly literature instead of repeating or making up fuddlore on the spot.

>>64852990
Because everybody in the world except the chinks wore it, yes, but this is not relevant to the discussion you've pathetically lost and are now trying to distract from with your red herring, troon.

>>64852990
chainmail is superior though, what's the big deal?

File: 9908483.jpg (86 KB, 550x399)

86 KB JPG

>>64852998
> y-you lost troon
First of all, you're responding to multiple people.
Second of all, the Russian scale vest was extensively used by their Ministry of Interior forces and even on occasion by their military forces.
The 6B3, which is like a titanium brigandine, was even more extensively used.
In contrast, just about nobody has ever used chainmail in modern times. A few cops who are memeing, and Tibetan forces fighting the Chinese decades ago, and that's about it.

>>64853034
>First of all, you're responding to multiple people.
Nope, it's clear as day you're the same seething shitter unable to take the L.
>Second of all, the Russian scale vest was extensively used by their Ministry of Interior forces and even on occasion by their military forces.
Name one case of its combat use.
>The 6B3, which is like a titanium brigandine, was even more extensively used.
6B3 is nothing like your cope washer vest and is kevlar backed with large inserts in separate pockets.
>In contrast, just about nobody has ever used chainmail in modern times
It sees very common industrial use and even saw service among the police, which you cope about because it doesn't count or something.

So what will it be, vatnik cocksucker?

File: 9908482.jpg (51 KB, 600x480)

51 KB JPG

>>64853047
lol, this seething is off the charts.
> kevlar backed with large inserts in separate pockets
Yeah, small titanium plates in pockets over a textile backer, basically a brigandine.
> even saw service among the police, which you cope about because it doesn't count or something.
You're in total denial if you don't see that scale armor was used 100x more frequently with police and even in military contexts.
But it's Russia so it doesn't count and I'm a vatnik or whatever.

>>64853056
>Yeah, small titanium plates in pockets over a textile backer, basically a brigandine.
Where do you see pockets in a brigandine, retard?
>You're in total denial if you don't see that scale armor was used 100x more frequently with police
I don't see it because you haven't posted anything to support this. A couple cops in mail don't count but somehow a ragtag bunch of idiotic vatniggers wearing it are proof that it's totally widespread and commonly used. How about you take out rusnigger cock out of your mouth and post any actual use instead of some random blurry photos?

>>64853066
If you're going to seethe this hard and be so rude, I'm not going to respond to your nonsense.
Do your own research. What you'll find is that scale was actually used as combat armor in the 20th century. Chainmail, outside very rare contexts, was not.
Scale can actually make sense as armor. In modern times, chainmail does not.
Scale is aesthetic and kino. Chainmail is also aesthetic and kino.

>>64853069
You don't deserve politeness because you're a pathetic worm that cannot argue for shit and will just keep running away and seething while samefagging until you get humilitated enough to abandon the thread. You could've taken the L and stopped responding 20 posts ago instead of repeating your womanly bitching but i expect you'll stalk this thread for any way to shill your garbage for the next few hours or days.
>Do your own research.
Lmao, good job admitting you haven't got shit and got called out for it,
>What you'll find is that scale was actually used as combat armor in the 20th century.
Repeating the lie again as if it'd make it more believable.
>Scale can actually make sense as armor. In modern times, chainmail does not.
Lmao

File: angry2.png (32 KB, 375x370)

32 KB PNG

>>64853077
Pure seething. You've got nothing.

>>64852843
But used enough that they depicted it

>>64853101
>loses the argument again
>resorts to projecting
from the weak sauce responses and whining about rudeness it seems that rather than a vatnik we've encountered a chinksect in the wild here

how does it feel to have a Japanese granddaddy, little guy?

File: Germany,_early_16th_Centu(...).jpg (49 KB, 530x1198)

49 KB JPG

>>64852997
A needle like weapon like, say, the ESTOC? There were also Bodkins and Military Forks that would work well against chain.

>>64852998
"Troon
Listen to pronunciation
Share definition
A derogatory term, usually applied to transgender women, that implies both that they are their assigned gender at birth and that they are misappropriating transgender identities; similarly to the word 'trender.' A portmanteau of 'trans' and 'goon.' It's an extremely online word and it's origins can be traced back to Something Awful forums."

So you're terminally online. I don't think we can take your words on faith.

>>64853141
That "needle" is wider than most mail rings half an inch from the point. Just because it looks slim due to being 4 ft long doesn't mean it's comprable to an 80 thou wide auger.

Such swords were also commonly used oh horseback, which would allow them to strike hard enough to destroy mail rings and actually do damage to the man underneath, unlike your scenario.

>>64853150
If you wanted to just smash through the rings you'd use an axe. Regardless, an Estoc could fit through the larger rings and focused enough energy to pierce through the smaller ones.

>>64853159
>If you wanted to just smash through the rings you'd use an axe.
Axe will do jack shit against riveted mail. An estoc can actually defeat the rings by breaking them when used from horseback.
>Regardless, an Estoc could fit through the larger ring
It cannot, no matter how much you repeat this lie.

>>64853160
An axe would have enough inertia to drive the rings right into the wearer. An estoc would get stuck in the corpse and would be lost.

Why are You making shit up?

>>64853182
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juIw20z5p0c
A two handed axe will do jack shit to riveted mail and give a tiny bruise to the wearer. Estoc can and has been used in a way to extract it from the target on horseback while riding past.

Instead of just wasting time over you parroting your fuddlore nonsense how about we return to discussing a more relevant topic at hand now? How does it feel to have a Jap granddaddy? Are you proud of him? Grandma sure was.

>>64853189
>A two handed axe will do jack shit to riveted mail and give a tiny bruise to the wearer
Dead pig doesn't bruise. Disregard that the skin is thicker, there's no bloodflow so we can't assume similar damage. Also, that's no bearded axe.
>Estoc can and has been used in a way to extract it from the target on horseback while riding past.
When and where? The Estoc is a very precise weapon. It's got a narrow wound channel so you'd need to place the thrust precisely. For a well trained fighter on foot, this is no problem. However, the gallop of the horse adds an up and down motion that makes it far harder to aim. Knights had to train for years to aim a lance at full gallop just to hit someone at all. Later cavalry would use sabers almost exclusively. I can see a cavalryman using an estoc to fence with other cavalry or deter infantry pressing in but at full gallop? Too difficult a target, too much lateral inertia for such a narrow sword. There's a good chance you'd break the estoc.

This is all logical deduction. How do You know you're not repeating fuddlore?

>>64853230
>Disregard that the skin is thicker, there's no bloodflow so we can't assume similar damag
There's no padding either.
>When and where?
During the entire period it was in use. You ride past the target and allow the sword to rotate as you pass it, pulling it out when it points back. This happens after you hit the target.
>This is all logical deduction. How do You know you're not repeating fuddlore?
I've literally posted an actual physical test that completely disproves your theory. You have posted nothing, ergo you just made up this fuddlore. Is it because of your ancestry that you're incapable of stopping making shit up?

So about this jap granddaddy question, why are you avoiding answering it? I'd be proud of my heritage compared to chinese cesspit genetics if i were you.

>>64853240
>There's no padding either.
Doesn't matter. No bloodflow, no bruising.
>During the entire period it was in use. You ride past the target and allow the sword to rotate as you pass it, pulling it out when it points back. This happens after you hit the target.
And the target is supposed to rotate perfectly every time? Y'know what, why don't you go into MSPaint and paint us a picture because your logic isn't logic'ing.
>I've literally posted an actual physical test that completely disproves your theory.
You posted a man on foot. How is that supposed to prove anything about cavalry?

No, the entire Estoc-at-full-gallop theory is fuddlore. Also, you're rudeness makes you less credible. Why should we believe someone who things an Asian grandparent is a bad thing?

Isn't a brigandine just scalemale+ with padding on both sides?

.t no armor haver

>>64853265
>Doesn't matter. No bloodflow, no bruising.
So you've given up on your "enough inertia to drive the rings right into the wearer" fuddlore then?
>And the target is supposed to rotate perfectly every time?
It's about a 90 degree turn, i don't see why it befuddles you so. It's a pretty well publicized technique too, used all the way until the last cavalry swords in ww1.
>because your logic isn't logic'ing.
Go check a scholagladiatoria vid on it or something, there are multiple where he talks about it if you're this ignorant.
>You posted a man on foot.
Using an axe, with two hands, at full force, much greater than any chinaman that ever lived could generate.
>Also, you're rudeness makes you less credible.
No matter how much you cry and parrot accusations about fuddlore you will never convince anyone that you're not making shit up.
>Why should we believe someone
As far as i'm concerned you will keep repeating your fuddlore as long as you're not humiliated enough to abandon the thread again.
>who things an Asian grandparent is a bad thing?
Oh, your jap granddaddy is the best thing that has happened to your bloodline, i'm glad we agree! So why won't you tell me your thoughts about it?

>>64853274
No. Well, yes. I mean...Let me start over.

So a Brigandine is basically inside-out scale mail with thicker scales and better attachment points. The connecting layer is on the outside which means the little plates are all squeezed together for better, stiffer protection.

And then you want to wear a gambeson under it so yes. I supposed a Brigandine is basically Scalemail+ with padding on both sides. Except inside-out.

>>64853274
Brigandine is a scale armor turned inside out so the scales are trapped between you and the fabric, often with larger plates in exposed areas like the chest, similar to the coat of plates it evolved from. This allows it to remain flexible while keeping the plates in place, offering very effective protection in the process. It was also often made of recycled scrapped plate armor, cut into pieces and assembled as a cheap, readily available protection.

>>64853283
>So you've given up on your "enough inertia to drive the rings right into the wearer" fuddlore then?
Nope. I'm just saying your video doesn't prove shit.
>It's about a 90 degree turn, i don't see why it befuddles you so. It's a pretty well publicized technique too, used all the way until the last cavalry swords in ww1
So you have no problem sharing it.
>Using an axe, with two hands, at full force, much greater than any chinaman that ever lived could generate.
Why should I take the word of a man who is clearly biased?
>As far as i'm concerned you will keep repeating your fuddlore as long as you're not humiliated enough to abandon the thread again.
Oh no, I'm having fun.
>Oh, your jap granddaddy is the best thing that has happened to your bloodline, i'm glad we agree! So why won't you tell me your thoughts about it?
Why is this a bad thing again?

>>64853303
>Nope. I'm just saying your video doesn't prove shit.
Well you can cry and whine about it but it will still do just as little as the axe did to the mail.
>So you have no problem sharing it.
Sure. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bee71tYERBw starts at 13 minutes.
>Why should I take the word of a man
You've only taken white and jap penises as far as i'm certain, much like your mom and grandma did.
>Oh no, I'm having fun.
Yeah, i've seen how you were "having fun" before jumping to this point to seethe about mail armor.
>Why is this a bad thing again?
Why are you avoiding answering the question again?

>>64853315
>Sure. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bee71tYERBw [Embed] starts at 13 minutes.
>Immediately talks about how giving point against a charging opponent tends to disarm the user.

Also, you know Ad Hominem is a fallacy, right? Why would you care about my ancestry? Nah, you're just too biased to be taken at your word.

>>64853334
You've been begging me to describe you the technique used for centuries for thrusting swords on horseback, including against armored targets that won't be overpenetrated like 19th century troops. Why are you dissatisfied now?
>Also, you know Ad Hominem is a fallacy, right?
It's not an ad hominem to describe you the way you are when it's exactly how you behave. Did they not teach you that on reddit?
>Why would you care about my ancestry?
Because chinks are too effeminate and subhuman to discuss arms and weapons with human people, and if you don't have at least a quarter Japanese genes in you then you don't deserve to post here or speak.
>Nah, you're just too biased
Can't be biased if i'm right.
>to be taken at your word
So far i've backed up what i've said with evidence, unlike you spreading fuddlore you make up like the weaseling chinkmutt you are.

>>64853159
You're retarded.
You're never cutting or breaking worked metal armor in any substantial way with just manpower.
You aren't cutting mail rings, you aren't stabbing through them, either.
>>64853189
>A two handed axe will do jack shit to riveted mail and give a tiny bruise to the wearer.
You are retarded.
A strong hit from an axe will break bones through mail armor unless you're wearing too much padding to be a useful fighter.

Fucking inbred imbeciles on this site.

>>64853344
>You've been begging me to describe you the technique used for centuries for thrusting swords on horseback, including against armored targets that won't be overpenetrated like 19th century troops. Why are you dissatisfied now?
Mostly because your own proof shows the impracticality of the technique.
>It's not an ad hominem to describe you the way you are when it's exactly how you behave. Did they not teach you that on reddit?
And what so offends you about how I behave? Is it the basic courtesy?
>Because chinks are too effeminate and subhuman to discuss arms and weapons with human people,
Is that not what we're doing?
>Can't be biased if i'm right.
How can you tell you're right? Other than a massive ego telling you you're always right.
>So far i've backed up what i've said with evidence, unlike you spreading fuddlore you make up like the weaseling chinkmutt you are.
Your own evidence proves you wrong.

>>64853373
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juIw20z5p0c [Embed]

>>64853375
>Mostly because your own proof shows the impracticality of the technique.
If it was impractical it'd not remain in use for 4 centuries.
>And what so offends you about how I behave? Is it the basic courtesy?
Inability to take the L, provide sources, reason or speak like a human and not a bugman redditard.
>Is that not what we're doing?
That's what i'm doing. You're just spreading lies and making shit up because chinese have never managed to repel invaders and always spread their legs for them throughout their history.
>How can you tell you're right?
Because you cannot refute a thing i say.
>Your own evidence proves you wrong.
It doesn't but you won't show it in any way regardless, because arguing is for humans and rapebaby eunuchs prefer to just spam falsehoods and evade arguments they'll lose.

>>64853388
>If it was impractical it'd not remain in use for 4 centuries.
Did it? Because it sounds like some aristocratic officers tried to push the technique only for it to fail again and again.
https://youtu.be/bee71tYERBw?si=JIOwQyFrs_IvtxmY&t=796
He immediately talks about how John Jacob wrote about how he keeps getting disarmed because thrusting into a mounted charge is such a difficult thing.
>reason or speak like a human and not a bugman redditard
And how am I speaking "Like a Bugman redditard"? Is it the fact that I have manners? Or should I insult your parentage?

>>64853420
>Did it?
Yes. That's how these swords were used, end of story. That's what estoc was used for, including its polish version, koncerz.

How about you try to show me anything to back up your idiotic fuddlore instead of crying about how your nation is born from slavery and how evading any argument is actually good manners. I know you won't because kowtowing and womanly whining are the only traits of your subhuman muttified weretched "people" of note.

>>64853443
And yet the primary weapon of the Hussars was the Lance and in an era with armored cavalry slowly fading away.

Also, you still haven't seen the video, have you?

>>64853452
>still can't show a source for any claim
>deflects to lances because can't disprove estoc's technique
That's what i thought, evading all argument and just wasting time because you got whipped again is very much like you. I guess you're not fortunate enough to have Japanese ancestry, which is why you can't talk about arms and armor like a human at all.

>>64853461
Ah but I did post evidence. Your evidence.

>>64853468
So you really have nothing but your ass as the source of the fuddlore, good that you finally admit it. Good job, you can finally take the first step from being a mindless bug to being a human. Now all that remains is hook me up with your sister and then your bloodline will be saved.

>>64848132
It's Mail you tard, not chain mail.

>>64853481
https://youtu.be/bee71tYERBw?si=JIOwQyFrs_IvtxmY&t=796 [Embed]

>>64853608
You mean Maille? Yes, we could go with the old names but we could also drink light beer with our pinkies out. It's about the same level of pretentiousness.

>>64853628
>light beer
The pretentious has gone the other way - IPAs are boomer drinks now so you have to be above that and pretend to enjoy sour beers.

>>64853673
I don't think anything rises to the level of Indian Pale Ale Pretention.

>>64849990
Anon. Not really the best evidence, lmao. How old is that thing? 1000 years old? 1500? 2000? And not just sitting on a mantle during its time, probably was used. But sure, you're probably right that scales are more difficult to achieve consistency with.

>>64853628
Yeah, no. We know hat you know that mail and maille are both valid spellings, and that "chainmail" is retarded old bullshit propagated by DnD and the like. You're just a contrarian little shit about it since you need your next hit of grabass every few minutes like the most desperate crackhead needs his next fix.

>>64853373
War axes lighter than you think, they won't do shit through mail.

File: 1721843727646168.png (801 KB, 828x1000)

801 KB PNG

>>64850703
Did you miss "technological precursor" to a technology that emerged in the 14th century? Being able to draw wire that is consistent enough to make maille is an important step toward being able to build blast furnaces that power forge-cities like Solingen and Toledo, which does lead to forms of industrialization much later.
>>64850671
Long house is not a mud hut, but I'll give you points on the beheading.

>>64853734
>Being able to draw wire that is consistent enough to make maille is an important step toward being able to build blast furnaces
Bro 6th century scandinavians could do it. Literally everyone can, it's simple as shit.

>>64848741
>Gets shanked in an upwards motion
Great armor you got there. Small wonder the Romans ain't around no more.

>>64853712
What does it matter if it's mail or chainmail? What matters is that you're Understood. Everything else is secondary and being insistent is pure pretention.

>>64853750
It compares well with "Slash proof but stab me anywhere" Chainmail.

>>64853734
You didn't actually need sophisticated technology to draw wire, just a drawing plate. Just pull the metal through the hole and you'll get wire suitable for chainmail. Lamellar was actually more sophisticated since you needed to coordinate between rope-makers and smiths to get the diameters for both holes and rope just right.

File: file.png (675 KB, 649x900)

675 KB PNG

>>64853748
>>64853734
Mail was so ubiquitous even African tribesmen made it, the Tuareg of north Africa and the Malians had mail armor-clad riders with scimitars and muskets.

>>64853756
this bait keeps getting worse and worse

alright, so this thread has firmly established that chainmail is superior to scale armor.

>>64853850
Only in terms of comfort.

>>64853835
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGSL7XApz2s
Scale would unironically perform better

>>64853894
oops meant to respond to >>64853850

>>64853894
>minimal penetration, not enough to reach vitals even with minimal padding
scale doesn't protect at all from thrusts going even slightly upwards

>>64853961
That's a meme-tier redditoid answer and not necessarily true.
Also with a lot of weapons, e.g. that spear, you physically can't thrust upwards at a steep enough angle unless you're on foot and your opponent is on a horse. And even then, it would be tough.

>>64854047
that's a serious answer, given that ballistic gel flexes inwards and the padding can be up to half an inch thick this is sufficient defense even against such powerful, full force and body weight thrusts.
>Also with a lot of weapons, e.g. that spear, you physically can't thrust upwards at a steep enough angle unless you're on foot and your opponent is on a horse
unfortunately for scale armor you don't need a spear, any sharp weapon will do because once it slips under a scale the armor offers basically no resistance so even a kitchen knife stab would be fatal.

>>64853894
>>64853961
So I'm beginning to think that Chain was a downgrade in response to improving shield designs. Much of the classical period had European's with some fairly massive shields to the point that body armor just wasn't as important. Because of this, you could switch to the more flexible and breathable mail and still be reasonably well protected.

>>64854054
That assumes that the wearer lets his opponent get close enough to make that upwards stab and even a knight in plate armor can be killed if the knight does nothing to defend himself.

>>64854102
or maybe chain was just cheaper, easier to make and repair and the protection increase wasn't as essential as those three things

this shit is why you can't discuss ancient and medieval technology with online retards. They simply don't understand logistics was never not a factor.

>>64854054
> that's a serious answer, given that ballistic gel flexes inwards and the padding can be up to half an inch thick this is sufficient defense even against such powerful, full force and body weight thrusts
It's also modern chainmail, which metallurgically is superior to stuff from centuries ago, and it still performed quite poorly, I'd say. As for this:
> and the padding can be up to half an inch thick
Just lol. You really are a redditor, huh? That's a huge misconception, and 1/2" padding was definitely NOT the norm.
> unfortunately for scale armor you don't need a spear, any sharp weapon will do because once it slips under a scale the armor offers basically no resistance so even a kitchen knife stab would be fatal.
lol, sure. If you're facing an opponent on foot, and you're both standing, you're not getting that angle. And it's almost impossible to EVER get it with a spear.
Besides, it's spears, not kitchen knives, that were used on the battlefield.
You've never sparred, I know this for 100% certain.

>>64854113
Well it definitely wasn't easier to repair. Cloth can be stitched up pretty easily and a broken scale can be easily swapped out since it was only attached to the underlayer at a single point. However, a damaged link was a pain in the ass to work with. Rivets aren't meant to come undone so the only think you could do is to break the ring entirely. This could be difficult if the links were made of the toughest materials on hand. Replacing the ring was just as bad since you had to thread it through the nearby rings in a pattern designed to be extremely dense .

Cleaning was even worse because you basically couldn't clean the space between links without tools. You can't even fit a finger through one of those rings, never mind one with 4 other rings running through it. With scale you can clean each scale individually but with Maille it was so interlinked that you were never dealing with an individual link.

Easier to clean my ass. How about you make a video on how to clean chainmail? Let's see how far you get before you just dunk it in a bucket.

>>64854152
>Let's see how far you get before you just dunk it in a bucket.
The normal cleaning was sand in a barrel and simply roll it around. Dead easy to do.
Repair was also easy to do. So easy field kits would often have the tools and spare rings for repair at nights.

>>64854114
Lol, imagine trying so hard to fabricate a scenario where scale would perform well and still failing while trying to downplay mail stopping a full force thrust with no major injury.

>>64854110
>yeah bro this fatal flaw of the armor will never happen because just don't get hit, lmao
>if you don't get hit scale totally works

>>64854233
Yeah, you've never held a weapon or worn armor. Could you make it any more obvious? That "fabricated scenario" was more or less the default scenario. Scale is more resistant to penetration and distributes blunt force more easily. "Just stab upwards bro" is like ancient Fuddlore.

>>64854102
Shields became smaller when full suits of mail became more common. This completely flies in the face of your backwards theory.

>>64853703
>How old is that thing?
Not very old:
https://www.rom.on.ca/blog-post/fact-falsehood-ancient-roman-and-greek-objects

>>64852853
Considering that specific Osprey plate dates to 1986 it is woefully outdated. Anyone with a passing interest in arms and armor should just look at archaeological remains.

>>64854239
>if you don't think a flawed armor that can be defeated with a simple move is dumb and was obsolete the moment better things were invented you don't spar, which proves that it's actually better despite me never testing it and using some youtube test using modern materials as proof shows how it's totally bad despite demonstrating amazing protection
cool story bro, your mom distributed my semen very easily yesterday

>>64854251
>despite demonstrating amazing protection
lmaoooo
Modern riveted chainmail getting penned by a plain vanilla spear, wielded by women and hobbyists, is certainly not "amazing protection"
You're totally incapable of actually thinking for yourself and analyzing evidence. It's just "chainmail good scale BAD" retard-tier logic.

>>64854249
there's one obsessed insistent shitter that spams these outdated images at every opportunity

>>64854259
>getting penned
reducing the strongest thrust to a mere scratch against a flexible backstop isn't "getting penned" but ok bro, you totally sparred more than i sparred your mom last night

>>64854260
Ospreys is one of the more readily available resources for laymen though not that it makes their early works any better.

File: a9e66ebcc3667e91b6f2b6fa6(...).jpg (436 KB, 1365x2048)

436 KB JPG

>>64854152
>Well it definitely wasn't easier to repair. Cloth can be stitched up pretty easily and a broken scale can be easily swapped out since it was only attached to the underlayer at a single point.

No, actually. You can't stitch it up easily. You don't have sewing machines. You don't have a way to make fabric as strong as it was when first weaved without replacing the whole patch. You can't just swap scales easily because they're solidly attached by not only cloth but metal loops forged in. You need to disassemble the whole thing to have free access to a specific part to be able to work on it.

>However, a damaged link was a pain in the ass to work with.
It really wasn't, you could just cut it and put a new one in.

>Rivets aren't meant to come undone so the only think you could do is to break the ring entirely.
Which is completely fine since it's broken and you're replacing it.

>This could be difficult if the links were made of the toughest materials on hand. Replacing the ring was just as bad since you had to thread it through the nearby rings in a pattern designed to be extremely dense .
Which is basically the same thing you did to build it to begin with. Don't get me wrong, it's very labor intensive, but it's not actually difficult. Mail was very common because DESPITE being relatively material-costly and labor intensive, when you factor in the toolings and the maintenance regime(ie oil it up, shake it around and rinse it in a barrel of sand) the long time cost made immediately much cheaper, and these armors were maintained and reused for decades, in fact we know of cases where Roman mail armor kept being reused by barbarian kingdoms way after the fall o Rome, simple cutting them into pieces to be used in coifs, chausses, gauntlets and so on.

>>64853750
That's fake trash, this is how Roman scale armor would look like. However, you would also see vests of scale used on top of a mail coat, doubling the protection and making it semi-rigid.

File: a40d926310a6ea416fa75f9c3(...).jpg (111 KB, 736x1077)

111 KB JPG

>>64854245
Nah bro, shields started shrinking as plate came into the picture. Shield walls were used in the First Crusades and that requires a pretty big shield.
>>64854232
Yeah, and you could do that for any armor so long as you had a barrel of sand. Nah, if you needed a washing machine it's not easy to clean.
>>64854236
By that logic even Chainmail is useless because you can still choke the man out. No weapon required.

>>64854439
>Yeah, and you could do that for any armor so long as you had a barrel of sand. Nah, if you needed a washing machine it's not easy to clean.

No you can't because the abrassive nature of sand would damage anything that wasn't solid metal so armors that required leather or fabric straps, joints, backings or padding needed to be scrubbed, oiled and polished manually.

Also the point of sanding is that the sands get everywhere and mail being open lets it out when you shake it, anything with solid pieces will have it build up inside and be a pain in the ass, and it would actually make rusting worse instead of removing it.

>>64854436
>No, actually. You can't stitch it up easily. You don't have sewing machines. You don't have a way to make fabric as strong as it was when first weaved without replacing the whole patch.
Well for one, you don't have to. The cloth part isn't taking the blows so it's under far less strain than the plates.

For another, you could actually get it stronger. Overlap the rag with the existing fabric and take your time with a needle and thread. The effect is similar to a quilt.
>Which is basically the same thing you did to build it to begin with.
It's really not. When you're making chainmail you only had to link each ring to two other rings. Maybe 3 depending on the pattern. Working with existing

>>64854152
>However, a damaged link was a pain in the ass to work with
>Rivets aren't meant to come undone so the only think you could do is to break the ring entirely. This could be difficult if the links were made of the toughest materials on hand.
They generally were iron and not all that hard. If it's damaged it's probably broken, which means it's really easy to get out. You just cut the link if not. How do you think they made the rings in the first place? You gotta be able to cut them.

I own maille and it's not hard to replace a link. It's especially easy when you know the pattern and have done it before.
>Cleaning was even worse because you basically couldn't clean the space between links without tools
Good thing that's not how it was cleaned.

I think you'd probably cry if you had to sew on a button or something. This isn't difficult stuff here.

>>64854458
What, and you think all that sand isn't grinding away the chainmail? Nah, you're causing even more damage. Sand is mohs hardness 7 while iron is 4. You'll find iron filings at the bottom of the barrel. The scratches will accelerate rusting and it'll still smell weird because the sand doesn't consistently get to every crevice.

>>64854461
>Well for one, you don't have to. The cloth part isn't taking the blows so it's under far less strain than the plates.

The plates are directly attached to the fabric. If they take a hit, get damaged or even lost, the fabric gets ripped along with it. If it's leather then you have to glue and reinforce the whole thing because it's fibers are structurally compromised. Think of the holes wearing out and cracking on an old leather belt.

>For another, you could actually get it stronger. Overlap the rag with the existing fabric and take your time with a needle and thread. The effect is similar to a quilt.

You can't just endlessly pack fabric on a small amount of space that has to fit over a human body. Again, you don't have a sewing machine so you can't get it perfect, and you're working on a pretty small space. Repairing scales means working with several materials at the same time, if it was only the scales + padding you'd be talking about lamellar.

>>64854469
good thing it's not industrial sandblasting then, it's just rolling it in a barrel and creating fairly mild friction.

>>64854462
And have you repaired Scale Mail? Lamellar? Plate? Why not compare the steps?

>>64854481
>plate
No
>lamellar
Yes
>scale
No

>Why not compare the steps?
Because it's going to depend on what damage was done.

File: 2066565.png (2.43 MB, 809x1612)

2.43 MB PNG

>>64854469
NTA but it's literaly how it was done. We got lots of sources on that.

File: retard hazard.png (168 KB, 349x427)

168 KB PNG

>>64854469
>What, and you think all that sand isn't grinding away the chainmail?
In the same way that a pumice grill brick "grinds away" a stainless steel flat top, yeah.

>>64854439
>Nah bro, shields started shrinking as plate came into the picture.
Heater shields appeared at least a century before plate armor did. The whole purpose of the kite shield is to protect the uncovered legs of a mounted knight better.

>>64854469
Anon the lifespan of an iron chainmail vest is significantly shorter than the time it'd take to abrade the iron with sand.
>Oh shit, after 50 years of being spun in a sand filled barrel the chainmail is all messed up!
You know what also messes up chainmail? Years of being used in the first place.

>>64854436
those scales look a lot like lamellar lamelles in shape, is there archaeological evidence for this?

>>64854634
Clean and clean, that's more of a step to remove sharp edges.
Source: did the exact same shit when making lots of same parts for assembly after cutting from profiles.

>>64848132
Scale is AC 6, weighs 20lbs, and is worth 75GP. Chainmail is AC 5, weighs 15lbs, and is worth 150GP.

>>64855530
It's mostly in the name. Plumata literally means "Feathered" like a bird. You wouldn't get a feathered plume-like effect with lamellar. I figured lamellar would be called something else but I can't seem to find it anywhere.

>>64854634
Is there really no other way of cleaning chainmail or are you supposed to bring your suit to the dry cleaners after every battle?

>>64855551
https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/3919/1/Thom_Richardson_thesis_final.pdf
>For the cleaning of the mail, wages were paid to four workmen each at 6d. per day for forty-five days rolling barrels with various mail armour.

>>64856012
Today, with the quality of steel, which is often stainless, water and mild soap (or dishwashing liquid) are often used by reenactors. But in the Middle Ages? Sand is the best method. As mentioned above by anon, it gets everywhere, removes rust, and absorbs moisture. It is fundamentally a very good method and, once again as mentioned above, it will only damage chain mail over a very long period of time.

>>64856012
Another method was to place it in a bag filled with sand and vinegar (or urine) and hang it from a horse saddle or shake it manually.

>>64853748
Were they making maille with it, or jewelry?
>>64853796
Interesting point, and lamellar armors are significantly more recent.
>>64853825
That's modern, not 200 years ago.

>>64856463
>Were they making maille with it
yes

>>64855830
This never made any sense. The people who did D&D weapons and armor are retarded.
"Studded leather" in 2026, damnit

>>64854247
>two women rebuilding some armor that had been found about a hundred years ago
Gee, I wonder why it looks like that.
>1000 years old instead of 2000 years old
Open and shut, wouldn't you say.

>>64856463
>Were they making maille with it, or jewelry?
Maille. Although we should note that only the richest Scandinavians could afford chainmail.
>Interesting point, and lamellar armors are significantly more recent.
Eh...depends on where we're talking. Huge swaths of Asia had English tier obsession for archery.

>>64856516
It's pretty obvious that Gary Gygax and every single one of his successors didn't know shit about economics or medieval combat.

>>64856546
Economics doesn't matter because FR and most settings are basically magical far-future, post-apocalyptic, and typically even post-scarcity settings. They have teleportation, resurrection, more dungeons and ruins than towns, etc. There's almost nothing genuinely "medieval" about them.
But combat, yeah, they really know nothing.

File: file.png (1.05 MB, 1024x768)

1.05 MB PNG

>>64855530
There's finds of metal scales of several shapes and sizes all over the territory of the empire in forts and towns. They're almost always fairly small and round though.

File: Roman-Lorica-Squamata-mod(...).jpg (253 KB, 864x486)

253 KB JPG

>>64856631
Meanwhile this one was found in Turkey

>>64848132
Brigandine is scale armour, the metal is just on the inside and its square so its less wasted weight.

>>64856927
No. In a brigandine, plates don"t overlap like they do on a scale armour

>>64857015
They do but it's more by accident than by design. Remember that the plates are on the inside so as you put the brigandine on it squeezes the plates together. If your armorer didn't short you on plates then this should lead to plates overlapping a tiny amount.

File: ZG-1030_4.jpg (42 KB, 850x850)

42 KB JPG

>>64857015

>>64856585
>FR
Holy shit for the one zillionth time Forgotten Realms is not the base setting of DnD.

>>64856635
>>64856631
>Regular holes at the bottom of every scale
Now That looks like Lamellar.

>>64857238
Dude they're all pretty much the same. I don't think that there's even one setting that's genuinely "medieval" (people wouldn't like it much and most "adventurers" -- people who wander around, getting into trouble, robbing tombs, studying the occult, being murderhobos, and generally stirring up mischief -- were LITERALLY Jews.)

>>64857301
>Jews.)
Opinion discarded.

File: Later Tang Armor.jpg (114 KB, 770x1000)

114 KB JPG

>>64849052
>the Chinese kept using it well into the middle ages

Chinese armor was predominantly lamellar followed by chainmail & brigandine. Scale armor was barely used in China.

If anything Europeans and Central Asians used that shit more.

Considering protection from rust and wear, an unpainted finish that gives off a metallic sheen seems illogical. Paints that adhere well to metal are a product of the post-World War II era, but was there anything else that could have been done?

>>64857444
Checked
In fairness nobody really knows that that "Mountain Armor" is supposed to be, though. The recreations of its artistic depictions are very weak. My hypothesis is that it actually represents a woven material, possibly silk, rather than a metallic one.

File: pic_spot_poleaxe17.jpg (52 KB, 800x600)

52 KB JPG

>>64853160
This is your axe, it will have no trouble killing the man in his maille armor like he wasn't wearing any.

>>64857288
the distinction isn't really the scales being attached to eachother or not and simply the presence of a backing material or not.

It's basically impossible to tell some scale armors from lamellar without looking at them from the other side.

>>64857470
Thing is, that theory gets further compounded by the existence of actual scale artefacts.

>>64857493
Are you saying that they actually found mountain-pattern scales? Or the lack thereof?

>>64857175
Cool fake brigandine bro

>>64857466
Bluing existed in the Middle Ages. Steel could be heated to specific temperatures to create a controlled oxide layer that produced a deep blue color. This was used on weapons and armor (granted: in the late Middle Ages) both for decoration and for corrosion resistance.

But the main method to resist rust and wear was maintenance. Armor was regularly cleaned, dried, and coated with oil or animal fat to prevent rust. Mail in particular was often stored in an oiled cloth or bag, and sometimes tumbled in sand or a barrel to remove corrosion (like that anon said previously). There was no perfect “rust-proof” coating. Just constant care and upkeep.

Imagine the smell

File: 2.jpg (273 KB, 731x1219)

273 KB JPG

>>64857444
This is some bullshit larp armor it has already been noted there are no surviving examples made from metal.

>>64857470
While there is no explict description of mountain pattern(Shan Wen) armor it generally used to describe something shaped like a mountain range.

File: 3.jpg (152 KB, 539x626)

152 KB JPG

>>64857470
Hisorical usage of mountain pattern doesn't actually refer to the Y pattern it a misrepresentation of research done in the 1970s. The leading hypothesis is it was a type of cusped lamellar worn during the Tang dynasty.

>>64857874
> The leading hypothesis is it was a type of cusped lamellar worn during the Tang dynasty.
>>64857859
> it generally used to describe something shaped like a mountain range
Yeah, nobody fucking knows.

>>64857472
>This is your axe
this is a hammer, not an axe. you cope about it because an actual axe is useless against mail so you need some blunt weight attached to it to do anything.

>>64858510
This is a poleaxe. It's a can opener for all sorts of armor, and was in very common use before firearms made all of this obsolete.

>>64858519
and it's only useful for bashing through mail as a hammer, not an axe because an axe is a worthless against it, no matter how much you twist and writhe about it.

besides this being the common name for polearms lacking an axe head at all like polehammers(which are a neologism) that also were called poleaxes contemporarily.

File: 1.jpg (432 KB, 1247x586)

432 KB JPG

>>64858482
>Yeah, nobody fucking knows.
The first example is very clearly labeled mountain pattern, by definition it cannot be >>64857444
Better yet we have a Tang sword(Kingin Denso no Karatachi) where the original inventory report labels the hilt as mountain shaped. Y pattern in all historical instances is categorized under Suo Zi(mail) never mountain pattern.

>>64858550
This wasn't an uncommon weapon from the 15th century onward, and that spike on the top which was almost always there would have defeated a riveted or even reinforced haubergeon like it was nothing. A solid hit with the pig sticker will punch through nearly anything.

File: 2298fbda2953903ccb4819a1a(...).jpg (77 KB, 800x600)

77 KB JPG

>>64858722
>This wasn't an uncommon weapon from the 15th century onward
this doesn't magically make the axehead at all useful except as a blunt axe-shaped hammer against mail.
>nd that spike on the top which was almost always there would have defeated a riveted or even reinforced haubergeon like it was nothing
not really. while you could possibly defeat some mail with a really strong thrust man power alone without some mechanical advantage is generally insufficient to do this with certainty. that's why a spike on the side would be better for that, since you now have a solid lever with a weight on the end to be accelerated, which would be very effective against mail. the spike on the end is much more useful for bypassing the armor and poking through the gaps in the joints, neck, face or the groin much like a longsword would be, especially against a target that was knocked on the ground.

i'll again refer to the tests from the "Knight and the Blast Furnace" for this.

>>64858739
Then don't use the axe head, use the spear on top. It's a versatile weapon, and will easily defeat a haubergeon. Even the axe head is going to dislodge a shoulder or break an arm or a collar bone. The poleaxe was nasty.

>>64857466
Oil, changed out regularly and applied generously. Vegetable oil was the norm but just about any oil would do, even waxes so long as you avoid sliding surfaces.

>>64858592
> clearly labeled mountain pattern
Possibly by somebody who didn't know what the fuck they were doing.

>>64858739
Nigga are you absolutely retarded?
I have The Knight and the Blast Furnace. Here's what it says about penetrating mail:
>He tried shooting a bodkinheaded arrow from the larger longbow (75 lb draw weight) at a mail shirt hung on a pine box 7 yards away. The mail shirt weighed 25 lbs and consisted of links of approx. 1/2" (13mm) diameter and 22 gauge wire thickness. The arrow went through the mail and both sides of the box. He did not try a broadhead arrow on this target.
There's some asspull conjecture later on:
> Let us apply these energies to some hypothetical case studies:
> Re a 11th-12th century knight who is clad in mail.
> An edged weapon would need to deliver at least 200 J to defeat the mail. A very strong man using an axe or sword with both hands might just about be able to do this. An arrowhead, on the other hand, would only need to deliver 120 J to pierce the mail and the padding underneath. An archer would find this difficult, but an exceptional archer, or one armed with a crossbow, could defeat the mail.
Most of this chapter is literally the "Source: I made it up / it came to me in a dream" meme. It also contradicts what the author noted previously, as a 75lb draw weight bow is novice-tier.
And, meanwhile, we also have lots of videos of girls with spears defeating chainmail.
A poleaxe's spike, wielded by a strong man, is going to be barely inconvenienced by chainmail.
Not sure about scale or brigandine armor, though. I think that those would do a lot better.

>>64858771
Yeah that hardened steel spike on top of a poleaxe is going to split rings like butter. The only chance you have against it is a shield or maybe a thick hardened steel cuirass designed to deny the spear purchase and make it glance off.

>>64858759
>Then don't use the axe head, use the spear on top.
yes, that's my point, axes are shit against mail, and poleaxes in general aren't because they're not just an axe but multiple weapons in one
>He tried shooting a bodkinheaded arrow
bows are a force multiplication device, deflecting to them because a straight poke is insufficient is your admission that you lost the argument.
>And, meanwhile, we also have lots of videos of girls with spears defeating chainmail.
except for videos of butted mail none of them show actually destroyed mail links because it's a difficult thing to do.
>A poleaxe's spike, wielded by a strong man, is going to be barely inconvenienced by chainmail.
nope, not at all unless your target is on the ground and has no give. a standing human is going to be shoved back before the link breaks, although it still might break depending on the mail and spike geometry.

>>64858779
>or maybe a thick hardened steel cuirass
even a thin flat unhardened 1mm iron plate will stop any spear thrust dead, you grossly overestimate the penetrative force of a spear thrust. you should try this at home with a screwdriver sometime.

>>64858812
>will stop any spear thrust dead
preemptive correction here: spear thrust involves the actual action of a thrust, so a lance strike with the weight of an armored human and his horse in a charge is obviously a different kind of a threat entirely.

>>64858814
>a lance strike with the weight of an armored human and his horse in a charge is obviously a different kind of a threat entirely.
I can't imagine how anyone, even protected by armor and armed with a pole weapon, could have stood their ground against a line of armored French knights and caparisoned horses charging with their lances lowered. It must be one of the scariest things to experience.

>>64858861
well if this makes the impression any better the strike doesn't actually carry the full weight of the horse because the rider would get unsaddled before that, as would occasionally happen during tournaments despite knights having very solid, deep and beefy saddles to climb into.

as a testament to the performance of mail armor we actually have historical accounts of it withstanding lance strikes without penetration despite the wearer being knocked out of a saddle. plus there is a whole class of mail called "tournament mail" or "double mail" that we know absolutely nothing about except that it was used during early tournaments when they were using actual sharp weapons and were betting their horse and armor on the bouts.

>>64857584
Find me a picture of a historical brigandine that shows the plate layout.

>>64858812
I wouldn't volunteer to wear the armor and test that theory and neither would you.

>>64858893
i wouldn't volunteer to be hit with a bag of piss so this argument completely falls flat.

>>64858898
I would if it's Zendaya's piss

>>64858882
Jousting armor was quite a bit thicker and a lot heavier, you wouldn't be fighting on foot wearing it. It protected the chest and had attachment points for the helmet so a lance wouldn't knock your head off.
This kind of armor was only used in tournaments and would have been almost completely useless in combat

File: this-jousting-armor-set-r(...).jpg (97 KB, 798x1390)

97 KB JPG

>>64858924
Image.

>>64858924
i should've clarified, there are accounts of mail protecting the wearer from a lance strike in battle, not just tournament. likewise, jousting mail predates the armor you posted by several centuries and is from the era of the very early jousts that were the closest to real combat of them all.

File: there is very little diff(...).gif (284 KB, 400x221)

284 KB GIF

>lamellar
>scalemail[e]
>briga[n]dine
ALL THE SAME SHIT

THIS IS JUST SMALL PLATES OF METAL, HELD TOGETHER BY RIVETS/STRING/CLOTH.

THE AMOUNT OF AUTISTIC SPERGING THAT HAS HAPPENED ON THIS TOPIC ISN'T WARENTED BY THE MINOR SUPERFICIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THESE.

Please stop.

>>64858942
When spears had leaf-shaped heads, imagine hitting a maille shirt with a trowel vs hitting it with your nugget bayonet.

>>64858973
lance heads didn't change much over centuries and it's retarded to assume that people wouldn't use the more effective design when it was available if it actually did perform better.

stop talking out of your ass like a dumb nigger to cope.

>>64858982
Maille was always the heaviest, most expensive, worst kind of armor.

>>64859004
Eh...I wouldn't say it's always the worst. It's pretty comfy and is flexible enough to cover joints

>>64858943
2deep4u?

>>64859004
too bad they couldn't make armor out of you. it'd be completely impenetrable.

>>64858804
> Heh, heh, you plebs really need to read The Knight and The Blast Furnace
> N-nooo not like that!!!
Asspull aside (and even there they note that "axes and swords" can penetrate mail) where the FUCK does it say that mail is impenetrable or even decent?
I think that scalechads are winning this thread, bros. The mail autist is too weak.

>>64859045
running damage control after getting called out and making up strawmen is exactly what i expected from you, good job.

>>64859061
Strawmen? You referred to the book. Where exactly does it back up any of your claims? If anything, it says the opposite of what you claimed.

>>64859068
the part where it directly states that their samples of mail needed over 140j to penetrate with a lance or a halberd in their test rig, which is more than even a downwards thrust with one hand can generate, compared to 63j for an upward thrust.

nowhere did i claim mail to be impenetrable but you're a slimy lying faggot so i expect you to just recite this strawman because you cannot argue like a man instad.

>>64859080
...wait, isn't a halberd a 2 handed weapon? Why is one handed use even in consideration?

What the fuck is "Knight and the Blast Furnace"?

>>64859102
playing dumb to waste my time because you have nothing to respond what i just said to isn't the smart move you think it is.

he has a japanese granddaddy.

>>64859108
>>64859110
>Thinks he's dealing with the same person.

>>64859102
Retard-kun, you're responding to multiple people.
> the part where it directly states that their samples of mail needed over 140j to penetrate with a lance or a halberd in their test rig
What page number?
Even if true, that's not exactly good performance, lol. The author even says that swords and axes can penetrate mail.
> U-uhhh if you thrust downwards with one hand, maybe you can't!
pathetic desu

>>64859123
>Thinks he's dealing with the same person.

>>64859125
>What page number?
page 942
>Even if true
Didn't you claim you have the book?
>that's not exactly good performance, lol
your damage control is what's pathetic
>The author even says that swords and axes can penetrate mail.
yeah, nobody claimed it's impenetrable. good job following on repeating your weak strawman, fag.

>>64859123
>>64859127
no worries, i was fishing for rapechink, he tends to hang around these scale armor threads

>>64859153
so did i yesterday but so far no bite

he must be busy melting don on some other board rn

>>64859153
Please keep your bizarre fetishes to the red boards.

>>64859161
nta but i maintain that all japanese sexual activities in china were consensual. spreading legs before invaders is chinese culture.

>>64859161
sorry fren, bullying board schizo's is one of my passtimes, i've had luck randomly throwing those triggerwords into a thread before.

>>64848132
It's just generally inferior. Chain is lighter, can cover joints with no gaps, requires less maintenance, and will protect equally well or better against the same threats. It just takes longer to make.

>>64859169
...you get off by stalking people online?

>>64859268
it's actually reverse stalking, you lay out the bait and the stalker jumps at it on his own. /k/ is especially effective at this because it's like a schizo magnet for various neurotic spammers.

>>64859283
...It's schizo to point out the truth?

>>64859299
yes if your idea of truth means a twitter screencap or some unsourced aggregator headline

>>64859312
You mean
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGSL7XApz2s [Embed]
https://youtu.be/bee71tYERBw?si=JIOwQyFrs_IvtxmY&t=796 [Embed]
https://manuscriptminiatures.com/search?year_start=&year_end=&country=4&country=12&country=3&country=8&country=9&country=2&country=23&country=1&country=34&country=24&country=19&country=5&country=14&country=7&art=&tag=56&gallery=&source=&place=&artist=&page=1#results

>>64859341
i mean the schizos that stalk /k/ daily, like the one that's made another series of chink threads again just now.

File: KnightAndBlastFurnace1.png (176 KB, 610x844)

176 KB PNG

>>64859135
Dude, did you even read your own book?
Page 942+943 has mail failing embarrassingly. The 15th century stuff lost to every weapon they tested it against. See picrel.

>>64859393
I'd add that the tests were retarded. The author penetrated the mail with a blade at 170J impact energy, then states that this is the amount of energy "required" to defeat the mail. This is obviously false; it could possibly have been defeated at 100J, which was never tested.

>>64859224
Chain is NOT lighter and does not protect better, but the opposite on both counts.

>>64859393
>Page 942+943 has mail failing embarrassingly.
i've already said that your damage control is pathetic
>lost to every weapon they tested it against
that's what happens when you test things to faulure, did you not realize it? or do you live in the world where people can casually stab with more than 170j of force? i guess you're still hanging on your idiotic strawman about it being impenetrable again.

>>64859395
>This is obviously false; it could possibly have been defeated at 100J, which was never tested.
that's not how it works at all, lmao. do you think he pulled the figures out of his ass?

>>64859398
Nope, it's both lighter and protects better. The only way it can be heavier is if it has a lot more coverage as well.

>>64859400
Dude, you literally don't know how to read. I'm embarrassed for you at this point. They didn't even test the mail at lower energies.
> lost to every weapon they tested it against
Yes.
So tell me again: Where in the book does mail actually perform well?
> damage control
What are you even talking about? You just make shit up. Calling you on your bullshit isn't "damage control".

>>64859412
>They didn't even test the mail at lower energies.
they did, you just posted it.
>Where in the book does mail actually perform well?
in every test it's going through. you can cope about it by claiming it performs poorly but it's shown to be very effective even against bodkin arrows.
>What are you even talking about? You just make shit up
lmao, crying because your damage control about how it's performing bad is pathetic.

>>64859423
>they did, you just posted it.
Retard-kun, it went exactly like this:
"We tested it at 170J, it failed."
They didn't test at 100J or lower energies. There was no test where the mail performed well.
> it's shown to be very effective even against bodkin arrows.
> loses vs a 75lb draw bow
Holy shit you're completely delusional
> crying because your damage control
lmao, completely pathetic

>>64859431
>t-they didn't test it at lower impacts, except they did and bodkin failed to pen at 80j
>b-but the test where we hung it on a wooden crate with zero padding penned, therefore it's what counts, gotcha!
the damage control is off the charts here, coupled with angry seething

>>64859437
> 80j
It is now conclusively proven that you know nothing.
An 80J impact corresponds to either a large standoff or a draw weight of 63 pounds. Kids and women can draw more than that. At 100J you're dead, and at 120J you're turbo dead. That's what I call BAD performance, lmao

>>64859450
>>64859437
Also that was literally the only test where they experimented with lower energies. All of the others were like "we tried this, and the mail failed."

>>64859450
>An 80J impact corresponds to either a large standoff or a draw weight of 63 pounds
actually even a 100lb self bow will often fail to generate 80j at point blank range, it's not modern fiberglass here.

but regardless it withstood this impact, not failed against it, despite using the incredibly narrow 18 degree arrowhead that's supposed to effortlessly defeat any mail like butter.

>>64859455
>. All of the others were like "we tried this, and the mail failed."
weird way to read "but by no means defeated" but we've already established you have trouble with that.

>>64859457
> actually even a 100lb self bow will often fail to generate 80j at point blank range
> t. I made it up.
Complete bullshit.
>>64859460
Did you not read beyond the first paragraph? Also check the comparison between modern and antique chainmail.

>>64859481
>> t. I made it up.
>Complete bullshit.
ok https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMc8YDsnWI
>Did you not read beyond the first paragraph?
did you? it seems to not be the case.
>Also check the comparison between modern and antique chainmail.
yeah, antique performed similar but slightly worse, which is understandable given its age.

>>64859368
Dude, the PRC propaganda team focuses on modern weapons, not history. the CCP doesn't give a shit about anything before the Century of Humiliation.

>>64859547
The ones who do it for free do. My YouTube feed is filled with AI-voiced videos of "ancient Chinese Wonder tech" seemingly a different one every day. Yesterday it was brine water wells about how they could drill over 9k miles deep to get saltwater to get salt using nothing but BAMBOOO!!!1!

>>64859153
Get a better hobby because we all know the end-game of an anti-schizo schizo: imitating the schizo to force everybody to care when it turns out they don't. Don't say I didn't warn you.

>>64859491
As usual with you, because you're deeply retarded, the video disproves the point you're trying to make. The 100lb draw is already >85J. 125lb is well over 100J.
Man, chainmail really just stinks.
Also, you should actually read the books you cite, and watch the videos you link to, lmao
Total scalechad victory.

File: dennis.jpg (56 KB, 361x516)

56 KB JPG

>>64859568
it's a bit time consuming to imitate the rapechink

you'd need multiple hours per session and kilobytes of copied wikipedia text pages about rape cases and archive links to where he got b& for spamming them previously.

rapechink is quite famous for this because even pronounced /k/ stalking schizos like pic rel never got to this point despite being easily identifiable and quite active.

>>64859577
What the fuck is a rapechink?

>>64859572
>The 100lb draw is already >85J
bro, do you really not know about bow effeiciency? i hopre you're pretending because otherwise retardation this severe is clinical.

>>64859581
how nu r u?

>>64859582
Dude, if anything, your videos and books demonstrate that average bodkin arrows from an average longbow will go through chainmail like it's not even there.
(And also that "swords and axes" can penetrate it, lol.)
Would you want to take your chances vs. a halberd in chainmail? (Please try this.)
You have failed utterly.
Scalebros keep winning.

>>64859600
so you've stopped engaging with reality and are just in plain denial now, reciting your victory to yourself ad nauseam? btw that video chronographs a 111lb longbow topping out at 83j which is solidly within average among the bows tested.

File: videoscreenshot.png (149 KB, 847x403)

149 KB PNG

>>64859606
> btw that video chronographs a 111lb longbow topping out at 83j
No it doesn't. Watch the video again.
Your 110lb longbow is at nearly 100J.

>>64859619
ravenbeak longbow 111lbs 83j. you've even found some 100lb longbow for me at 86j. it's funny that you chose to ignore it when it's right in your face and deflect to another, heavier bow instead.

how does it feel to keep proving me right as reality closes in on you? no more self-encouraging victory recitals?

File: k_ - Weapons » Searching (...).png (406 KB, 1866x2338)

406 KB PNG

>>64859581
>What the fuck is a rapechink?
Rapechink is a spammer that keeps spamming about rape.
https://desuarchive.org/k/search/text/soviet%20rape/
He spams about how soviets raped european and japanese women, Chinese men raped japanese women, how Japanese women got raped by everyone and how north Africans raped italien women and so on.

He has a distinct posting style and lists a large number of sources and croped images in his rape spam. His Japanese grandfather feels a large amount of shame regarding his grandson schizo behavior.

>>64859566
That's youtube. This is 4chan.

File: expert on rape in the sov(...).png (1021 KB, 2496x1776)

1021 KB PNG

>>64859635
is he a different guy from the red army rape expert? Actually, now that I read what I just wrote here, it was probably many multitudes.

>>64859657
yeah, rapechink only posts about the rape of other peoples by soviets and only as a way to get back at whites, philipinos, japs, etc. the guy is completely unhinged.

>>64859648
So you think the barrier of entry here is higher?

>>64859635
That's very distinctive. Unfortunately, someone muddled the whole mess with >>64853189 and now calling our rapechink is basically just another form of schizo.

>>64859666
Add in Taiwanese to the list too.

>>64859670
More like the barrier for being forgotten is lower. You can post whatever you want on youtube and it'll stay there forever. You post boring BS here and it'll age to death in a day or two.