View Full Version : Lorica Segmentata
Just wondering if the new EB will have their imperial legion equipped with this armor, and lorica hamata.
General Appo
03-09-2008, 16:23
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Sorry dude, but are you serious? If you are, then I feel kinda sorry for you, since you are about to get your ass kicked.
Spartan198
03-09-2008, 16:28
Definitely,no. I can tell you that much for sure,having visited the EBII area only once and got somewhat of a light verbal lashing over Spartan hoplites.
Just wondering if the new EB will have their imperial legion equipped with this armor, and lorica hamata.
The question of lorica segmentate (LS) appears every month or so on the EB1 forum, and the answer is always the same. EB ends at 15 AD, and LS didn't became common until half a century later. The team is aware that there are LS finds predating the end-date, but the impression is that LS was a rarity in the Augustean army, and such will not be included.
Sorry dude, but are you serious? If you are, then I feel kinda sorry for you, since you are about to get your ass kicked.
I understand people are getting tired of this question, but that is no reason to be derisive. Sadly, due to misrepresentation in popular history, most people think that all Roman legionaries wore LS.
antisocialmunky
03-09-2008, 17:48
You know how many problems would be solved if the EB team added a blurb about LS in into the description of all Roman Units?
General Appo
03-09-2008, 18:50
Or even better, every time you enter the forum a big sign flashes repeatedly saying "The Romans didn´t use LS in EB´s timeperiod!".
You know how many problems would be solved if the EB team added a blurb about LS in into the description of all Roman Units?
You'd be amazed how many people would still manage to miss that :stupido2: . I'd prefer general Appo's suggestion, however there would still be people asking for "the segmented armour, don't know what's it called, the Romans used".
The question of lorica segmentate (LS) appears every month or so on the EB1 forum, and the answer is always the same. EB ends at 15 AD, and LS didn't became common until half a century later. The team is aware that there are LS finds predating the end-date, but the impression is that LS was a rarity in the Augustean army, and such will not be included.
I understand people are getting tired of this question, but that is no reason to be derisive. Sadly, due to misrepresentation in popular history, most people think that all Roman legionaries wore LS.
Ludens, thanks for your explanation!
Sorry dude, but are you serious? If you are, then I feel kinda sorry for you, since you are about to get your ass kicked.
No need to kick anyone :smash: . It's good enough that EB fans always take the field in this recurrent issue. :yes:
Isnt it accepted that the Kalkriese type of lorica segmentata was in use from 20BC to about 50AD? They found the breastplate dated 9ad from Teutoberg Forest so if the legions had them then, the praetorians who were better equipped should have had them some time before.(unless of coarse the less important guys would have the nice armor first which wouldnt make any sense) So maybe a praetorian unit having it wouldnt be far fetched.
Watchman
03-10-2008, 09:30
Given that at least in EB1 it's possible to have the Imperial reforms pretty early in the first century BC, I'd say it rather would be.
Watchman
03-10-2008, 09:34
...what is it with people and LS, anyway ? I don't get it. :huh:
Isnt it accepted that the Kalkriese type of lorica segmentata was in use from 20BC to about 50AD? They found the breastplate dated 9ad from Teutoberg Forest so if the legions had them then, the praetorians who were better equipped should have had them some time before.(unless of coarse the less important guys would have the nice armor first which wouldnt make any sense) So maybe a praetorian unit having it wouldnt be far fetched.
It is debatable whether LS is truly superior to chainmail, so the Praetorians wouldn't necessarily have worn it. Again, the impression is that LS was rare EB's time frame.
...what is it with people and LS, anyway ? I don't get it. :huh:
Is that a rhetorical question? Most basic history books and almost all of popular history display Romans in LS. It is recognizable and unique, so for many people it is the quintessential Roman armour.
Geoffrey S
03-10-2008, 21:03
I don't know how rare it was, but I think a safe possibility would be to use it for artillery crews.
I don't know how rare it was, but I think a safe possibility would be to use it for artillery crews.
In truth, it's far more comfortable to wear mail if you need to keep bending over. Lorica might look flexible but it does tend to dig in to your flesh when you demand more movement than it wants to allow. And if you are doing a repetitive job like artillery loading, lorica tends to keep digging into the same spot each time!
I believe they needed to wear a scarf to keep the armor from chafing the neck
No so much the neck, but the collar bone is where it rubs. You don't notice it at first, but certainly after a few hours you find you're trying to push the scarf over the sore bits!
If you're wondering how I can say this, it's because I'm a member of a re-enactment group (the Ermine street Guard) so we tend to have first hand experience of wearing this sort of kit for 6 or 8 hours at a time. :sweatdrop:
hellenes
03-12-2008, 07:08
Let me attempt a solution:
M2TW allows for multiple models per unit why not stick just couple of guys with LS?
This way its accurate and not widespread....
First archeologic evidence of the LS comes from 15 AD, I believe. Now, look at EB's ending date.
The answer for now and ever is plain no until you have very good proof of why it should be included.
9BC actually, but anyway Lorica Segmentata is ugly, and thats coming from a massive Roman fan.
Spartan198
03-12-2008, 14:35
What exactly is so wrong with chainmail,anyway? That's what I don't get. If anyone here knows why lorica Hamata seems to be so evil,please tell me and let me know when the exorcism is.
Seriously,though. Chainmail provided just as much,if not more,protection than the (dare I say it) Segmentata,with increased comfort and mobility. But everyone on the EB team knows that,after all.
I haven't played EB yet,but I hope you guys don't mind my :2cents: in the history department on weapons and armor.
antisocialmunky
03-12-2008, 15:32
...Then go play EB, most of the Romans wear some sort of chain main except the piss poor ones.
It is certainly true that the LS wasn't used in the EB timeframe. However, this does not mean it shoudn't be included. The LS started to appear after the Augustian reforms, in game the Augustian reforms can occur roughly hundred year to early. This means that the LS is a possibility within the EB timeframe.
I do however question it's superiority in comparison the LH. Since the Romans used very large shields and kept their formation, bodyarmor isn't so much of an issue. Besides LS is a logistic nightmare. Every smith can make and repair a LH but it takes a specialized facility to produce the LS.
The Lorica Segmentata was designed to withstand Dacian falxes, which has very little to do with the time of the Augustans. And by the way, the change from Lorica Hamata - Lorica Segmentata didn't happen over night. It took some time to adapt to it, and I think we're talking about mid 2nd century AD now.
Come on, just because the Augustians happen 100 years earlier, doesn't mean we should include stuff like that.
Historically, the Seleucids didn't conquer Nubia, but should we also just in case make an upgrade so they can ride pink flammable rhino's?
The Lorica Segmentata was designed to withstand Dacian falxes, which has very little to do with the time of the Augustans. And by the way, the change from Lorica Hamata - Lorica Segmentata didn't happen over night. It took some time to adapt to it, and I think we're talking about mid 2nd century AD now.
Come on, just because the Augustians happen 100 years earlier, doesn't mean we should include stuff like that.
Historically, the Seleucids didn't conquer Nubia, but should we also just in case make an upgrade so they can ride pink flammable rhino's?
Well if the Augustian reforms can happen much earlier maybe partial adaption of the LS can happen earlier. Besides, only some of the legionaries would wear the LS. When a condition like five battles fought with Dacia is added it would be more realistic. This does require a new unit though. This would however take a unit slot which is unacceptable. The Romans have a lot of units allready. So in short, I agree with you. If only Trajanus lived a bit earlier.
I must say that all this talking about the LS is over the top. There are more important things. The reason most people want them in is because Romans wear them in the movies. I can understand the pain of the team.
Watchman
03-13-2008, 22:26
I sincerely doubt if the appereance of LS had anything to do with the Dacians and their falxes - already because A) it was coming into use quite a bit before the Romans started having any major Dacian trouble B) they'd had to deal with the similar, but due to its all-metal build probably even choppier, Thracian rhomphaia already in the Macedonian Wars centuries earlier...
The Dacians did inspire some modifications to helmets and the limited issuing of laminate arm-guards for first-line units though.
The question is why they started using it? I doubt the Romans used it just because they could. It probably had it's advantages in the field but I think the logistical drawbacks were far greater. What I don't understand is where they got the idea from. Maybe an emperor ordered research into a new armor.
Watchman
03-13-2008, 23:31
The basic idea of the laminate structure was old news - it'd already been used for limb defenses by Achaemenid Persian heavy cavalry, and the Romans probably first encountered it on Seleukid cataphracts at Magnesia. I'd be willing to bet it was sometime after that it began forming part of some gladiator classes' panoplies.
Presumably some clever fellow eventually came up with the idea of adapting the concept into a corselet, but it wasn't until the reorganisation, consolidation etc. after Augustinus' takeover that the resources for such in practice tricky and expensive R&D became available; which also explains how such an expensive and logistically finicky item could begin to be issued to the troops.
Would it be wrong to draw the following conclusion?
It would have been possible for the Romans to develop the LS earlier. However the costs associated with it are so large that it would be madness. Especially considering the benefits are only minor. Only the later emperors where willing to pay such a high price. Maybe it had to do with prestige?
In this case I completely agree that there is no place for the LS in the EB timeframe.
Gebeleisis
03-15-2008, 11:30
lorica segmentata gives me itches every time i read the word:furious3:
EDIT
here you go
http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/story/ludenslsanswer1.jpg
beatoangelico
03-15-2008, 18:00
ahahah wonderful! :laugh4:
russia almighty
03-15-2008, 20:39
Though, I do wonder what an EB created LS legion with the dirty look other EB units have, would look like.
That is brilliant Gebeleisis. A balloon is in order I think... :balloon2:
MarcusAureliusAntoninus
03-16-2008, 00:29
lorica segmentata gives me itches every time i read the word:furious3:
EDIT
here you go
http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/story/ludenslsanswer1.jpg
Ha!
Did you make that picture? I should put that picture in the FAQ...
Whoops, forgot about the timeline!:dizzy2:
@Gaivs
Why is it that you think LS is ugky, I like LH but LS is the bomb.:inquisitive:
BTW, where is the picture of the M2TW legion unit at? I cant find it.
Mr Frost
03-16-2008, 02:28
Don't mind me , just setting my watch by this thread .:vanish:
Gebeleisis
03-16-2008, 12:04
nah i did not make it :)
i found it here
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1857861&postcount=68
thx for the balloon dough :D
its my first:laugh4:
What is the purpose of a balloon? Is it like rep?
Gebeleisis
03-17-2008, 15:48
its 4 fun :)
It is pure randomness. Have one. :balloon:
Lorica Segmentata, which btw isnt its true name, we dont know what the Romans called it, possibly Lorica Lamina or something. The thing is, we get this whole Segmentata deal from Trajans column, but its widely accepted that his column is over stylized, probably out of simplicity to distinguish all Romans as one. So as such, we get an over representation of LS, where as in actual fact, Hamata was far more common than LS
if you wan't to know what a legionary c.100AD mostly looked like look at that romanian monument (ada...whatever)-anything but LS and attic helms.
*Ibrahim goes off to look at it again*
it's "adamclisi tropaeum".
Gebeleisis
03-19-2008, 12:54
i think we can solve both problems,make lorica segmentata(:dizzy2: i hate the name already) a gold armour upgrade to the legionaries,that can be made only in uber blcksmiths that come around the year ~-10, +15,maybe some guys can get the romans evolve faster in technology?
we can do that dont we?:idea2:
antisocialmunky
03-19-2008, 13:51
How about you go and requrest the mod in the EB mod forum.
Gebeleisis
03-19-2008, 16:43
isnt this the one?:inquisitive:
i think we can solve both problems,make lorica segmentata(:dizzy2: i hate the name already) a gold armour upgrade to the legionaries,that can be made only in uber blcksmiths that come around the year ~-10, +15,maybe some guys can get the romans evolve faster in technology?
we can do that dont we?:idea2:
I guess it can be done, but it assumes that LS was indeed an upgrade over lorica hamata. That is debatable, in fact one of EB's Roman experts argues it was a downgrade. And, as yet, the magnitude of the upgrade cannot be modded.
Gebeleisis
03-20-2008, 15:50
well i may think its not necesarily to upgrade,like make a special small blacksmith type of building that allows to upgrade it?
Oh Gebel.! why are you so eager for the LS? like I said, look up the adamclisi tropaeum and look at romans at the time LS was supposedly at the hight of it's use-again, anything but LS is on it (it's a war memorial set up by legionaries in Dacia, and it's quite realistic for a crude bas relief). here's the link to one legionary from there:
http://www.gk.ro/sarmizegetusa/ranistorum/site_eng/Images/falx_03.jpg
Why do people dislike the LS so much? If its at the end of the time period then it is what it is right? Trajans column depicts the roman Legionaries wearing lorica segmentata and auxilia wearing the hamatata. So what would you get, 15 turns or something if they include it historically?
LS armor IS superior for comfort due to the design, The weight is distributed much better, alot of the weight is held by your hips.
Is it superior due to its design for piercing/arrow protection. The curved plates would deflect the force away from the impact point while chain just absorbs the impact. Chain offers good protection from slashing and blunt trama.
Thin chain is not very useful either(check out the history channel this week, they have some tests done) and to have be effective would require a much more elaborate design, very tight and thick, (see the link below), but it is very heavy and cumbersome.
Who wants to walk around all day with a heavy chainmail on, no thanks.
I would chose LS anyday.
http://www.legionxxiv.org/loricapage/
antisocialmunky
03-21-2008, 13:40
Because popular history think that legions should be professional, LS wearing bamfs from the 3rd century BC onwards.
Its superiority is debatable.
Abokasee
03-21-2008, 19:52
LS possibly implemented as Ancillary or trait?
Lorica Segmentata
-This character wheres a Lorica Segmentata, the improved armour has some benefit, unless you request it for the entire army then you'll be considered mad: Give +1 hitpoints
Gebeleisis
03-21-2008, 23:49
lol
well ibrahim im not a fan of LS but i toguht this way we could satisfy both sides,
us - cause it wont be in use
and the ls lovers who cant rant anymore,anyways,what are the plans for armour upgrades?:idea2:
regardless of whats superior or whatever people like or dislike, based JUST for historical accuracy , the Kalkriese version of the lorica segmentata should be included at 20BC via a special building or blacksmith upgrade or whatever.
Many many many other units and time periods have been introduced into the game with much less historical proof. You shouldnt let peoples disgust for something get in the way of historical accuracy.
"The currently recognised types being the Kalkriese (c. 20 B.C. to A.D. 50), Corbridge (c. A.D. 40 to A.D. 120), and Newstead (c. A.D. 120 to 250) types"
the above statement isnt mine, it was taken from websites that do reenactments. There are ALOT of different sources stating exactly this.
* Someone might say well it was found in 9ad on the rank and file as well as depicted, so it should be included in 9ad not 20bc.
These groups say 20bc for a reason. Plus Common sense will say that in order for the rank and file to get it issued to them it could not have been right off the blacksmiths anvil. Alot of sources say it was probobly created during the last century bc.
Now, As far as whats superior, its really not debatable. You can wear a much heavier suit of armor longer due to the weight distribution. Take a physics class and do the calculations yourself for the incoming force(im being serious too, get the pattern of the most common types of ls and chainmail and do the extensive math required((the romans used a 4 in 1 pattern btw, no evidence of 6 in1 or 8 in 1 ever)) check out " mail tests performed by Dr. Williams" and also the book "The Great Warbow". It also doesnt take a genius to understand that the incoming force impacting on an angled surface will cause much of the force to be redirected and not absorbed like the chainmail will.
you could always buy both armors and have a buddy of yours shoot arrows and throw spears at you, youll get a good feel for the comfort trying to dodge them too! :laugh4:
CaesarAugustus
03-24-2008, 02:22
regardless of whats superior or whatever people like or dislike, based JUST for historical accuracy , the Kalkriese version of the lorica segmentata should be included at 20BC via a special building or blacksmith upgrade or whatever.
From a historical viewpoint of the EB mod itself, very few if anyone has ever played up to 20 BC in their Roman campaign. Therefore it is simply not worth the time, effort and unit slot, along with special building or "blacksmith" or whatever else would be required for the EB team to include the Kalkriese lorica segmentata, as has been stated many, many times. (I must admit, however, I would be tempted to play up to 20 BC for those LS units :P)
antisocialmunky
03-24-2008, 04:46
/me load multiplayer EDU and plays with LS that way.
Why do people dislike the LS so much? If its at the end of the time period then it is what it is right? Trajans column depicts the roman Legionaries wearing lorica segmentata and auxilia wearing the hamatata. So what would you get, 15 turns or something if they include it historically?
LS armor IS superior for comfort due to the design, The weight is distributed much better, alot of the weight is held by your hips.
Is it superior due to its design for piercing/arrow protection. The curved plates would deflect the force away from the impact point while chain just absorbs the impact. Chain offers good protection from slashing and blunt trama.
Thin chain is not very useful either(check out the history channel this week, they have some tests done) and to have be effective would require a much more elaborate design, very tight and thick, (see the link below), but it is very heavy and cumbersome.
Who wants to walk around all day with a heavy chainmail on, no thanks.
I would chose LS anyday.
http://www.legionxxiv.org/loricapage/
I agree, this is definitely true. Also M2TW allows for three different sets of armor. Maybe at a certain era, one could be for LS and the other two for LH seeing that it was not immediatley replaced.
lol
well ibrahim im not a fan of LS but i toguht this way we could satisfy both sides,
us - cause it wont be in use
and the ls lovers who cant rant anymore,anyways,what are the plans for armour upgrades?:idea2:
Here is another ballon.:balloon3:
That is a exellent idea!
look: as I have stated above, the LS was in use for quite a long time, but it is evident that it was actually rare: think about it:
1-the depictions are overwhelmingly in Italia (and most of them from rome)
2-most provincial (admittedly not all) show the overwhelming majority in chain mail (e.g: adamclisi)
3-no one knows what the roman name for the LS really was; shouldn't that tell anyone here something? they have a roman name for LH, LSq, and even LPlum, but no known contemporary name for the LS; if it was really that common, let alone standard issue, shouldn't it pop up in some history of the exercitus (army) somewhere? why doesn't anyone give 2 F's about it in the manuals and histories? because it was too rare & exotic to matter!:sweatdrop: :sweatdrop: :sweatdrop:
what explains the preponderance of the LS in Italian carvings?2 things:
1-they wanted to tell one group from another (legionaries, Auxiliaris, and cav.)
2-maybe the LS was a parade armor, or artistic standard adopted to a reason known only to the sculpturers (like the romans in Attic helm on the Trajan column)
lastly: all archeological finds were dug up for the most part in Auxiliary forts/ sites (judging from what I have read)
Oh EB team! hope a member is reading-put that in the info on the cohors imperatoria
*Ibrahim dies*
look: as I have stated above, the LS was in use for quite a long time, but it is evident that it was actually rare: think about it:
1-the depictions are overwhelmingly in Italia (and most of them from rome)
2-most provincial (admittedly not all) show the overwhelming majority in chain mail (e.g: adamclisi)
3-no one knows what the roman name for the LS really was; shouldn't that tell anyone here something? they have a roman name for LH, LSq, and even LPlum, but no known contemporary name for the LS; if it was really that common, let alone standard issue, shouldn't it pop up in some history of the exercitus (army) somewhere? why doesn't anyone give 2 F's about it in the manuals and histories? because it was too rare & exotic to matter!:sweatdrop: :sweatdrop: :sweatdrop:
what explains the preponderance of the LS in Italian carvings?2 things:
1-they wanted to tell one group from another (legionaries, Auxiliaris, and cav.)
2-maybe the LS was a parade armor, or artistic standard adopted to a reason known only to the sculpturers (like the romans in Attic helm on the Trajan column)
lastly: all archeological finds were dug up for the most part in Auxiliary forts/ sites (judging from what I have read)
Oh EB team! hope a member is reading-put that in the info on the cohors imperatoria
*Ibrahim dies*
This is incorrect, read below:
1) depictions are not primarily in italia, in fact, actual LS is depicted all over the empire. --->
Alba Iulia monument, found in Romania/Antonine Column in Rome/The Arch of Septimius Severus/The funerary stele of Marcus Aurelius Diodorus from Hierapolis--turkey/The Column of Marcus Aurelius/Arch of Constantine after 300ad taken from an aurelian monument/Trajan’s column, which tells the story of Trajan’s conquest of Dacia ca. AD 102-105, depicts nearly 300 legionaries wearing the lorica segmentata/
2)depends on the time period your talking about. obviously before the armor was in use there wouldnt be any depictions of it now would there be ;)
3) what manual of history are you speaking of?
1) i dont need to comment on this one obviously
2)Many many depictions of this combined with archeological findings of the LS in actual military forts expecially in far off reaches of the empire.-not primarily parade armor.
lastly) -----lastly they were not mostly dug up in auxiliary forts:
The Roman legionary fortress of Isca contained about 9 excavation sites alone/Kalkriese, Germany /Cobridge and Chichester, United Kingdom respectively/Trimontium (Newstead), which came into use around 100 A.D-Corbridge, Northumberland, produced fragments of between three and twelve cuirasses/Carnuntum an important Roman army camp in what is now Austria.
some pics of the real stuff-
http://www.romancoins.info/MilitaryEquipment-Body-Armour.html
aparently on the history channel there was a professor shooting recreated LS with a xbow...which just bounces right off, i havent seen it. If anyone knows the name of the series its in id appreciate it thanks.
i still think the let your friend throw spears or shoot at you with arrows would be the best test....maybe they willl find your body 1000 yrs from now and think our poeple still used LS....
antisocialmunky
03-24-2008, 12:30
I agree, this is definitely true. Also M2TW allows for three different sets of armor. Maybe at a certain era, one could be for LS and the other two for LH seeing that it was not immediatley replaced.
EB said they won't do this since units get a hard coded armor bonus. Maybe if the next patch changes that... if it comes out the team might consider using the armor system.
LS possibly implemented as Ancillary or trait?
Lorica Segmentata
-This character wheres a Lorica Segmentata, the improved armour has some benefit, unless you request it for the entire army then you'll be considered mad: Give +1 hitpoints
~:thumb:
regardless of whats superior or whatever people like or dislike, based JUST for historical accuracy , the Kalkriese version of the lorica segmentata should be included at 20BC via a special building or blacksmith upgrade or whatever.
Many many many other units and time periods have been introduced into the game with much less historical proof.
Following your reasoning, every piece of equipment known to be in use between 272 BC and AD 15 should be included. Unfortunately, there are not enough unit slots to do that. This would also mean creating a third legionary unit wearing lorica squamata. So we end up with three legionary units (not counting the Marian cohort) with the same functionality and very similar stats, for a faction that already takes up a disproportionate number of unit slots.
Let's keep this in perspective: LS appears in the last 25 years (out of 287) of the mod; it wasn't common at that point; and even at when it was popular, it would never become the most common form of legionary armour. Those are good reasons for not giving the Imperial legionary a lorica segmentata, so why do you conclude it's being ignored out of spite?
hellenes
03-24-2008, 17:14
Ill repeat myself due to people ignoring me:
For CHRISTS SAKE put a texture variation into the Augustian Legionare unit with couple of guys wearing LS...
END OF STORY!!!!
Spendios
03-24-2008, 17:21
Ill repeat myself due to people ignoring me:
For CHRISTS SAKE put a texture variation into the Augustian Legionare unit with couple of guys wearing LS...
END OF STORY!!!!
Or even simpler, no LS in EB, End of the Story.:laugh4:
hellenes
03-24-2008, 17:27
Or even simpler, no LS in EB, End of the Story.:laugh4:
While I understand the joke :2thumbsup:
Its not that hard to get a compromise which is actually not far from historical reality...couple of guys with LS in a unit wont harm anyone...they may even allow us to avoid the cloned Romans syndrome all in LHs...
Spendios
03-24-2008, 18:22
While I understand the joke :2thumbsup:
Its not that hard to get a compromise which is actually not far from historical reality...couple of guys with LS in a unit wont harm anyone...they may even allow us to avoid the cloned Romans syndrome all in LHs...
No compromises. No LS.:balloon2:
Irb_the_Pictish_Berserker
03-24-2008, 20:55
If people want LS in EB so bad, why doesn't someone just make a texture and model available for download that replaces Augustan legionaries or something? that way the LS fans can play with LS to their hearts' content, and the players that are really anal about their history can just not download it. Seems like a perfectly reasonable solution to me.
:wall: :inquisitive:
Shame about that. By the by, here's an actual photograph taken by Varus' Chief of Staff, of the 17th Legion setting off over the Rhine (mid March 9AD). This is one of the last photo's ever of this Legion, and is quite a collector's item as it was not widely circulated at the time (as it took far longer than expected to perfect the techniques necessary to display digital photography). :beam:
Notice quite widespread use of LS ... (it rains a lot in Germania, and when it rains, LH wearers get wet, LS wearers don't!)
https://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w269/_MAXIMVS_/Kelmarsh15-1.jpg
Oh sorry then-guess what I was reading was wrong-besides most of what I saw was from Italy:embarassed: :embarassed: :embarassed:
*Ibrahim goes and burns the bad books; bans sites with bad info*
@pictish berserker:
Interesting Idea....good one
and what history manual?!??! I meant to say no one ever mentioned the LS by name in the various books written in the time period-not necessarily manuals, but any book on the subject:wall: :wall: :wall:-manuals if any probably don't mention it (i.e: I said no one in any book from the time mentions it)-sorry for the confusion
This is incorrect, read below:
1) depictions are not primarily in italia, in fact, actual LS is depicted all over the empire. --->
Alba Iulia monument, found in Romania/Antonine Column in Rome/The Arch of Septimius Severus/The funerary stele of Marcus Aurelius Diodorus from Hierapolis--turkey/The Column of Marcus Aurelius/Arch of Constantine after 300ad taken from an aurelian monument/Trajan’s column, which tells the story of Trajan’s conquest of Dacia ca. AD 102-105, depicts nearly 300 legionaries wearing the lorica segmentata/
2)depends on the time period your talking about. obviously before the armor was in use there wouldnt be any depictions of it now would there be ;)
3) what manual of history are you speaking of?
1) i dont need to comment on this one obviously
2)Many many depictions of this combined with archeological findings of the LS in actual military forts expecially in far off reaches of the empire.-not primarily parade armor.
lastly) -----lastly they were not mostly dug up in auxiliary forts:
The Roman legionary fortress of Isca contained about 9 excavation sites alone/Kalkriese, Germany /Cobridge and Chichester, United Kingdom respectively/Trimontium (Newstead), which came into use around 100 A.D-Corbridge, Northumberland, produced fragments of between three and twelve cuirasses/Carnuntum an important Roman army camp in what is now Austria.
some pics of the real stuff-
http://www.romancoins.info/MilitaryEquipment-Body-Armour.html
aparently on the history channel there was a professor shooting recreated LS with a xbow...which just bounces right off, i havent seen it. If anyone knows the name of the series its in id appreciate it thanks.
i still think the let your friend throw spears or shoot at you with arrows would be the best test....maybe they willl find your body 1000 yrs from now and think our poeple still used LS....
that was what my replay was about
anyways: the show was about some lost inventions-something on bronze age weapons, they were comparing bronze age armor to the LS and others (the branze age cuirass was good)
~:thumb:
"Following your reasoning, every piece of equipment known to be in use between 272 BC and AD 15 should be included. Unfortunately, there are not enough unit slots to do that. This would also mean creating a third legionary unit wearing lorica squamata. So we end up with three legionary units (not counting the Marian cohort) with the same functionality and very similar stats, for a faction that already takes up a disproportionate number of unit slots."
Incorrect, squamata was never as widely used as LS for the rank and file. There are many concrete examples of widespread use of LS being utilized, even a few concrete examples of its use during the end of the EB time frame. Just look at a reenactment site or some of my previous posts in this section if you want specifics.
Lorica Squamatata was typically seen on depictions of standard bearers, musicians and centurions, expecially during EB's time frame. Later on however, a few other examples of its use arose. There are a few finds---- Squamatata pieces were found near Lake Trasimene-- section of neck guard -Carlisle found early in 2001. The metal was generally not very thick, .020" to .032" but it offered good protection because the scales did overlap. Overall not even close to comparison as LS for the rank and file's widespread use.
[QUOTE=Irb_the_Pictish_Berserker]If people want LS in EB so bad, why doesn't someone just make a texture and model available for download that replaces Augustan legionaries or something? that way the LS fans can play with LS to their hearts' content, and the players that are really anal about their history can just not download it. Seems like a perfectly reasonable solution to me.
:wall: :inquisitive:
I think this idea is perfect, an LS patch :laugh4: They could replace one of the upgrade textures or a unit ect. Then if the individual wanted to play a few years longer, they could just edit the end date in the descr_strat.txt . Hopefully someone will eventually create one. I guess time will tell...
antisocialmunky
03-25-2008, 12:46
Just look at a reenactment site or some of my previous posts in this section if you want specifics.
Eh... did you just reference reenactors? :inquisitive:
Incorrect, squamata was never as widely used as LS for the rank and file. There are many concrete examples of widespread use of LS being utilized, even a few concrete examples of its use during the end of the EB time frame. Just look at a reenactment site or some of my previous posts in this section if you want specifics.
Lorica Squamatata was typically seen on depictions of standard bearers, musicians and centurions, expecially during EB's time frame. Later on however, a few other examples of its use arose. There are a few finds---- Squamatata pieces were found near Lake Trasimene-- section of neck guard -Carlisle found early in 2001. The metal was generally not very thick, .020" to .032" but it offered good protection because the scales did overlap. Overall not even close to comparison as LS for the rank and file's widespread use.
Thanks for the information, but I don't see how it invalidates my point. LSq was not as widely used as LS, but LS was not as widely used as LH (at least that is what I understood from the EB team).
You can make a case for the inclusion of LS, but the point is there is a unit limit, and apart from the aesthetic, there would be no significant difference between LS and LH-equipped legionaries. As LS was probably never more popular than LH, and certainly not during the time-frame, the point of an LS legionary seems moot. Nor do I think that inclusion of an LS legionary will prevent threads like this from springing up. It will merely change the emphasis from "why was LS not included?" to "Why is LS not less/more effective than chainmail?".
If the LS is included it should not be due to whining people.
It would be awsome though, some legionaires wearing the LH (maybe two variants?), some the LSq and some the LS. It will also make clear that not every legionair wore the same armor.
Eh... did you just reference reenactors? :inquisitive:
You mean reenactment groups? They have good information, but mostly just about the measurements and material. Books, alot of sculptures, artwork, archeological finds, websites, i usually list my source if your interested in something specific.
If the LS is included it should not be due to whining people.
It would be awsome though, some legionaires wearing the LH (maybe two variants?), some the LSq and some the LS. It will also make clear that not every legionair wore the same armor.
this is a really great idea, is something like that possible or are the variants hardcoded as well?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-25-2008, 23:43
How many times? It's not happening.
The armour is, at best, less effective than mail and about on par with scale, plus it's only good if you're in a camp with a well supplied and skilled armourer. Plus, most modern versions are over engineered while modern mail tends to be under engineered. In general Roman mail was tighter and better rivited than modern versions.
Also, LS rusts much worse than mail.
How many times? It's not happening.
The armour is, at best, less effective than mail and about on par with scale, plus it's only good if you're in a camp with a well supplied and skilled armourer. Plus, most modern versions are over engineered while modern mail tends to be under engineered. In general Roman mail was tighter and better rivited than modern versions.
Also, LS rusts much worse than mail.
Your are right about the rust but I imagine scale rusts just as hard, unless its bronze offcourse. Mail isn't an issue, if it's rusty you just put it in a bag with some sand and carry it with you for some time. It will be good as new.
antisocialmunky
03-26-2008, 01:00
Rust on scale and main means replacing a ring or a scale... rust on plate... that's bad news.
How many times? It's not happening.
The armour is, at best, less effective than mail and about on par with scale, plus it's only good if you're in a camp with a well supplied and skilled armourer. Plus, most modern versions are over engineered while modern mail tends to be under engineered. In general Roman mail was tighter and better rivited than modern versions.
Also, LS rusts much worse than mail.
Where is your proof of LS being less effective than roman mail and equal to scale?
Roman mail was not tighter and better than more modern mail, where did you get this information? I hope your referring to the fake costume butted mail they sell on websites...you can buy real stuff nowadays but its very expensive.
Medieval mail was formed in the 6 in 1 to even the 8 in 1 or 8 in 2(kings mail)pattern forming a much tighter knit than roman 4 to 1, there is no evidence of anything more than 4 to 1 pattern. The drawback was mobility and weight, but this armor was extremely effective in stopping almost anything. Romans used mostly rivited welded rings or solid punch with rivited- For the most part roman mail was of the highest quality at the time period but not compared to the mail used in the medieval period.
Watchman
03-26-2008, 13:20
Err... I'm pretty damned sure Medieval mail was overwhelmingly in the 4:1 "international standard" pattern too you know. And I'm fairly certain the solid "washers" puched out of sheet iron were a fairly late, originally Middle Eastern developement...
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-26-2008, 14:51
Where is your proof of LS being less effective than roman mail and equal to scale?
Roman mail was not tighter and better than more modern mail, where did you get this information? I hope your referring to the fake costume butted mail they sell on websites...you can buy real stuff nowadays but its very expensive.
Medieval mail was formed in the 6 in 1 to even the 8 in 1 or 8 in 2(kings mail)pattern forming a much tighter knit than roman 4 to 1, there is no evidence of anything more than 4 to 1 pattern. The drawback was mobility and weight, but this armor was extremely effective in stopping almost anything. Romans used mostly rivited welded rings or solid punch with rivited- For the most part roman mail was of the highest quality at the time period but not compared to the mail used in the medieval period.
Most tests are done with low-grade mass-produced steel mail, the links are generally larger than those found in archaeology. In the same vein modern LS is usually mild steel and over engineered. As a result modern reconstructions of LS usually perform better and mail worse than the more rigerous tests that have been carried out recently.
As to Roman mail being high quality, well I think the Celts would definately have something to say about that.
I for one am happy there'll be no LS.
Most tests are done with low-grade mass-produced steel mail, the links are generally larger than those found in archaeology. In the same vein modern LS is usually mild steel and over engineered. As a result modern reconstructions of LS usually perform better and mail worse than the more rigerous tests that have been carried out recently..
You previously stated roman chainmail was superior to more modern chain. We were talking about lh not ls compared to medieval chainmail. Exactly what test are you talking about? what exactly do you mean by engineered?
The medieval period is from 5th century to the beginning of the 16th century.
4in1 international style was the most popular yes, but not the most effective.
Also as mail use progressed from roman times, they introduced carbon steel, tempered and blackened steel and still used iron too as well as more than 15 different chainmail patterns, Smaller rings for better protection against arrow fire and flat rings for better slashing deflection.
"As to Roman mail being high quality, well I think the Celts would definately have something to say about that."
Romans adopted chainmail from the celts and improved on it in a few ways, the most important i see is the celts usually butted thier links closed.
Watchman
03-26-2008, 20:53
Most tests are done with low-grade mass-produced steel mail, the links are generally larger than those found in archaeology. In the same vein modern LS is usually mild steel and over engineered. As a result modern reconstructions of LS usually perform better and mail worse than the more rigerous tests that have been carried out recently....which said, I've serious problems with the idea folks as pragmatic about warfare as the Romans would have spent a few centuries and not a little resources of all kinds tinkering with a genuinely defective type of body armour. Especially as most of the arguments for the LS not having provided decent enough protection that I've seen border on the patently absurd, such as the one about the lames being too widely spaced - an issue that can be readily fixed by adjusting the internal leathers, unless I've completely misunderstood something about how that kind of corselet is put together...
It's not like the laminate construction and its principles themselves were particularly novel or alien to the Romans after all.
Err... I'm pretty damned sure Medieval mail was overwhelmingly in the 4:1 "international standard" pattern too you know. And I'm fairly certain the solid "washers" puched out of sheet iron were a fairly late, originally Middle Eastern developement...
yes correct the 4in1 is was the most popular even in medieval period
sorry :( but your incorrect in this fact, the solid rings were being used by the romans, usually half were solid while the rest was riveted shut
Watchman
03-26-2008, 22:38
Well, it should be obvious why you can't use all solid rings... ~;)
Well, it should be obvious why you can't use all solid rings... ~;)
hahaha very true :)
Gebeleisis
03-27-2008, 16:17
cant we just follow my advice ,its easier :inquisitive:
cant we just follow my advice ,its easier :inquisitive:
I am afraid I did not understand it. What did you propose?
Also, the issue that is being debated is not the possibility of including it, but the historicity.
Gebeleisis
03-28-2008, 15:52
ah ,ok got it,
i proposed to have lorica segemntata as a last armour upgrade for the roman legions,i dont think anyone's gotta get them,but meh,at least nobody can say we dont have them,and they wont be ingame only if they build some uber blacksmith that needs some other stuff maybe?:inquisitive:
General Appo
03-28-2008, 16:25
Just consider one thing. How many people have actually played a campaign with no cheating or extra modding what so ever and gotten the Augustan reforms? My guess: at most 3.
Gebeleisis
03-28-2008, 16:31
maybe,but at least we shall get over the,where is LS threads without compromising historical accuracy:2thumbsup:
i proposed to have lorica segemntata as a last armour upgrade for the roman legions,i dont think anyone's gotta get them,but meh,at least nobody can say we dont have them,and they wont be ingame only if they build some uber blacksmith that needs some other stuff maybe?:inquisitive:
To which I replied:
I guess it can be done, but it assumes that LS was indeed an upgrade over lorica hamata. That is debatable, in fact one of EB's Roman experts argues it was a downgrade. And, as yet, the magnitude of the upgrade cannot be modded.
In other words, upgrades will increase the armour on a unit with a set, unmoddable bonus. However, it is arguable whether LS was truly an upgrade over LH, at least in terms of protection offered.
I also fail to see how your solution does not compromise historical accuracy.
This is getting drawn out, i argued that LS was superior in design and stated some proof but theres no way for sure to know anything unless someone was to recreate everything exactly and put them through a series of tests, which im sure none of us have the drive, money or time to do.
Here is my proposed solution:
Make EB2 without the LS at all, then after its all done someone can make a separate patch or add on for the LS and ppl can chose whether they want to dl it or not. What do you think?
General Appo
03-29-2008, 00:27
As long as you do the patch, great! Once EB2 comes out we don´t want the EB team wasting their time with such stupid things when they can be out there doing much funnier stuff, like finally going outside their own rooms for the first time since 2005.
This is getting drawn out, i argued that LS was superior in design and stated some proof but theres no way for sure to know anything unless someone was to recreate everything exactly and put them through a series of tests, which im sure none of us have the drive, money or time to do.
Actually, one guy on the team has and his conclusions pointed to it being worse than chain.
pezhetairoi
03-29-2008, 02:38
*pops by for the first time in a month and sees this thread sitting at the top*
Ooh, a party! Without inviting me? Really, all of you in the Council of Ten. How could you?
Actually, one guy on the team has and his conclusions pointed to it being worse than chain.
According to what factual proof? My advice to you is to look through the facts out there and decide for yourself or read through this entire thread.
Look, man, a guy on the team has spent extensive time studying arms and armor as part of career to getting a Ph.D. That included building and testing armor.
Believe it or not. And personally, these threads are enough of an annoyance that the team just doesn't care anymore. Lorica Segmentata will not be in EB1 or EB2; at least not in line infantry. Possbility for artillery crews as that was discussed somewhere before a long time ago, but that's it. End of discussion on our part. This topic has been exhausted. My advice is that if you want it, learn how to mod it.
Look, man, a guy on the team has spent extensive time studying arms and armor as part of career to getting a Ph.D. That included building and testing armor.
Believe it or not. And personally, these threads are enough of an annoyance that the team just doesn't care anymore. Lorica Segmentata will not be in EB1 or EB2; at least not in line infantry. Possbility for artillery crews as that was discussed somewhere before a long time ago, but that's it. End of discussion on our part. This topic has been exhausted. My advice is that if you want it, learn how to mod it.
temper temper lol :laugh4:
General Appo
03-29-2008, 10:06
No, shut up!!! You are wasting the teams time and patience, these kinda threads are what makes people quit the EB team.
You´re question has been answered probably a hundred times, and at least a dozen times in this very thread, and still you seem unable to comprehend this.
:daisy: Because you make it seem that way. You want LS in EB, do it yourself, don´t pester other people who have better things to do. Or else... *trademark shifty eyes and winks at Pez*
No, shut up!!! You are wasting the teams time and patience, these kinda threads are what makes people quit the EB team.
You´re question has been answered probably a hundred times, and at least a dozen times in this very thread, and still you seem unable to comprehend this.
Because you make it seem that way. You want LS in EB, do it yourself, don´t pester other people who have better things to do. Or else... *trademark shifty eyes and winks at Pez*
Then counter the proof i showed in this thread that ls was used and is superior or let it go as no one knows, dont come all irate sounding like you have adhd or something, like your mom dropped you on your head... your pathetic
Gebeleisis
03-29-2008, 13:35
it will not compromise it cause i suggested a building to be made available only in uber situations when the actual player made more techonoligal progres then the empire evr did,i mean,we already did that with the reforms no?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-29-2008, 13:37
Look, you haven't provided any proof of anything. The fact is that the modern reconstructions on Segmentata are all wrong anyway, we can't seem to get the rigging right and the lames never hang properly. Additionally modern version are made of rolled sheet mild steel, not forged iron, the rivits are usually bronze and not copper as they are in finds. In general the standard of the modern metal armour is just better, because it's not massed produced by hand; it's either machine produced or lovingly handcrafted in a garage.
Now, added to this sculpture and the dispersal of finds suggests it was never widely used. To suggestions have been made recently.
1. It was used by artillery crews to protect against the potentially fatal blunt trauma from miss-fires etc. This might help to explain why we find it in so many auxillary border-posts.
2. It was used by the "light" second cohort or some other form of assault trooper who would value the lighter wait and protection from blunt trauma over a generally better form of armour.
The other possibility is that it just flat-out looks pretty and needs polishing. Seriously, this was an army.
hellenes
03-29-2008, 13:40
Can anyone explain to me how the idea of placing a guy or two into the variations of a unit wearing LS is a bad idea?
antisocialmunky
03-29-2008, 14:01
Because someone will just make a minimod of that.
Spendios
03-29-2008, 14:22
Can anyone explain to me how the idea of placing a guy or two into the variations of a unit wearing LS is a bad idea?
Mostly because there wasn't a "guy or two" wearing LS in our time period.
hellenes
03-29-2008, 15:19
Mostly because there wasn't a "guy or two" wearing LS in our time period.
So youre saying that by 1ad-14ad there wasnt even a single guy wearing LS within the legion's unit?
I mean Im pretty sure that Legionares werent just clones...
Spendios
03-29-2008, 15:48
So youre saying that by 1ad-14ad there wasnt even a single guy wearing LS within the legion's unit?
I mean Im pretty sure that Legionares werent just clones...
You can keep asking in 1000 different threads. There won't be LS in EB2. Period.:balloon2:
You have to wonder about the sheer rudeness of some people.
The EB team spend years building a great mod. Improving on the original game infinitely. And they have all enjoyed it.
They do not question the EB team when it comes to the near infinite details for many faction, they accept that EB know what thy are doing.
However when they don't see the shiny amour they see in cartoons they imagine they are expects (because they have all seen some video on you tube when LS gets hit by a V2 missile and comes out smiling, then they follow it up with 15 minutes googling).
And they constantly never acept that it won't be in.
The smart ones will simply wait, and have there own LS minimod, the others will whine about it's use after the time period, and the loss of the pretty armour.
No, shut up!!! You are wasting the teams time and patience, these kinda threads are what makes people quit the EB team.
But that doesn't give you the right to be rude. In fact, he hasn't even repeated his request for LS to be included in EB, he merely asks PVC to back up his claims.
However, I'll admit I am getting very tired of this discussion, too :shame: .
it will not compromise it cause i suggested a building to be made available only in uber situations when the actual player made more techonoligal progres then the empire evr did,i mean,we already did that with the reforms no?
True, but even at the height of its popularity LS was never more common than LH, so apparently even the great Roman empire preferred LH. Also, it is still debatable whether LS represent a technological advance (or in game terms, an upgrade) over LH, so that rules out the armour upgrade system.
So youre saying that by 1ad-14ad there wasnt even a single guy wearing LS within the legion's unit?
I mean Im pretty sure that Legionares werent just clones...
I am not sure how common LS finds are compared to LH in the time-frame, but the impression is that it was uncommon. Hence one could argue that even if only one legionary model would use LS, it would still be overrepresented. I am guessing (but again, I wouldn't know) that the legionaries of a single cohort would be identically equipped, for reasons of simple logistics.
MarcusAureliusAntoninus
03-29-2008, 18:55
Ok, this thread is going in circles and has become rude (it's been reported).
There will not be LS in EB or EB2, sorry. End of discussion.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.