Re: Weapons vs armor tactics
All plated armor does is protect you against slashes, and thrusts to some degree. What alot of people don't realize is that someone encased in such a suit of armor still recieves significant concussion damage from heavy blows, and if he can be knocked to the ground an enemy can easily find an unarmored piece of flesh to stab, for instance. And in close, congested melee, being knocked down or thrown off balance and falling is one of your greatest concerns.
"urbani, seruate uxores: moechum caluom adducimus. / aurum in Gallia effutuisti, hic sumpsisti mutuum." --Suetonius, Life of Caesar
Re: Weapons vs armor tactics
Did you know, particularly heavily armoured fighters often ended up grappling each other with daggers ? One of the best ways to get at the unavoidable gaps in the defensive gear. There are well-preserved Sassanid reliefs of cataphracts and clibanarii wrestling on horseback for example.
Anyway, Roman infantry were never particularly totally armoured. Sure their "vitals" were pretty well protected, but there was still the throat, the armpits, the limbs (even short swords can sever arms, and spear thrusts functionally cripple them), the groin and lower abdomen depending on the exact type of harness...
"Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."
-Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Re: Weapons vs armor tactics
^^^ thats why romans had big shields and fight in close formations... to acoid parts of that body be exposed.
Re: Weapons vs armor tactics
I'm sorry but there is no real way for lightly armed and armoured troops to deal with heavily armoured on the same terms. If you have to fight against a guy with a substantial mail armour backed with padding or a segmented or plate armour you will normally lose. By the way that was one of the reasons our forefathers wore such armour which was not very comfortable most of the times.
Of course you can hack and slash and stab at unprotected areas or deliver heavy (and therefore slow!) blows against the plate. But be sure you have one, two or three aides at hand who hold the armoured man to hinder him to hack and slash and stab at your (greater) unprotected areas at the same time. Otherwise you can still succeed but chances are with the armoured man. If you have a big shield and a helmet the difference is smaller but still exists.
Interesting discussions about arms and armour are found f.e. on http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/, http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/index.php or http://forums.swordforum.com/.
Last edited by geala; 01-20-2007 at 11:24.
The queen commands and we'll obey
Over the Hills and far away.
(perhaps from an English Traditional, about 1700 AD)
Drum, Kinder, seid lustig und allesamt bereit:
Auf, Ansbach-Dragoner! Auf, Ansbach-Bayreuth!
(later chorus -containing a wrong regimental name for the Bayreuth-Dragoner (DR Nr. 5) - of the "Hohenfriedberger Marsch", reminiscense of a battle in 1745 AD, to the music perhaps of an earlier cuirassier march)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks