Scientists Said WHAT?!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- An armour (spelled armor in the US) is a protective covering that is used to prevent damage from being inflicted to an object, individual, or vehicle by direct contact weapons or projectiles, usually during combat, or from damage caused by a potentially dangerous environment or action (e.g., cycling, construction sites, etc.).
The word "armour" began to appear in the Middle Ages as a derivative of Old French. It is dated from 1297 as a "mail, defensive covering worn in combat". The word originates from the Old French armure, itself derived from the Latin armatura meaning "arms and/or equipment", with the root armare meaning "arms or gear".
Armour has been used throughout recorded history. It has been made from a variety of materials, beginning with rudimentary leather protection and evolving through mail and metal plate into today's modern composites.
Significant factors in the development of armour include the economic and technological necessities of its production. For instance, plate armour first appeared in Medieval Europe when water-powered trip hammers made the formation of plates faster and cheaper.
Well-known armour types in European history include the lorica hamata, lorica squamata, and the lorica segmentata of the Roman legions, the mail hauberk of the early medieval age, and the full steel plate harness worn by later medieval and renaissance knights, and breast and back plates worn by heavy cavalry in several European countries until the first year of World War I (1914-15). The samurai warriors of feudal Japan utilised many types of armour for hundreds of years up to the 19th century.
link to the original article.
www.ranker.com/...
Link to the second article (scientist etc also shared on BBC)
science.slashd...
Link to my Agincourt video
• The Battle Of Agincourt
Follow me on my social networks:
/ themetatron
/ metatron_youtube
www.facebook.c...
/ puremetatron
/ realmetatron
Royalty free music by Epidemic Sound:
intro ES_Knights Templar 1 - Johannes Bornlöf
intro 2 ES_Medieval Adventure 01 - Johannes Bornlöf
outro ES_Knights Templar 2 - Johannes Bornlöf
Check out the facebook page of the photographer who works with me, he has lots of fantastic pictures
www.facebook.c...
and his instagram
www.facebook.c...
Check out my friend Salvo's channel
/ @littlesalvo000
7 ways plate armour was more dangerous than wearing nothing:
1. If you fell into a river
2. If you fell into a lake
3. If you fell into the sea
4. If a flood was coming
5. If you were hanging from a cliff
6. If your opponent was using a giant magnet
7. If your opponent was using a heat ray
Actually, if the heat ray was just a laser, I think I'd rather be in the plate armor than naked. The laser would have to "burn" through the plate before it got to me to harm me. That's better than nothing.
XD
The heat ray would take a bit much of time to melt it away meaning you would need to be brain dead and Stay there while the steel melts
Like frederick the 1st?
Japalloo XD
10 reasons why fighting naked, by yourself, while wielding a bread stick was the most effective strategy for ancient knights to storm castles.
Brought to you by buzfeed
hahaha! you should be a modern " scientist"
After reading you comment months ago, I've since stormed several unmanned castles using this very method, and I can verify that it is indeed extremely effective.
That is the Dark Souls way
france agrees with you
Medieval armor doesn't make you completely impervious to all harm, therefore it's useless. Classic Logic.
If all else fails, Medieval armor causes autism.
@@CrippledNCRVeteran wot
@@CrippledNCRVeteran dont say that, the anti-armourers might hear you
Now wear armor and become armor king
Or rather lack thereof
3 ways wearing a bulletproof vest is more dangerous than wearing nothing:
1. You can still get shot in the leg.
2. It can get stuffy, and you can get sweaty, yuck.
3. You can still die from getting shot by a tank.
...........Makes sense.
what'S next? are we going to tell firefighters to walk into burning buildings shirtless because the thick padded isolating jackets trap too much heat inside?
4. It can still be pierced by a bullet.
Reisys V. Felicity Sumeragi tho, sometime being armed to teeth changes your survival mindset ( for week minded folks) that you run toward the gun shot instead of running away.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lol i wear III+ plate carrier everyday. I conceal it with a "fancy" cloth.
Great video mate, every point superb. I love how you correct misinformation so eloquently, you're a true champion of truth.
Shadiversity You are also great! Your katana videos were awesome. :)
But hey at least they were not talking about dragons.
Just picture what they would of gotten wrong about them.
Shadiversity Hey Shad! This man is taking the motto "confusion to the enemy '" too literally.
ahah Hey Shad! Good to hear from you "my old China!" Grazie very much!
yes. the truth has been spoken. and my 2 favourite youtubers are having a chat. now i can die without regrets
When in construction, wearing a hard hat can
1: get hot
2: make turning head quickly more difficult
3: the orange clashes with your outfit
I know I wont go onto any construction sites wearing a hard hat
Safety harnesses?!!?!! Those chafe my giblets! No thank you. I prefer the freedom of effortlessly jumping from scaffolding to scaffolding like a squirrel!
Update: I got fired.
OSHA wants to know your location.
I'm a ghost and I was killed by this i do not regret it I have to look good for the woman I mean lady yes now I won't be cancelled
@@strawbunyan7671 I was gonna type the osha violation song this works too
🎶Come with me and you'll be in a world of OSHA violations🎶
@@raphmaster23 can't you see,
its just me,
without safety regulations 🎶
They missed a reason. Enemy forces utilizing industrial car magnets, such as were used at the Battle of Agincar, can pick you up, completely immobilizing several units at once.
Perfect example. Agincar is my favorite medieval battle to study.
Aardvark I like your username. Aardvark lovers unite!
Bishop Gilchrist Church lmao
My grandfather would tell me of that war.
He says he was one of the bikers during that war.
Battle of Agincar ??? ahahahaha
"Plate armour didn't offer full protection. There were gaps where the wearer could get stabbed. Therefore it would've been better wearing no armour at all! So you can get stabbed anywhere on the body instead!"
Derp, logic?
not including the fact that it takes a pretty well fuckin trained guy to be accurate and skillful enough to penetrate through the very very small gaps in the armor.
not including the fact that the fuckin dude wearing it is going to be moving and also trying to stab you.
Yep... Of course... So your armpits won't get hurt, who needs inner organs when you have an ugly scar under your armpits XD
Kermeet Frug: exactly. Also, there's a tactical advantage for the wearer. He knows where the weakpoints in his armour are, so he knows which attacks he needs to protect himself from and which attacks and feints he can pretty much ignore and just power through.
A person wearing no armour at all doesn't have that advantage. That person has to be on his guard against EVERY attack, because even small cuts and blows could be deadly (even if they don't kill him outright, the pain, shock and blood loss will most likely affect the victims balance and fighting stance, which will make it even easier for his opponent to finish him off)
And if you have to be on your guard for every kind of attack, because any impact could lead to your death, it also means you're more susceptible to feints, which could also lead to your death since the purpose of a feint is to lure your opponent off balance and deliver a follow up killing blow.
Seven Proxies to cover the gaps knights would just throw away the sword, keep their hands near their body and stab people with their bascinet beak
It's seriously retarded. "Scientific conclusions" my ass.
Late to the party, but this article missed a few obvious ones.
1) Swimming. If you don't have flotation device, swimming in armor is generally bad idea. True, you are reasonably safe from shark attack, but unless you can breathe under water (by device or strange mutation) armor might be more of liability than it's worth. Just ask Frederick Barbarossa.
2) Skydiving. While wearing a helmet is probably a good idea in any activity with a higher than average chance of falling over (possible exception for showering), a full suit of plate armor might be overdoing it, as it won't protect much from rapid deceleration syndrome (aka hitting the ground at high speeds). Still it might be worth it to make "Knightfall" pun.
3) Mountaineering. Plate armor will, as mentioned above be of little protection from falls, and the extra weight is more a liability both during actual rock/ice climbing and simply hiking uphill. At great altitudes where oxygen depravation and exposure are risks, a suit of metal armour would only excacerbate them. Still, the first person to climb Everest in plate armor would have my respect. And their family my condolences.
4) Firefights. Plate armour won't stop a modern high-powered (nor quite a few low-powered) bullet, and might hamper your ability to quickly take cover behind something that will. Also, like gas masks, a full faced helmet will hamper your ability to shoot back with a shoulder arm, and the limitation on situational awareness would be far more problematic than in medieval melee combat. I'd give even odds wearing full plate in an old west gunfight with black powder handguns, as it might stop the a smaller one. In a poker table shootout (alcohol, gambling and firearms don't mix) with derringers I'd positively recommend one, as such weapons have been known to bounce bullets of a sturdy tree.
5. Microwave ovens. If you're suddenly and inexplicably caught in a microwave oven, I don't think a suit of plate armor would help, and there's really no reason to take the microwave oven with you as you die. This entry might be a bit specualtive, but it gave me an excuse to google "Knight in a microwave oven".
I loled. Thanks.
Lel
Joel Müller Very true
Ban Medevial Armor
They hurt us :(((((
Well... Concerning Babarossa there are different theories. One of the more likely is that he actually suffered from a heart attack because he didn't take his time to slowly cool down after marching under the hot sun all day long....
about 1) with the frederik barbarossa example, afaik he didnt drown because of his armour, he got an heart attack because he jumped into very cold water, in a very hot environment, which is why you should wetten yourself before just jumping into the pool or sea, its a real danger having this rapid change in temperatures, our bodies arent build for that
this is perhaps the most polite way to roast someone.
Its like buttsex with lube
This is called passive-aggressive education.
This is not a roast, just politely pointing out the mistakes.
What, standing in a desert in full plate armour? I believe it was "baked" not "roasted" 😂
The armour has weak points which would be a painful death....Ummm sir if you don't have armour your entire body is a weak points which will STILL be a painful death but if you have armour you can reduce those points of weakness *results may vary*
Are you kidding? I can't tell, because getting your stomach sliced open is downright delightful! Just ask the Japanese.
Gabriel Keefe Um, so?
Mongols crushed everyone with heavy armor. By not using it.
@@randysavage1 Correction. Mongols won over a few with heavy armor. By using combat tactics that they had mastered.
@@jonteman9328 also mongols had essentially every soldier being well trained, as opposed to the european and chinese ideals of the time: peasant infantry and a warrior elite class
"In the midst of battle it could be pretty easy to come up behind someone and take them out"
The author must be imagining some sort of hollywood battle where the two sides just mix in complete suicidal chaos.
Are you telling me that in real battles the enemy doesn't have spies within your own ranks, that will attack you from behind randomly? Or that formations wasn't abandoned the moment battle began? How unrealistic!
On a more serious note though. Based on personal experience in smaller scale HEMA battles, or skirmishes with 5-40 people on either side. There is a serious risk of one part of the formation breaking, or for someone to slip through the formation, giving them an easy time picking of people behind the ranks.
This is easily countered by either having a reserve force to deal with that type of issue, or having someone not standing in a crucial position turn around to counter them. This isn't always realistic in smaller scale battles though. As in skirmishes you usually need all your people to do as much as possible most of the time. Unlike in most larger scale battles where most of the army isn't actively engaged simultaneously.
Naw, the knight just gets -2 perception debuff from the plate set so the ninja's stealth ability doesnt get dispelled, and they get to use their backstab for +200% dmg.
You know, like in real life.
As opposed to sneaking up on someone not wearing armor, which is so much more difficult since non-armor comes with rear view mirrors.
next up: being in a trench is more dangerous than standing in the middle of no-man's land
1: there's disease there, u could die
2: the enemy could advance
3: your general could surrender
4: you could run out of ammo
Actually that's exactly what British officials did.
I've heard Lyndibeige say something like
"It doesn't change that much and the troops don't like it"
Citing a book. Now go watch all Lyndibeige's vudeos
@@denisdionigidelgrande7961 He was talking about Officers being with the soldiers and not behind the action at a safety , not officers standing in the middle of no man's land, that defies all logic.
@@parthiancapitalist2733
5: You could get trench foot
6: You get killed by artillery
7: Someone might throw a grenade at you
8: You might get struck by lightning
9: You could get depressed and shoot yourself in the head
10: Goblins might eat you
11: Ze germans are comming
12: Rats eat your feet while you sleep(not joking)
13: Gas
14: Sauron unleashes the nazgûl
15: Are you still reading this?
16: Spontaneous combustion
@@Hubert_Cumberdale_ honestly I think if rather fight a nazgul than deal with either the trenches or no man's land...
It amazes me how redicolus this things "studies" are... why do people think that humans before 1890 are dirty thick cave man..?
I have no idea. Maybe some people just have a sense of thinking they were better than people in the past? For we are in the current year so we much be better than the past right right? Seems to be the logic they are going by i am guessing.
Forest elfranger Must be... but how does some learned person so quickly dismiss things they know nothing about... no human in history used something if it didn't give at least some benefits..
+Jean Luc Burilov Yeah it's like viking armor being toilet paper. Why would they even wear it if it was that bad and was just useless added weight? That and what about the chain mail some vikings had the same as knights.
That and this piece was bad. So you could get stabbed while still wearing armor? By aimming for the gaps and weak spots. How is that a down side, when you know about these can defend attacks against these spots. For wearing no armor just means they can stab you any where. I am starting to think they wrote this early in the morning before they had a cup of coffee or tea. That and i am not surprising their most likely source was the bbc. Given every time i seen a piece from them of something related to history. They get it wrong.
Forest elfranger Well stupid stuff sells I guess so they wrote it stupid? Can't say anything that bad about the BBC, remember one Scottish guy and sir Attinburg (cant spell that) who I thought were great... but yes, toilet paper.
Jean Luc Burilov cause aliens taught humans how to do everything
Reasons wearing a seat belt is dangerous:
1. You can still die if the accident is bad enough.
2. That annoying thing where it won't pull any farther and you have to let it back a bit first.
3. Covers part of your chest, making you hotter in the summer.
I have had them clamp down on me making it harder steer the car wile an idiot was coming over on me with out looking or a blinker.
My grandpa got t-boned by a semi and sense he wasn’t wearing his seatbelt he flew into the passenger seat and lived had to have a lot of plastic surgery but he’s alive
bet the used the old Conan movies as study material
Ahhahaha this one really made me laugh xD
Also, world of warcraft.
Cat gut Hahahahaha! :"D Now that's a Good one! :"D haha
also darksouls
When Metatron said he "Comes as a friend" i thought about godfather xD
Well, both Meta And the Corleones are Sicillian :)
We need to find a Turk to his Corleone.
year, in the "I'm your friend, so I will not shoot you and only break your knees." kind of way;)
"When all you have is a hammer, all your problems look like...kneecaps?" :-)
Blood does not lie
"Easy to sneak up behind them in the heat of battle..." so did this guy just assume ninja master gets past the infantry in formation and sneaks between them to kill the guy in the front or....?
Caden Dennis a ninja wouldn't need to sneak behind if he has his time-space cutting ninjato, it is like a katana but ninjyer. Sciencie fact bro.
Just a update on this discussion, the guy in the article was predicting GoT long night Aria
@@nicovelardita8619 see you are terribly wrong a ninja would use its rasenshuriken to kill the enemy
Look up Naruto a historical accurate representation of ninja
Just to add small actual fact but don't mind me, ninja is not a professional assassin but a professional espionage agent. Please with all due respect continue the party.
Don't need. Everybody knows from films that armors like butter and anything can go through them...
The 50kg of armor part got me so hard. I can't breath right now.
Lift your visor then :p
Phrasing, mate XD
T....Throw a pommel on it.
Should probably take your armor off.
Sir Big Yes, the double take to the camera, "Seriously?!?"
You were raised very well. In a time and place where manners are somewhat of an anomaly, you're a much needed breath of fresh air. Even when confronted with stupidity or ridicule you still maintain an immaculate sangfroid and retain your corrigibility. I wish more people were like you.
Disagree, all this pointless mannerism does nothing other than wasting your viewer's time and thus ends up being disrespectful anyway.
***** I don't see it that way.... At all.... But okay
This is actually one of his more sober debunkings.
General: "There is the enemy approaching just beyond those brambles, if we attack now..."
Sergeant: "Brambles! owch we aren't going!"
General: "What? Even to the lightly armored troops brambles are nothing."
Sergeant: "Well, I was reading this scientific article...."
You mean lieutenant not Sergeant. The Sergeant has already lit the brambles and is shooting through them. LOL
Lol this bloke thinks that because you can sometimes get stabbed through armour then you're safer not wearing it because you can't get stabbed somehow? Lol destroy him Metatron
*his hand starts reaching the pommel...
Done ;)
Metatron ahahahaha end him rightly mate
'' if you don't have armor you can be stabbed everywhere '' lololol
the most painful way to die is being stabbed in the crotch , imagine that , if you're a man , you would be literally begging someone to kill you , however this is not possible if you're wearing armor
Unless you run away because your faster. Mongols......beat them down
@@randysavage1
It's your fetish, right?
Catman 50 "X" Doubt
@@thaneofwhiterun3562 How would they stab you in the first place?
"You couldn't run away from your opponent for very long...."
Wait, I'm not familiar with this battle tactic. Could someone explain?
The writer is clearly a coward, running away in battle hahahahaha. If you do that your side would execute you there after
@@velluccisamuel Saw me on the Discord and wanted to see if you can also find me on TH-cam I take it?
That whole myth of Plate Armor weighing an absolute fuckton to the point of near-uselessness, yet another thing we can shake our fist at and yell *DAMN YOU VICTORIAN ERA!!*
Lets keep this list going shall we? What else did the Victorian Era ruin for everyone? Especially in terms of history.
DragonMastrNova sex
They ruined sex
Post mortem photographies
+Drewster Was it the Victorian Era that Established the whole stereotype about Men being the gender that wanted to fuck all the time, or was that something from Earlier? Because I do know Medieval times had the notion of Females having that particular stereotype, and it would make a lot of sense if it was the Victorian Era that popularized the notion.
They ruined the phrase "stay in the kitchen" because back then it meant "tend to the hearth, take this spear and shove it up any animal's arse if it tries to eat our children"
They ruined martial arts because most Brits in that time look down on anything that involved kicking, saying it's "ungentlemanly" and just went for boxing instead
They ruined the joys of colour by forcing everyone to wear the same three or four colours until it was finally time to say "fuck all these suits and ties, my neck and dick can't breathe in them"
I know two or all of these are probably wrong, but I'm just glad I wasn't born in that age
+DragonMastrNova What were unarmed western martial arts during the Victorian era? Predominantly boxing and wrestling? Those are still highly effective. In real life high kicks are not that great. They are mostly used in 'sport' martial arts styles. In a one-on-one fight between a martial artist trained in a "kicky" martial art and a wrestler, I'd put my money on the wrestler. Once you bring weapons into the mix, kicks will quickly earn you the name "stumpy".
Once when sparring with a "kicky" martial artist, my opponent led with a powerful roundhouse kick. I slid in quickly, took the kick from his knee/shin (reduces the force), and gave him a right-cross to the face. I came out a lot better than he did, but apparently I "broke the rules".
TL;DR, boxing and wrestling are very effective for unarmed martial arts training, and the skills translate easily to armed martial arts. Kicks? Not so much.
The biggest disadvantage of steel plate armor was that if you pissed yourself you could rust to death.
Not true, steel doesn't rust. Iron rusts, not steel.
Jesse The Writer Guy steel is refined iron
+Jesse The Writer Guy - Steel is iron combined with other elements causing it to chemically change into steel and steel does not have the property of rusting.
steel is iron and varying percentages of carbon and what rusts is the iron content
I guess I was talking about stainless steel. Stainless steel contains chromium which prevents it from rusting.
Any article called "Seven ways..." just means they want you to click seven times on their click-bait site.
lol, so arrows cant pierce straight through wood(shields) but they can pierce through steel? dunno about that
Linkus exactly lol. I honestly think it's more a question of people not knowing how bows work as opposed to people not knowing how armor works. later crossbows could do it yes, having at least double the draw weight of a war bow, but I considder a crossbow to be more a primitive gun than an advanced bow, as they didn't work like bows at all.
xhuggels an arrow would easily pierce through wood that is about 2-3 cm thick
Through steel? Not so much
BoS Knight pierce, maybe, go clean through and damaging the guy behind it, we'll if it did that people wouldn't bother with shields
xhuggels that's why the were usually reinforced with linen
A plain wooden shield holds up to severely less punishment
BoS Knight okay I see where the confusion comes from. I should have clarified that. figured people would know what I meant.
"7 reasons you should level dex instead of strength" INTO THE TRASH IT GOES, LEGENDS NEVER DIE
wt ring u got bithc
havel's ring, ring of favor and protection:
health, stamina, endurance. VERYTHIN
YOU NEED
DEX IS FOR CASULS!
This is the party I wanna be a part of
Mike Esparza F I R E T H E B A S S C A N N O N
"This is all just chit-chat" - that is a perfect summary of misinformation about history. Keep up the good work Metatron! Love your videos. As a person with academic qualifications in ancient, medieval and modern history I am always frustrated when inaccurate nonsense is spread about history. It is good to have well-informed people like Metatron spreading the truth to the masses!
Honestly, I use full plate in tournament in a reenactment group that uses steel weaponry, and my helm is period style strapped. A full strength hit from anything short of an unrealistically heavy Warhammer I can barely FEEL even with a good shot to the head. From what I've learned in my studies period helmets were suspension helms similar in nature to both modern hard hats and modern soldier helmets.
You could easily kill a knight in armour! If he was sleeping, that it. Try doing your fancy moves on someone actually fighting you back and you will find a different reality altogether.
Actually you couldn't easilly kill a knight in plate armor even if he were sleeping, knock him out or chain him maybe but not kill. As Metatron mentioned, knights trained in combat all their lives. As soon as you would hit a sleeping knight, he would wake up, turns around if you hit him from behind and thrusts his sword or dagger through your stomach or punch you in the face which would disorientate you which gives him a chance to call for help and you would have to face 10 more knights and later maybe another 20 or so.......yeaaaa your chances are great on that :D. Knights weren't stupid (at least most of them weren't), if you managed to jump on a knight and knight noticed you had upper hand, they would call for help and used something to make as much noice as possible....forget the glorious pictures of hollywood films showing knight in a shiny armor facing their opponent mano e mano, if their duty was to guard something, they would call for help as soon as they were attacked.....and they were never left alone to guard something.
To top it off, you wouldn't really find a knight on duty sleeping that often, most of them had good long sleep before they went to battle or guard duty and during guard duties, there was allways a shift change which was more regular than shift changes are today.
You know you're kinda saying that it is easy to take out a sleeping spetsnaz or Navy seal soldier, knights were highly trained fighters with better gear and armor than regular soldiers, their failures had more to do with facing more talented oponent, bad luck and fatique than lack of skill to handle oponent trying to jump on them while they are sleeping.
omfg, you know that knights werent demigods and their armors werent airtight right? a single little knife could end the life of a sleeping knight with ease. Also, many swords and daggers were able to penetrate knights armour, like it or not, not only armours were improved during history but arms as well...
Hmm....I would want to see dagger being able to penetrate iron... and yes certain types of armors were weak but unlike in movies or video games, they weren't even close to same clumsy handywork..
Also unlike video games and movies let you understand, knights didn't wear just mail or plate armor, they also had thick leather armor and covered their necks with thick padding which protected against stabbing but not so well against sliceing
You also totally ignore the fact that knights were well trained in combat just as soldiers of that time were and today are well trained and it was easier said than done to kill a night.
Knights knew the weakspots of their armors, so if one of them started sleeping, well they of course covered the weak spots. so unless you had knife that could cut through diamond like hot knife through butter, chances that you managed to stab sleeping knight to death were small.
Oh and by the way, did you know that the protective gear which police uses today to protect themselves against stabbing and shrapnells is pretty much same as during medieval and reneisance times? Bullet proof vests only add that protection and give bullet resistance.
Also do you think Knights would spend sum equivelant to 900 000$ on suit of armor that would still make them easy targets for stabbing? After all stabbing was.
Yes you could subdue a sleeping knight, yes you could chain them and make them immobile and yes, you could have knocked them out, but you couldn't kill them with one single blow.....that is just pure BS made by movies and video games.
It is true that certain armor was better against stabbing while not so effective against sliceing, some armor was affective against sliceing and not so effective against stabbing and some armor provided good protection against all, but no matter what armor you wore, they provided you protection and didn't make you invincible, skill played HUGE part when you confronted a knight, because a knight knew all the weakspots of his armor, therefore he also knew you most likely try to take advantage of those weakspots and therefore he made sure not to expose those spots (and yes, armor were built so that you could cover the weakspots by simply going into certain position.)
ohh my fucking god...
"Yes you could subdue a sleeping knight, yes you could chain them and make them immobile and yes, you could have knocked them out, but you couldn't kill them with one single blow.....that is just pure BS made by movies and video games."
for fuck sake! stabbing someone through his eyes with a nice long knife is very possible while he is sleeping and no man would survive that one single blow. dont be such a fanboi to ignore simple things. i dont even know where you get that bullshit from. nobody would try to kill them through their armour. lol. sure its the byproduct of hollywood or videogames :D :D :D ANYBODY can be killed while sleeping :)
also stiletto, rondel and heavy dagger along with some others were fairly good in penetrating armors, each in their own times respectively of course...
I see you are one of those on the other side of the horse. one grows up on hollywood while you dismiss everything that's coming from hollywood. Of course the truth is again somewhere halfway :D
Stabbing through eye holes? Nope, the eye holes were made so that you couldn't stab anyone trhough them, eithere they were too small for blades to fit through our there was double layer protection which would mean your blade would get stuck.....
You think it would have been easy but it wasn't because just like you would think of ways to kill....armor smiths would think ways to protect
New fan, thanks for the content.
One point people just don’t seem to consider the fact that people in armor in battle would generally have experience in their equipment. The more experienced we are with any tools the more effective we are at using said tools.. wear armor and train with medieval weapons for a year and you’d be able to move in that armor in ways someone with no experience can understand.
As for “just” hitting the weak points of the plate.. unless you’ve trained with the weapons you intended to use you would have challenges you haven’t learned to overcome yet.
I would definitely love to hear your opinion on Cold Steel.
Also, i would like to know your opinion on how medieval and/or ancient psychology worked. Yes, it is very speculative, but i guess they really thought about things in a very different way. In particular, i'd like to hear about how they thought of freedom, life and death, and duty. Kind of what their philosophy was, how men saw themselves -yeah, that gives ground to quite a few possible different videos.
Is it possible that you make videos on these subjects in the future? Thanks!
Estupitastico i like this
Estupitastico I would also like to hear Metatron's opinion about Cold Steel. Didn't ever hear about it at all, so I think it will be fun seeing an angry Italian talking about it.
Im gonna have a guess and say the tl;dr would be "No."
I personally like Cold Steel. I have been using a Cold Steel SRK as a utility knife on my outdoors treks for decades, and it's still in great condition. I also just bought their Gladius, which I like. Of course, I have never handled a real Gladius, so I have nothing to compare it with. But since I do not have the budget to get a real Gladius, the Cold Steel version will have to do for me.
I have a large crowbar. It has about the same amount of edge, distal taper, and balance of a Cold Steel sword. :)
5 Reasons why watching Metatron's videos is more dangerous than you think:
1: You might get educated.
2: You might get entertained.
3: You might never be able to eat pineapple pizza ever again.
4: You might get addicted to pasta.
5: You might grow your hair long, grow a beard, scream "MAMMA MIA" all the time and randomly speak japanese without being able to control it while you're wearing a Lorica Segmentate, throwing a Pilum an swinging around your Gladius, while shooting with your Yumi and swinging your Nodachi while telling Matpat that he wrote "Hay" in Japanese and not "Armour" XD
Armor actually protected you from the heat and sunlight. That scientist is completely full of it. They have done numerous tests on Plate armor, and it was very resilient to arrows, swords, blunt weapons and spears.
i remember in elementary school. maybe grade 3 or 4. i was taught that a longsword weighed as much as a bike.
LOOOL
Well I guess it depends heavily on the type of bike and long sword in question, there is probably at least a long sword that weighs the same as a bike.
Goddess Miranda.Cosgrove I think the longsword the teach was referring to was made of concrete
Well .. I think we are getting there. Those fancy new carbon bikes are already ridicilously light compared to oldfashioned steel bikes. The most extreme example I have found is a complete bike weighing only 4.4 kg. Still heavier than a two handed sword, but not by a huge amount.
this was canada though
Scientists should git gud
dyrak55d And claiming to be a scientist while this blatant disregard for proper research using the scientific method should be punishable by heavy fines on the scale media companies want for "copyright infringements" and a public appology for appropriating a title of authority and spreading desinformation.
I think there is a little misunderstanding. Who wrote that article has little to do with science and the experiment that those scientists made is correct, while being wrong. They used the wrong type of armor which, in turn, made their research wrong. If they would have used the right one the results would have been different.
Fat roll FTW!!
I just seen an article the other day where one of our top researches made the claim that less than 1% of all science papers follow the scientific method we live in a world of JUNK science.
Well let's be honest, I can claim I got PhD in a certain field while in reality I live in a Mcdonald's trash dumpster and shitpost online about how my scientific research shows water is worse than cyanide and people would still believe me.
I very much doubt it was real scientists( no sources cited), even a third grader would have a basic knowledge that if you place an object B between a target A and a certain amount of kinetic energy, some of it could be absorbed, some of it could be used up to break the integrity of Object B, some of it could be deflected, and many more crap could happen. Everyone doing anything dangerous, would definitely wear protection. Be it a lab coat in a chemistry lab, or a helmet in construction, any protection is always better than the bare skin. Does it take a genius to figure out, you might want to place an armour between yourself and a medieval weapon?
Oh God. I want to hear your opinion on Cold Steel so bad it hurts.
whats ''cold steel''
@@rianmacdonald9454 lol i gotta be honest I don't even remember what this video is about. Cold Steel is a pretty good knife company with what I would describe as "mall weapon store" advertising and management. The (former? I think it might have been sold) owner Lynn Thompson is a pudgy old man who thinks he's a martial arts master and quick draw gunslinger. Its all pretty funny/embarrassing.
The thing is that to use a mace or a warhammer sufficiently, you need to be in armor yourself, because a knight with a sword would have a massive reach advantage and would kill you.
Gerhard Hader or just have a shield?
Not necessarily, a Knight with the vizard down has a lot of blind spots, you just have to know how to exploit them, even when you could say that vision is fine with an helmet, most of them reduce significantly parts of your field of view, it feels like a full vision but actually that's your brain compensating the blind spots, if don't me believe google about the two blind spots that we naturally have and how we don't perceive them because our brain fools us, in a combat, an small blind spot could mean the tip of a sword or mace hitting you from a false angle, in a place you thought was safe.
Also the momentum, maces and hammers have more momentum.
If you have a pollaxe you'll have greater reach than a sword.
To throw my opinions and probably knowledge in:
No, not all blunt weapons were two handed, a lot of warhammers and maces actually are one handed weapons and a shield would be a great addition, especially if the wielder lacks other armour.
Yes, the visor limits field of view, but on the other hand, vs one handed weapons the armored guy has a reach advantage if he eihter uses a sword or a two handed weapon (which isn't exactly unlikely) and on the other hand, while having limited vision you still have better protection, not every hit will be fatal or staggering.
At last: The Pollaxe is great for it's reach, giving the unarmoured guy either a reach advantage or at least negating that disadvantage. Forcing the combattant to go without a shield might prove as a huge disadvantage then because he only has the protection that is ability to parry with the weapon give him instead of the huge protection that a shield is able to offer.
I don't think that knowing how to exploit weaknesses of armour is the best argument. Because someone in armour could just hapen to know how to compensate for them and then we're back at the beginning.
if armour was so useless as THEY say, why would they wear it anyway, their arguments are flawed
They didnt once Ghangis Khan exposed how stupid it was by taking over half world.
@@randysavage1 If you think the Mongols are why armor stopped being used you are WRONG.
It stopped being used because firearms became prevalent
@@someguy8055
And it was still useful for quite a while after firearms became main battlefield weapons. 16th and 17th century breastplates could stop a musketball.
@@randysavage1 The mongols won because all their men were trained in different tactics and a superior grasp of during-battle command. Communication was excellent in Mongol forces, using flags to coordinate hit-and-run tactics. Europeans only had minimal communication during battle, the "order of battle" being set in advance. At the battle of Legnica for instance, the couple of knights that were present (the majority of the force being at Mohi to prepare for the next battle) managed to destroy the flank of a mongolian unit of lancers. They only repelled the Europeans thanks to their horse archers putting pressure on the back. The infantry was made of Bavarian miners and conscripts from Poland for the main part, with some professional Silesian troops. The Battle of Mohi also saw contact action favoring the Europeans. Skirmishing and hit-and-run tactics with troops trained to do it gave victory to the Mongols. Armour was not at fault at all.
@UCStbqygOZqgNRCzwBE1zjWg You're a moron lmao
7:10 "Jim, I think wearing two layers of plate is a bit overkill."
You would collapse after walking a mile.
"Mind your own business, McCoy! If Data's grandparents could do it, so can I!"
There is sno kill like overkill!
It sounds like a knight's armor weighed less than the gear worn by modern day soldiers.
The armour I wore was pretty heavy. And very hot in the desert. Would not want to experience that again. And like the guy above me said, it's all on the shoulders and back.
Not what I would call comfortable, but would much prefer to be wearing while in combat than not.
Yes it was way lighter.they carried yes
Plate armor didn't have to try and stop bullets
Yep, and the weight is dispersed better. Modern soldiers also need to carry rifles, which weigh slightly more than swords on their own, and ammo, which in total probably weighs more than carrying a polearm.
It did. And it was evenly distributed across the body and also partially carried by the hips. As a machine gunner I was sporting over 150 lbs of shit, the majority of which was carried by my back and shoulders. ILBE pack and/or daypack (you could attach the daypack via straps to the bigger pack), plate carrier with full SAPI plates, M240B with over 600 rds in boxes, IFAK, one spare barrel and a detached bipod, cleaning gear, food, water bottles (camelpaks are fucking stupid because they're hard to deal with due to all the shit already on your back and they spring leaks like crazy,) NVG's in pack with mounting rail on kevlar adding weight onto the neck, the list goes on. All this shit is virtually necessary to fight a modern war as a gunner. And you have to carry this shit FAR. I'm talking forced marches upwards of 20 miles sometimes. If you're going to be a grunt, you better be strong. All this weight is why I have terrible posture to this day.
Knightly armor was much lighter and easier to carry.
I remember seeing a reenactor in full plate doing full acrobatics, i.e. rolls, vaulting a horse and even a summersault. I would think someone trained since childhood like a real knight could easily duplicate such.
7 Ways Eating Pasta Was More Dangerous Than Just Eating Nothing
When I heard the begining I died of laugh!
Бели Гардиста I hate when I die of laugh as well
I am very sorry but I cannot reply because I am dead.
I know right, it's terrible!
How'd he die?........ He died of *dramatic pause* the laugh.. "my god"
Buuuuuuuuut this is not my first time to die of laugh so there is a chance that I will get out alive.(But chances re very very small)
For a well deigned backpack, most of the weight ends up on your hips. The same weight in armor or in a backpack should have about the same effect. 30 pounds doesn't make a huge impact on the performance of a fit person in moving about. 30 pounds of armor, however can make a huge impact on what happens when someone tries to kill the person in armor.
but if you are naked they are no gaps or slits to stab you through
I'm going to assume this was a joke. That's pretty funny, you should be in standup.
Taps head
"If you have problems breathing in 15th century armor... You open the visor and you BREATHE!" Caught me off guard with that one Metatron LMFAO!!!!!
Officially my favorite quote from this video. “If you’re don’t wear armor you can get stabbed everywhere.”
It's easy to take out a knight in full armor.
with a 9mm pistol.
fgregerfeaxcwfeffece actually, plate armor of late 15th century easily deflects 9mm and 45 caliber
fgregerfeaxcwfeffece have to get the old 50 cal out lol
Hit him with a lorry.
might call my wife armour or not there dead 😂😂😂😂
Gate: Thus the JSDF Fought There would like to have a word with you, good sir.
I want to see a fully armoured HEMA practitioner go up against these LARPers who think it's easy to defeat plate. Both sides should put their money where their mouths are.
lancer D Well then the HEMA practitioner would be rich
Bow n arrow vs armor. History shows bow n arrow wins.
Daddy Warbucks Armor wouldn’t be worn if it provided no protection, also there’s specifically anti missile armor such as the hounskull
17:08 Can you imagine the feeling of satisfaction a person would have if they hit a knight in the face with an arrow while he's lifting his visor?
Yeah, i think Raf meant to say "when their visor was raised", not "while they were raising their visor". He makes that kind of mistake sometimes.
@@Likexner Either way the point remains, it would be an incredibly satisfying shot to land (I would imagine).
It's like the person who wrote that article is saying that it's safer not to wear a bullet proof vest going into a gunfight because you might get shot in the head. While that is certainly true you would still have a huge advantage over someone not wearing a bullet proof jacket.
Ugh bullet resistant not bullet proof
And also a vest not a jacket
The Victorians really were the worst Historians.
Like, how stupid do they think people were in the 10th to 14th century? "Oh hey just going to put on this thing that makes everything worse!"
It also tickles me that they talk about mobility problems in chainmail when modern body armour actually weighs as much.
And less areas of defense
Random User yeah because you are most likely to be shot in the chest than anywhere else and it would weigh you down too much. Wearing full body armor in a modern scenario that actually protects you would weigh way too much for actual movement
Catching up on videos, I'm well behind the other comments. I appreciate your approach to history and careful scrutiny. We need more historians like you and Matt. You've mentioned Marines before, so I thought you might like to know. After watching this, I sat down and looked up or weighed everything I carried/wore in Afghanistan. Conservatively (the minimum), I carried greater than 60 lbs of gear on a daily basis. I was fortunate, as this was less than most others (privilege of rank), and I was still capable of short sprints, long patrols, jumping over canals, and generally full movement. If medieval combat armor was as light as I'm starting to understand it was, I have no doubt that knights would be extremely agile if they trained for it. I wish our armor was fitted.
maybe all the 7 ways are drowning in 7 diferenet sort of bodies of water,
being naked usualy increase the chances of survival in this sort of places
I am stil waiting on study- ''Seven ways you can take out tank with a knife''
Unless the water is near freezing temps. Then wearing stuff actually helps because the clothing keeps a later of warm water next to the body and thus helps against cooling out.
About the tank:
1. open the tank and stab the driver
2. plug the barrel with the knife. when it shoots, it explodes.
3. cut the treads
4. lay the knife in front of the tank, when it drives over it, it breaks
5. pretend you got stabbed, wait for the tank crew to help you, stab them all
6. draw the knife and hold the tank hostage.
7. cut the rope on a trebuchet to launch a 90kg projectile over 300 meters into the tank
@@HappyBeezerStudios 😂😂
@@HappyBeezerStudios
8. Stand in front of the tank with the knife in a fighting position, and stab the crew while they're laughing at you.
A massive advantage an armoured knight would've had was the fact that against someone unprotected he could've been all the time on the offensive, expecially if not against a hammer or a mainly thrust weapon. Absorbing a hit with the armour and stabbing the poor fool while he couldn't defend himself, almost never worying about parrying a slash but just trading hits, something an unprotected folk couldn't do, forcing him to parry and block and preventing him to strike.
personally i would like to see metatron and shadiversity as advisors for the next Witcher series, and all series/films that deal with knights and medieval themes.
I assure you, I do indeed want to listen to your opinion on Cold Steel and their baseball champ sword demonstrations. I would like to listen to that at great length.
You have my bow.
And my axe!
also at the battle of agincourt is the surprisingly large numberof injury and death to the face meaning to say the french knights lifted their visor and got shot
But sir sir, what if we need to feed wholesome Macdonalds to war weary French knights dying of lack of Coke Cola ?
Nikita Onassis hahahahahahah
Ze grass waz muddy, zat's why we lost.
I don't know about the mounted knights but the men at arms didn't dare to lift their visors.
Recent *GOOD* research on Agincourt shows that the knights with full lower leg armour did get stuck faster and more solidly than the archers wearing normal foot wear due to suction from the thick mud. But most likely this was pre-planned by Edward from his own experience as a knight. This just shows what happens when you've got someone who understands the weapon systems of his area, more than "armour bad".
Maybe Andre got his units mixed up, he read 50 Kgs by mistake, but it was actually 50 lbs. 🤣
That article gave me cancer.
There there *taps on back*
GlitterSpark This article killed my papa!...😢Rest in piece Pappy!
"7 reasons why cancer is actually good for you"
DeputyChuck 1. You could be Deadpool
2. The End
Get well soon
There are actually quite a few advantages to fighting naked.
1.) It confuses the enemy
2.) You can run faster
3.) Your abs may scare the plump ones off
4.) The gay ones will be too distracted by your sexiness (assuming your sexy)
5.) They might just think your crazy and or stupid and ignore you
6.) It makes you act more carefully and stay out of arrow fire
7.) A peasant could do this for free, knights armor costs as much as a car
"A lovely individual". Such diplomacy. You are a lovely individual!
What logic is this guy running on? If it doesn't 100% protect you, it's useless?
It's not a T-Shirt. I'm still in my pajamas
Sorry couldn't see well in the dark ;)
When you say "always advantageous" I hear Matt Easton somewhere screaming "CONTEXT!"
I think Matt Easton, if you pressed him a little, would say "It's very hard to imagine contexts that involve high likelihood of imminent medieval combat where it would not be miles better to be wearing full plate harness compared to a t-shirt and shorts. "
When I saw the title I first thought it was yet another gender video. Thank God I was wrong.
same here mate
+Whiteknight Ofhope Don't get me wrong, I think Metatron is a great chap, and he makes perfectly reasonable points in both of his videos.
The issue I have is the comment section. Anytime someone even says the word "gender" it seems to attract all the neckbeards and feminazis of the Internet.
Jen'Ari-Asha yeah mention gender or race creates a decent chance of some autistic argument over the internet.
Yeah, this channel is a great escape from all that bullshit, just a nice normal channel that has healthy affixations.
Jen'Ari-Asha, dellboid
I totally agree with you, this channel is my "safe space" from those pointless arguments about gender, politics, and or race
Beginning part made me mentally die....
Dude i'm just at the chapter in the manga where your thumbnail is from!
robotzombienazy berserk
robotzombienazy ill spoil everything since that chapter. serpico gets cut in half by guts going berserk and farnese head was chopped of by an apostle. Griffith stabed caska then killed her in front of guts. and guts was left to suffer once again.
But then skeleton knight comes to save the day, right?
Does he also loose another eye?
Unless the other side had huge magnets it was a huge plus to choose to be clothed in metal because it's much harder to cut than flesh ..its kinda common sense.
If plate armor was such a liability, nobles of the time wouldn't have spent so much money on it. "Hey my suit of steel plate has a few weak points in areas that are difficult to hit anyway. So I'm just gonna wear a tunic that way I have no protection at all against sword cuts instead of being all but immune to them."
Metatron is like the teacher you've always wanted in school 😂
If the task was to swim through a river, i'd rather wear nothing than full plate armour.
It is really weird that the bbc article was published exactly the same day as the digital version of the paper, usually journalist don't look at peer reviewed papers much less the same day they are published. About the scientific study:
-The amours tested had a weight between 30 and 40 kg included the padded clothing. "The mass of the armour (including arming doublet-a padded garment to which parts of the armour are attached with protective mail gussets) averaged 35 ± 5 kg"
-Nothing is said about the physical condition or how familiar were the test subjects with wearing an amour. Most probably they had no prior experience.
-They don't claim the french lost just because their armour made them exhausted. They say french soldiers were tired because armours were heavy, the ground was muddy, due to recent ploughing, rain and cavalry charges, and also "resulting from several days of marching" and this contributed to their lost. Plus the source they used to claim "Exhaustion of the French knights is cited as a contributing factor to their demise" is a novel (from a historian) not a peer reviewed paper.
If you are interested on the paper is published online: rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/279/1729/640
Nice, wanted to see that. I was wondering if the writer here was taking a study out of context, misunderstanding a study, or the study was bork. Seems like maybe all of the above.
Tell us about Cold steel Metatron XD
So the title literally means this:
Soldier: *wears armor*
Also soldier: *chuckles* "I'm in danger."
uh oh meme reference funny
I'm wearing a red t shirt and the ending quite startled me lol
Same here, and I own only one and hardly use it lol
Yeah, I hardly wear this red top and was absent mindedly buzzing around whilst listening and got quite the surprise.
I'm wearing red shorts
You re such a gentleman. Classy and smart
Very impressed with your delivery!!! You have my dream job!!!
I retarded from the infantry... I mean retired. Yes, there have been a lot of times when technology has advanced faster than tactics. And, yes it has led to lots of crunchies getting killed. However, that being said, war fighters in any era, in any climatic conditions, with any level of technology, will use that which works and drop that which does not. If they chose to wear armor it was because it worked, and they chose to stop wearing it when it no longer worked. So simple even an infantryman can figure it out.
poor bloody infantry
Sorriso Storto thank u for ur service.
I'm rather surprised it's not a buzzfeed article
''Based on my larp experience I could take down a fully equipped and trained knight, while not wearing any armor myself''
Bruh It will only take 1 light punch to your face with dem gauntlets and you'll be sent straight to St. Peter for an exclusive interview at the gates of Heaven
I'm still catching up with your videos, but so far this is one of my favorites. "If you have problems breathing in 15ᵗʰ Century armor, you open the visor and you breathe!"
I would love to know more historical you tubers.. as I really love history.
NorthObsidianG look for your local Society For Creative Anachronism. There are Many Anachronistic fighters, but it's a great place for finding History geeks and people who are genuinely working to recreate all kinds of arts and sciences. Bull Sessions welcome. Accuracy is variable!
That is straight up maidenless behavior
"If you don't have armor you can be stabbed everywhere."
Let's be honest, you only need to get 50% to pass your exams and get a degree in anything. So just because someone has a degree doesn't mean they're actually a subject matter expert and know what they are talking about.
I'm in the final year of a computing degree, and I'm still amazed at the number of people on my course who don't know how to code:/
Yes, it is possible to pass a degree and be pretty useless in that subject area. Some people just muddle through, and depending on the university, some are more lax than others.
Also some universities focus heavily on theory and not on practical application of that theory. This is a big problem in engineering, computing, woodwork etc. My step dad is an engineer and the amount of times a degree graduate came in to his work with a first who didn't have a clue because they had only studied the theory and not learned how to work with the materials or machines in a practical way.
This is exactly why I'm making every effort to code and make as many products as I can while at university. I can get advice from my lecturers and I can take full advantage of the environment while still learning how to apply what I'm learning in class:D I'd recommend it to any degree student studying a practical subject - make stuff, your furture employers/peers will thank you:D
50%?!? Here 60% is a failing grade. er... well, it used to be before 'no child left behind'. Now every fucktard that should have been ground into dog food by the age of 10 gets to pass.
+TacDyne at my university 45% is a pass grade (third class honors) and 71% is a first class honors
+Stettafire, There was a time I'd have been horrified at those percentages, but after seeing a classroom at EVIT, a local vocational school I was being recruited to tutor at some years back, and getting to grade some papers there nothing shocks me anymore. If the students put anything at all as answers the instructors were told to give them credit.
I don't know how it is in other countries, but here in the USA, colleges will only give credit for a degree at a C-, which an instructor will usually set at 70%. Perhaps our courses our less demanding, maybe things are different at the top schools, such as Ivy leagues. But in my experience, 70% is usually required to pass a class and receive credit for it.
Excellent , your analysis is spot on ,
The equivalent of you or me ,
Facing a SAS trained person .
Put him in armour , and , well , there you go 👍
So basically here's the moral: don't believe the scientists know what they're talking about just because they're scientists. This is, like, the lesson humanity learned around the fourth century BC.
And was forgotten by way to many people after the invention of the internet.
One thing that confused me is saying that wearing mail is fatal in the desert. If so, then why was mail predomenantly used in the middle east in medieval and renaissance times ?(btw. the desert is only hot in the summer. If you went to let's say Fayum in egypt in November, it'll be very windy and mildly cold but NOT hot.)
He cracks me up so much “if you have problems breathing is 15th century armor you open the visor and breath”
Would full plate armour be useless in a world of magic with weapons able to easily pass through non-enchanted metal? Do note that magic weapon so powerful are rare.
Depends on the magic.
Vanguard Productions I mostly mean about the weapons, magic in battle is mostly a magical standstill between mages, very rarely does it break and great magic is unleashed on a battlefield.
What I ask is: would you buy normal armour if there is a miniscule chance that you might face someone with a weapon able to cleave right through it. (Anduril for example) Enchanted items for war, apart from spells of endurance for weapons and armour are not cheap, only medium to high end nobles can buy them.
I think normal armour would still be pretty common. There is more than enough commonfolk shooting with stones, arrow, bolts at you or try to stab, slash or concuss you with mundane weapons. If you can't afford magical armour, you still need protection from the vast majority of peole trying to kill you.
People would be very upset about guys striking right through armour if it were nothing though. Armor would only start to fade out if quite a lot of people (probably the whole ranks of "elite Soldiers" if not even more) used armour bypassing weapons.
Axel Tenveils
In a world with magic people would still need to defend against normal weapons. I believe the quality of armor depends on who is buying it. You do not see mass produced armor until there are empires with great resources trying to equip large amounts of troops.
In feudal societies the lord might only bother to equip his personal servants and followers; the majority of the warriors are peasants who bring who equip themselves. Note that the roman empire had factories turning out standardized weapons and armor.
As for how magick affects armor I expect you would see an arms race; enchanted weapons lead to enchanted armor with advancements over time giving the advantage to one or the other depending on which had the last scientific breakthrough.
If magick is too expensive for the average soldier to afford but armor is not- or is not too expensive for the government to equip their soldiers with- then the warriors on the battlefield will wear it (assuming its not too heavy or otherwise problematic. In which case people will take it off).
In the scenario you described I expect an impenetrable suit of armor would be a huge status symbol affordable only for the grotesquely wealthy.
Now if mages were not locked in a stalemate and frequently let lose on the battlefield - and caused high casualties (meaning more of a threat than the enemy soldiers)
then armor would adapt to protect against that or be discarded as it would not enhance survival.
Wow, whatever I said sounded confusing. I would look at the use of firearms in late medieval period. Buy a book on it and study some tactics but also look at the economics. Basically, if a soldier can afford armor and it will actually save their life they will use it. The less likely it is to be useful the less people are willing to spend on it.
You could try the illustrated encyclopedia of weapons and warfare but there are a lot of good options. If you are an author it always helps to read as much as you can.
POLITENESS! I SEES IT!
Thank you, thank you, thank you, for being polite.
I really, really hate the amount of vitriol the internet pours out.
If plate armor was such an impediment, then it would not have been used.
If someone hits hard enough to dent a helmet, that blow would likely crush an unprotected head.
so does that mean modern armies can save billions of dollars by just getting rid of armour completely? I mean if a rpg can disable a m1 abrams tank by taking out its tracks whats the use of having all that expenive armour right? Jets like the A-10 warthog could carry so much more ordnance once they ditch that useless armour. Infantry can also benefit by getting rid of chest plates, it doesnt protect the limbs so the extra weight saved will allow them to somersault over their enemies while raining death and destruction through grenade spams. Wars would definitely be over quicker, so we can all go back to preparing for the next one much faster.
Diet News: like normal news, but the sugar's fake
If Medieval Armour was that dangerous, they simply would not have used it.
I think whoever wrote this article was grasping for reasons to defend scantily-clad anime females
No, he doesn't want scantily clad females. He wants females wearing nothing. Big difference.