Bikini Armor Battle Damage - Hypocrites and Sexy Art

[John Titor]

http://archive.is/XVxpu

Not only do we get BABD's obsession with poofy pants and uglyfying faces but we also get trans fetishization too.

Learn how the face works before you try to photoshop faces. Unless you were trying to make those blue cat people from Avatar, well, congratulations, you did it!

 

[Pointless Pedant]

This is true, but there's a conspicuous absence here: armor. The thing is, armor starts at "heavy" and goes to "I'm wearing a fucking refrigerator." The number of women who can handle medieval-style arms and armor for long periods is tiny, which is why warrior women were almost exclusively light: biology didn't give them an alternative. BABD, of course, doesn't care about the actual biological differences between men and women that caused realistic arms and armor to be as they are (and will, in fact, scream "muh sore giney!" if you bring it up) they just want to see their "stronk wamman" fetish catered to while getting the dopamine hit that comes from being mad on the internet about the most trivial shit.

A full suit of battlefield plate harness weighs about the same a a modern soldier's gear (30kg), since that's the maximum weight a soldier can carry in battle and still move easily. Jousting armour could be heavier, but people didn't wear that in battles. If a woman can wear modern military gear, she can wear plate armour. Obviously, small women struggle a lot with that weight, but there are women who carry that level of weight in armies in today's age. Lighter forms of armour weighed less than that.

Women didn't wear European plate armour because late mediaeval Europe didn't have women soldiers, except in siege defences where everyone had to defend the castle. In societies where women fought more often, like the Scythians or Japan, they wore the same forms of armour as the men (lamellar, in these cases, with some plate in Japan). If the Scythians had the metallurgy to make plate armour, they would probably have worn it.

She's able to stand up wearing plate armour easily, and she's not She-Hulk.

As for weapons, a longsword was about 1.5kg or so. That's substantial, but a child could pick that up with 2 hands and stab someone with it. You don't need a lot of strength to wield those weapons.

I do think the number of women capable of drawing a 120lb longbow is miniscule, though, so women archers would probably be restricted to using crossbows or 70lb hunting bows most of the time.

 

[plattschwanz]

Ancient Nordic cultures like the vikings absolutely had female combatants, (shield maidens.) Whether they played a significant role or were effective is another story.

The term or rather the concept of a shield-maiden first came up in early Medieval Norse sagas, not during the Ancient times as there exists no source for such a thing.

Secondly, the existence is not absolutely undisputed today:

But there is absolutely no hard evidence that women trained or served as regular warriors in the Viking Age

https://web.archive.org/web/2016030...14/04/19/viking-women-warriors-and-valkyries/

The scholars said their findings, based on DNA tests, “suggest that women, indeed, were able to be full members of male-dominated spheres” in Viking society.

But a respected scholar of the Vikings says that conclusion is premature. She says the researchers who conducted the tests were so determined to show that women were Viking warriors that they overlooked other possible explanations for why a woman’s body might have been in the tomb, which dates to the first half of 10th century.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/world/europe/sweden-viking-women-warriors-dna.html


While I am on the topic, the only source for women of a Germanic tribe actively fighting alongside the men is a legend mentioned in the Origo Gentis Langobardorum which was written in the 8th century, several centuries after the supposed event.

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

A full suit of battlefield plate harness weighs about the same a a modern soldier's gear (30kg), since that's the maximum weight a soldier can carry in battle and still move easily. Jousting armour could be heavier, but people didn't wear that in battles. If a woman can wear modern military gear, she can wear plate armour. Obviously, small women struggle a lot with that weight, but there are women who carry that level of weight in armies in today's age. Lighter forms of armour weighed less than that.

Women didn't wear European plate armour because late mediaeval Europe didn't have women soldiers, except in siege defences where everyone had to defend the castle. In societies where women fought more often, like the Scythians or Japan, they wore the same forms of armour as the men (lamellar, in these cases, with some plate in Japan). If the Scythians had the metallurgy to make plate armour, they would probably have worn it.

She's able to stand up wearing plate armour easily, and she's not She-Hulk.

As for weapons, a longsword was about 1.5kg or so. That's substantial, but a child could pick that up with 2 hands and stab someone with it. You don't need a lot of strength to wield those weapons.

I do think the number of women capable of drawing a 120lb longbow is miniscule, though, so women archers would probably be restricted to using crossbows or 70lb hunting bows most of the time.

That's about the same weight as a full set of firefighter's gear (turnouts, boots, helmet, SCBA tank, axe/tools) and there are women who do that job without a problem. Granted, they still won't look like the lithe anime waifs most fantasy nerds masturbate to.

 

[Pointless Pedant]

The term or rather the concept of a shildmaiden first came up in early Medieval Norse sagas, not during the Ancient times as there exists no source for such a thing.

Secondly, the existens is not absolutly undisputed today:


https://web.archive.org/web/2016030...14/04/19/viking-women-warriors-and-valkyries/


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/world/europe/sweden-viking-women-warriors-dna.html


While I am on the topic, the only real source for women of a Germanic tribe activly fighting alongside the men is a legend mentinoed in the Origo Gentis Langobardorum written in the 8th century, several centuries after the supposed event.

I don't know about the Vikings, but the Scythians and Massagetae definitely did have some women fighting. The Greek legend of the Amazons comes from them, though only about 1/5 of the Scythian army was female based on warrior graves. Any women fighting at all was shocking to the Greeks.

That's about the same weight as a full set of firefighter's gear (turnouts, boots, helmet, SCBA tank, axe/tools) and there are women who do that job without a problem. Granted, they still won't look like the lithe anime waifs most fantasy nerds masturbate to.

Absolutely. The maximum weight of gear someone can carry is constant through history. People don't have to be enormously bulky to carry that, either, though being extremely thin would make it impossible.

 

[One Man Bland]

A full suit of battlefield plate harness weighs about the same a a modern soldier's gear (30kg), since that's the maximum weight a soldier can carry in battle and still move easily. Jousting armour could be heavier, but people didn't wear that in battles. If a woman can wear modern military gear, she can wear plate armour. Obviously, small women struggle a lot with that weight, but there are women who carry that level of weight in armies in today's age. Lighter forms of armour weighed less than that.

Women didn't wear European plate armour because late mediaeval Europe didn't have women soldiers, except in siege defences where everyone had to defend the castle. In societies where women fought more often, like the Scythians or Japan, they wore the same forms of armour as the men (lamellar, in these cases, with some plate in Japan). If the Scythians had the metallurgy to make plate armour, they would probably have worn it.

She's able to stand up wearing plate armour easily, and she's not She-Hulk.

As for weapons, a longsword was about 1.5kg or so. That's substantial, but a child could pick that up with 2 hands and stab someone with it. You don't need a lot of strength to wield those weapons.

I do think the number of women capable of drawing a 120lb longbow is miniscule, though, so women archers would probably be restricted to using crossbows or 70lb hunting bows most of the time.

The thing that bothers me the most about BABD and their ilk like Escher Girls is that, as much as they wax on about realism, those "muh realism" complaints tend to end the second the armor is sufficiently covered enough regardless of all the other major design flaws in fantasy armor. You'll never see a BABD submitter weigh the pros and cons of the weight of full plate armor vs. the freedom of mobility with chain maile, or if the weight of the weapons makes pratical sense for the character's size a stature. Hell, the fantasy armor could be completely impractical in other ways like being make out of heavy or flimsy material or be covered in ornamentation that makes more sense for ceremonial purposes than actual combat and BABD will still laud it as being oh so "practical" so long as the tits are covered and there's not even a hint of a visible waist curve.

BABD just understand that there's more to designs than supposed real world practicality or sex appeal. Character design in fiction is meant to give you an understanding of the setting, tone, and individual personalities, and those aren't always going to conform to real world physics.

 

[Pointless Pedant]

The thing that bothers me the most about BABD and their ilk like Escher Girls is that, as much as they wax on about realism, those "muh realism" complaints tend to end the second the armor is sufficiently covered enough regardless of all the other major design flaws in fantasy armor. You'll never see a BABD submitter weigh the pros and cons of the weight of full plate armor vs. the freedom of mobility with chain maile, or if the weight of the weapons makes pratical sense for the character's size a stature. Hell, the fantasy armor could be completely impractical in other ways like being make out of heavy or flimsy material or be covered in ornamentation that makes more sense for ceremonial purposes than actual combat and BABD will still laud it as being oh so "practical" so long as the tits are covered and there's not even a hint of a visible waist curve.

Maille is already pretty heavy, so there's not much difference between it and plate. The reason not everyone wore plate armour is because plate armour was expensive, required a wagon to transport, and sometimes required assistance to put on, which was impractical for common soldiers. By the 15th century, even archers wore a brigandine over their maille. Brigantines did up at the front, so common soldiers could put them on without assistance.

You're absolutely right that BBAD ignores common fantasy armour problems. A lot of fantasy cuirasses would be horrible to wear because they're too long and would stop the person from bending over. Real cuirasses stop at the waist, with a fauld (skirt) protecting the abdomen. Other fantasy breastplates are so broad the wearer couldn't bring their arms together. Oversized, excessively heavy pauldrons are another problem, as is having everything covered in spikes, which would just lead to spiking inanimate objects and your comrades most of the time.

 

[plattschwanz]

The thing that bothers me the most about BABD and their ilk like Escher Girls is that, as much as they wax on about realism, those "muh realism" complaints tend to end the second the armor is sufficiently covered enough regardless of all the other major design flaws in fantasy armor. You'll never see a BABD submitter weigh the pros and cons of the weight of full plate armor vs. the freedom of mobility with chain maile, or if the weight of the weapons makes pratical sense for the character's size a stature. Hell, the fantasy armor could be completely impractical in other ways like being make out of heavy or flimsy material or be covered in ornamentation that makes more sense for ceremonial purposes than actual combat and BABD will still laud it as being oh so "practical" so long as the tits are covered and there's not even a hint of a visible waist curve.

BABD just understand that there's more to designs than supposed real world practicality or sex appeal. Character design in fiction is meant to give you an understanding of the setting, tone, and individual personalities, and those aren't always going to conform to real world physics

If we go the super realistic route, then that would mean that fighting with less clothes is actually safer when no armor is available.

I remember reading a history book about the ancient Franks ages ago, some Roman chronist mentioned that their warriors would be fighting topless during the summer in Italy because of the heat. The average Frank was also too poor to equip himself with chain mail.

The author then went to comment that that would be a safer thing because it reduces the chances of infection caused by dirty clothing lodged into a wound.


There was also a duel in the German Empire between the Princess von Metternich and Countess Anastasia Kielmannsegg that became pretty famous.
Both were topless during the fight because of fear of sepsis caused by pieces of cloth that could enter a wound. Only women were present of course.

Spoiler: NSFW, contemporary romanticised artistic rendition

Edit: typos

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

If we go the super realistic route, then that would mean that fighting with less clothes is actually safer when no armor is available.

Depends really on what that armor is. The Aztecs fought wearing heavy quilted armor and the Spanish actually started wearing that too because it was more effective than their own plate chestpieces.

There's really no uniform standard of armor effectiveness when you get down to it.

 

[plattschwanz]

Depends really on what that armor is. The Aztecs fought wearing heavy quilted armor and the Spanish actually started wearing that too because it was more effective than their own plate chestpieces.

There's really no uniform standard of armor effectiveness when you get down to it.

Was not my point:

when no armor is available

 

[Pointless Pedant]

Depends really on what that armor is. The Aztecs fought wearing heavy quilted armor and the Spanish actually started wearing that too because it was more effective than their own plate chestpieces.

There's really no uniform standard of armor effectiveness when you get down to it.

It wasn't more effective at stopping blows, it was less baking hot in the Mexican sun. Metal plate armour is incredibly hot when you're hot, and incredibly cold when you're cold. The Aztecs only had obsidian weapons, so quilted armour/gambeson offered some protection while not giving people heatstroke. This is also why people in West and South Asia and North Africa didn't usually wear full plate armour.

The aspects of armour not directly related to fighting are important.

 

[tumblrkek]

BBAD's Dragon'a Crown tag is a garbage fire, but the post below the garbage fire that sits atop that garbage fire:

Spoiler: nsfw

https://archive.li/x7hFC

It’s hard to find intelligent discussion about this issue, since most rational folks just dismiss it out of hand.

However, Nadia Oxford from USGamer had a great quote this week while discussing the minorly controversial Dragon’s Crown - “he can make as many titty witches as he wants, as long as he keeps drawing those badass dragons...”

Very :late::late::late: to the party but I find it amusing that BBAD displayed xeir ignorance by glossing over something really important about Dragon's Crown characters, the fact that they're really well designed and that it goes deeper than just fanservice.

Spoiler: Sorceress

The sorceress basically heals and resurrects skeletons, she gives life. That's why the artist and animators gave her motherly attributes like long hair and tiddies and also put an emphasis on her hips.
Same reason why the Fighter and Dwarf are V shaped, why the Amazon is very muscular but has no tiddies,... You can tell what they do just by glancing at them, it's amazing. There's a lot of thought that went into these designs and much to appreciate, really.

 

[Pointless Pedant]

Very :late::late::late: to the party but I find it amusing that BBAD displayed xeir ignorance by glossing over something really important about Dragon's Crown characters, the fact that they're really well designed and that it goes deeper than just fanservice.

Spoiler: Sorceress

The sorceress basically heals and resurrects skeletons, she gives life. That's why the artist and animators gave her motherly attributes like long hair and tiddies and also put an emphasis on her hips.
Same reason why the Fighter and Dwarf are V shaped, why the Amazon is very muscular but has no tiddies,... You can tell what they do just by glancing at them, it's amazing. There's a lot of thought that went into these designs and much to appreciate, really.

Her waist is miniscule compared to her massive tits and arse. She looks like some kind of mutant porn star. I'd be pretty amazed to see a woman who looked anything like that.

I don't know if BBAD does awful anatomy as well as costumes or not.

 

[Lurkette]

I think they're going for the old Amazon myth of them having a freed (or chopped off) breast.

But...its based on Greek mythology...either way, that redesign alone would jack the rating up to an NC-17 and cause more outrage then Tracers butt pose. I really don't get what they were trying to do with her. And Widow is just...why? It doesn't fit her character or theming at all.

 

[John Titor]

BBAD's Dragon'a Crown tag is a garbage fire, but the post below the garbage fire that sits atop that garbage fire:

Spoiler: nsfw

https://archive.li/x7hFC

Do women even like the cartoonishly large bulge? I see people go for this strawman a lot.

 

[Medicated]

Do women even like the cartoonishly large bulge? I see people go for this strawman a lot.

I've seen a lot of yaoi fanart, and none of it is about ridiculously giant penises. Most of the time it's about titillation. Usually you find ridiculously huge cocks as you move into the fringe furry, expansion porn and futa porn.

The strawman is exactly that.

I found out the Dragon's Crown designs were so popular they inspired the characters in Korean mobile games.

 

[WaltherPPGAY]

Her waist is miniscule compared to her massive tits and arse. She looks like some kind of mutant porn star. I'd be pretty amazed to see a woman who looked anything like that.

I don't know if BBAD does awful anatomy as well as costumes or not.

Yes, that's the point, good job spotting it. Unless you're saying it's somehow any different than the Dwarf or Warrior design.

Almost all of the designs in the game are cartoonish exaggerations playing on western fantasy motifs. It's a stylistic choice and considering the frothing rage that it somehow still induces over 5 years later I say good on ol' George for making it.

 

[Caddchef]

Her waist is miniscule compared to her massive tits and arse. She looks like some kind of mutant porn star. I'd be pretty amazed to see a woman who looked anything like that.

I don't know if BBAD does awful anatomy as well as costumes or not.

Mate, you tred on dangerously :autism::autism::autism: ground when criticizing the sorceress' proportions as unrealistic in Dragon's Crown because the rest of the cast look like this:

Seperately and out of context they all look ridiculous but together they look great, you've got:

Sorceress: Titwitch
Warrior: Human triangle
Amazon: Buns of adamantium
Dorf: Walking slab of muscle with a beard
Elf: 99.9% legs
Wizard: ... okay wizard is just a wizard.

The themes also continue through the game's NPC, enemy and world design.

 

[Pointless Pedant]

Mate, you tred on dangerously :autism::autism::autism: ground when criticizing the sorceress' proportions as unrealistic in Dragon's Crown because the rest of the cast look like this:

View attachment 556756

Seperately and out of context they all look ridiculous but together they look great, you've got:

Sorceress: Titwitch
Warrior: Human triangle
Amazon: Buns of adamantium
Dorf: Walking slab of muscle with a beard
Elf: 99.9% legs
Wizard: ... okay wizard is just a wizard.

The themes also continue through the game's NPC, enemy and world design.

Not really. I'd never heard of the game before. Most of them look pretty dumb to me.

 

[John Titor]

Mate, you tred on dangerously :autism::autism::autism: ground when criticizing the sorceress' proportions as unrealistic in Dragon's Crown because the rest of the cast look like this:

View attachment 556756

Seperately and out of context they all look ridiculous but together they look great, you've got:

Sorceress: Titwitch
Warrior: Human triangle
Amazon: Buns of adamantium
Dorf: Walking slab of muscle with a beard
Elf: 99.9% legs
Wizard: ... okay wizard is just a wizard.

The themes also continue through the game's NPC, enemy and world design.

Never understood people's hangup with the Sorceress's proportions when she's just like Jessica Rabbit.

Her waist is miniscule compared to her massive tits and arse. She looks like some kind of mutant porn star. I'd be pretty amazed to see a woman who looked anything like that.

I don't know if BBAD does awful anatomy as well as costumes or not.

Knowing their track record, they're just going to make it worse.