Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Is the vanguard from chivalry medieval warfare accurate? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Kieran Wardale




Location: Virginia
Joined: 01 Apr 2013

Posts: 9

PostPosted: Mon 01 Apr, 2013 12:58 pm    Post subject: Is the vanguard from chivalry medieval warfare accurate?         Reply with quote

My question is what time period does the vanguard originate. It appears as though it's form about the early to mid 14th century but there are some parts like the upper arm armor and the gloves that leave me to question it's accuracy in respect to that time period.


 Attachment: 55.09 KB
2354813-vanguard_205x300.png


 Attachment: 35.51 KB
ZFlsy.png


 Attachment: 10.99 KB
mqdefault.jpg


A man who speaks out of both sides of his mouth deserves to have it permanently shut.
Boyd Crowder
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,194

PostPosted: Mon 01 Apr, 2013 2:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The barrel helmet is late 13th century.
The ailettes are early 13th century and should be on the shoulders, not the upper arms.
The splint bracers are early 14th century.
The surcoat is 12th-13th century.
The pants don't look medieval at all.
Wearing a pollaxe strapped to the back is a 20th century fantasy.
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Parker




Location: United States
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Likes: 2 pages

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 95

PostPosted: Mon 01 Apr, 2013 3:42 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

My opinions concerning "Chivalry: Medieval Warfare" are that the hand-to-hand combat system is better than most video games that have a melee attack in first person. Most games do not really go into the timing aspect of fencing, with parries having to be executed at the right moment and attacks requiring commitment and stamina to execute, and feints being an option. That I do commend because it is executed well. At the same time really silly things, like knights using two-handed weapons in one hand and carrying the heaviest shields, even though they have the heaviest armor, just irk me. It is one thing to be anachronistic or fantastic, but it is another to just violate common sense. When you have a game that imitates realism then the inaccuracies are harder for me to accept. The melee combat system is a concept that should be experimented with more, but I guess when you're a historical stickler your enjoyment of video games can be a casualty.

By the way Dan, I thought that Ailettes were mainly used between 1290 and 1325. Is that faulty information?

"This is a sharp medicine, but it is a physician for all diseases and miseries."
-Sir Walter Raleigh, upon being allowed to see the ax that would behead him, 29 October 1618
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,194

PostPosted: Mon 01 Apr, 2013 6:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nope. I meant early 1300's (early 14th C)
View user's profile Send private message
Peter Anderson




Location: Holland, USA
Joined: 22 Mar 2013

Posts: 38

PostPosted: Mon 01 Apr, 2013 7:48 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chivalry is a fictional setting, merely derived from historical research. So accuracy is kind of a moot point. Wink

However, their inspirations are clearly drawn from historical sources; along those lines I would agree with Dan's assessment. The overall look strikes me as a generally 13th century style, abstracted.
View user's profile Send private message
Kieran Wardale




Location: Virginia
Joined: 01 Apr 2013

Posts: 9

PostPosted: Tue 02 Apr, 2013 3:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for the clarification everyone Happy
A man who speaks out of both sides of his mouth deserves to have it permanently shut.
Boyd Crowder
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Tue 02 Apr, 2013 5:55 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael, remember the game is in a low level fantasy setting, so you can't be critical of things like that.
Even so, most of the equipment in the game looks historical, it's just mixed and matched all around.
The Vanguards gauntlets and vambraces are early 14th century in style, while the rest of him is more 13th century.
View user's profile Send private message
William P




Location: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 11 Jul 2010

Posts: 1,436

PostPosted: Tue 02 Apr, 2013 10:44 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

the game 'war of the roses has a much greater level of historical detail in terms of armour and weapon types and designs and all that, but chivalry does look like it has a better combat system.
from what Ive seen most of the weapons dont really violate common sense rules of weapon design. except the whole carrying polarms on the back, thing.

most of the weapons look like i could plausibly see them in a museum somewhere.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Johan Gemvik




Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: 10 Nov 2009

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Fri 05 Apr, 2013 8:23 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I adore fantasy, but never liked how it tends to favor impractical armour and weapon use. Nor do I believe just because something is fantasy that you have to mix equipment and armour from various ages.
It would be perfectly viable to have a clear cut 13th or 14th century world -but with magic, dragons and the odd artifact or two. How refreshing that would be!

As it is I often wonder if mixing it up is for proper reasons (story driving with dimensions and ages merging by arcane means, or as a deliberate inside joke) or the creator just being lazy with the reaearch. Sadly I strongly believe it's almost always the latter.

"The Dwarf sees farther than the Giant when he has the giant's shoulder to mount on" -Coleridge
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,191

PostPosted: Fri 05 Apr, 2013 11:18 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

There's considerable evidence equipment was at times used decades or centuries after its manufacture, so kits we might call temporally mismatched historically appeared on the battlefield. Some English nobles in the sixteenth century allegedly mustered with armor that made amused Spanish soldiers think they'd stepped out of a medieval manuscript. Additionally, older styles persisted longer in certain region than in others, with Ireland being a striking example. In the late sixteenth century, you had English pike-&-shot armies facing Irish heavy infantry in high helms and hauberks wielding long-handled axes. I don't know any specific recorded instances, but it's quite probable that soldiers in Anglo-Irish borderlands would have worn mixed gear.
Read my historically inspired fantasy fiction in here. I walk along a winding path set by Ludovico Ariosto, William Morris, J. R. R. Tolkien, and Ursula Le Guin.

Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Is the vanguard from chivalry medieval warfare accurate?
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum