Is the vanguard from chivalry medieval warfare accurate?
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

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.
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?
Nope. I meant early 1300's (early 14th C)
Chivalry is a fictional setting, merely derived from historical research. So accuracy is kind of a moot point. ;)

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.
Thanks for the clarification everyone :)
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.
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.
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.
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.

Page 1 of 1

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 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum