[Question] Bikini Armour! when? :)

[kapri.5918]

The plate armor of the 17th century is not the same as the plate armor of Guild Wars 2. For one, they usually did not have all the embellishments that you see on any MMO heavy plate armor. For another, plate armor was not thick nor encompassed the whole body in real life. Whereas (as I stated before) the armor of GW2 and other MMO games could very well withstand up to firearms because of the thickness of it. And the characters wear this armor because of the fantasy of it. And the fact that a lot of MMO make their male body types to be extraordinarily strong...like super steroid strong.

[kapri.5918]

Before we continue further please elaborate on where you're getting at with this conversation. Because we have strayed from talking about the original topic to comparing the armor of fantasy to reality...

[Astralporing.1957]

There's already Gladiator armor set. We don't need to go any skimper than this.

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

@kapri.5918 said:

@"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:I've wanted swimsuit outfits for awhile. Nothing as audacious as a metal bikini, but I can still roll with it. I figure, the designs are already in the game, they're pretty easy to implement, and they're in high demand, too.

The way I see it, the point of fantasy is to be, well, fantastic. To stretch the imagination, to play fast and loose with physics, to create idealized people and put them in extravagant circumstances. At its core, GW2 is a power fantasy, where we run around fighting monsters and saving villagers. Sex appeal is power, to a certain extent, and vice versa. Because of this relationship, an idealized form expressed, while attractive, is not necessarily sexualized. While the goal always remains kicking butt and taking names, I also want to look good while doing it. A revealing out is an expression of ideals, in body, form, and spirit. To be unashamed expresses emotional confidence, and the muscular form reveals great strength.

When do you take fantasy to far? When do you sit there and say "So, how does this protect my character?" You have a steel bikini that only covers a small portion of the female body and we are supposed to throw reality with it? Yet again, we are supposed to ignore the over exposure of vital spots of the body to satisfy fashion? No. Other games have gone down this path and have suffered for it. This throw out reality cause I want my female character to be over sexualized in a bikini. I do not want this game to go down the path that Scarlet Blade did.

There's a difference between being sexualized and being idealized. The dress is metaphor. Our character's outfits figuratively represent who they are, and that is all they need to do, because none of it is real.

[kapri.5918]

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:I've wanted swimsuit outfits for awhile. Nothing as audacious as a metal bikini, but I can still roll with it. I figure, the designs are already in the game, they're pretty easy to implement, and they're in high demand, too.

The way I see it, the point of fantasy is to be, well, fantastic. To stretch the imagination, to play fast and loose with physics, to create idealized people and put them in extravagant circumstances. At its core, GW2 is a power fantasy, where we run around fighting monsters and saving villagers. Sex appeal is power, to a certain extent, and vice versa. Because of this relationship, an idealized form expressed, while attractive, is not necessarily sexualized. While the goal always remains kicking butt and taking names, I also want to look good while doing it. A revealing out is an expression of ideals, in body, form, and spirit. To be unashamed expresses emotional confidence, and the muscular form reveals great strength.

When do you take fantasy to far? When do you sit there and say "So, how does this protect my character?" You have a steel bikini that only covers a small portion of the female body and we are supposed to throw reality with it? Yet again, we are supposed to ignore the over exposure of vital spots of the body to satisfy fashion? No. Other games have gone down this path and have suffered for it. This throw out reality cause I want my female character to be over sexualized in a bikini. I do not want this game to go down the path that Scarlet Blade did.

There's a difference between being sexualized and being idealized. The dress is metaphor. Our character's outfits figuratively represent who they are, and that is all they need to do, because none of it is real.

Real or not, that does not matter and has nothing to do with the point. The word idealized does not mean what you think it does. For one it is a general terminology. Based off of the word idea. Point blank,if you think that a woman in high heels and a steel bikini fighting on a battlefield is not sexual in any way then you are either mentally lacking or just in pure denial of facts. For one, unless your world is blatantly to the point to which even outright nudity is safe from sharp objects, this would never happen.

[Schnuschnu.9857]

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a hot topic (pun intended!), i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

We won't get it because of one simple reason. Videogame logic. "The less armor the higher the armor score." This means a bikini armor would have to be even better than legendary armor and we don't have a gear treadmill. Sorry to disappoint you.

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:I've wanted swimsuit outfits for awhile. Nothing as audacious as a metal bikini, but I can still roll with it. I figure, the designs are already in the game, they're pretty easy to implement, and they're in high demand, too.

The way I see it, the point of fantasy is to be, well, fantastic. To stretch the imagination, to play fast and loose with physics, to create idealized people and put them in extravagant circumstances. At its core, GW2 is a power fantasy, where we run around fighting monsters and saving villagers. Sex appeal is power, to a certain extent, and vice versa. Because of this relationship, an idealized form expressed, while attractive, is not necessarily sexualized. While the goal always remains kicking butt and taking names, I also want to look good while doing it. A revealing out is an expression of ideals, in body, form, and spirit. To be unashamed expresses emotional confidence, and the muscular form reveals great strength.

When do you take fantasy to far? When do you sit there and say "So, how does this protect my character?" You have a steel bikini that only covers a small portion of the female body and we are supposed to throw reality with it? Yet again, we are supposed to ignore the over exposure of vital spots of the body to satisfy fashion? No. Other games have gone down this path and have suffered for it. This throw out reality cause I want my female character to be over sexualized in a bikini. I do not want this game to go down the path that Scarlet Blade did.

There's a difference between being sexualized and being idealized. The dress is metaphor. Our character's outfits figuratively represent who they are, and that is all they need to do, because none of it is real.

Real or not, that does not matter and has nothing to do with the point. The word idealized does not mean what you think it does. For one it is a general terminology. Based off of the word idea. Point blank,if you think that a woman in high heels and a steel bikini fighting on a battlefield is not sexual in any way then you are either mentally lacking or just in pure denial of facts. For one, unless your world is blatantly to the point to which even outright nudity is safe from sharp objects, this would never happen.

... Did you read my post?

[kapri.5918]

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:I've wanted swimsuit outfits for awhile. Nothing as audacious as a metal bikini, but I can still roll with it. I figure, the designs are already in the game, they're pretty easy to implement, and they're in high demand, too.

The way I see it, the point of fantasy is to be, well, fantastic. To stretch the imagination, to play fast and loose with physics, to create idealized people and put them in extravagant circumstances. At its core, GW2 is a power fantasy, where we run around fighting monsters and saving villagers. Sex appeal is power, to a certain extent, and vice versa. Because of this relationship, an idealized form expressed, while attractive, is not necessarily sexualized. While the goal always remains kicking butt and taking names, I also want to look good while doing it. A revealing out is an expression of ideals, in body, form, and spirit. To be unashamed expresses emotional confidence, and the muscular form reveals great strength.

When do you take fantasy to far? When do you sit there and say "So, how does this protect my character?" You have a steel bikini that only covers a small portion of the female body and we are supposed to throw reality with it? Yet again, we are supposed to ignore the over exposure of vital spots of the body to satisfy fashion? No. Other games have gone down this path and have suffered for it. This throw out reality cause I want my female character to be over sexualized in a bikini. I do not want this game to go down the path that Scarlet Blade did.

There's a difference between being sexualized and being idealized. The dress is metaphor. Our character's outfits figuratively represent who they are, and that is all they need to do, because none of it is real.

Real or not, that does not matter and has nothing to do with the point. The word idealized does not mean what you think it does. For one it is a general terminology. Based off of the word idea. Point blank,if you think that a woman in high heels and a steel bikini fighting on a battlefield is not sexual in any way then you are either mentally lacking or just in pure denial of facts. For one, unless your world is blatantly to the point to which even outright nudity is safe from sharp objects, this would never happen.

... Did you read my post?

Yes...and?

[Liewec.2896]

@"Svennis.3852" said:As long as the male variant is literally just a chain mail thong, I’d be open to it.conan style loincloth! :smile:

@AllNightPlayer.1286 said:

@Liewec.2896 said:it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!Well, if we want to go full RPG I hope, every bearer of this “armour” get’s a debuff, that they only have 500 HP. Then, it is realistic.

ok, well then i want perma quickness and superspeed too!and if you wear full plate you have perma slow and can only use walk speed! :lol:

[Trise.2865]

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:In gw2 wearing full metal armor would be terrible against a guy with a rifle if we were applying realism. First the bearer of full metal armor would be extremely slow making a great target and the armor would offer scant protection against bullets. This is only if we are looking at it realistically..... In fact the female in the chain mail bikini would have a greater chance than her fully armored female counterpart because of a greater ability to dodge, duck and run quickly

Steel plate mail is quite effective at stopping handheld black powder weapons and lead ball shot. Only a precision strike to a joint (which was nigh-on impossible) or a point-blank shot from a magnum-charged blunderbuss (which may as well have been a canon blast) were able to penetrate it effectively in lab testing. Even a rifled musket could only dent the plates at range.

Full plate mail is not nearly as cumbersome as one may assume, and soldiers trained in it are quite comfortable and agile wearing it. They are able to perform all kinds of martial maneuvers, including full-run marching, combat rolls, and wrestling grapples. The main, significant hindrance was in trying to mount a horse, as the saddle could not support enough weight on one side without injuring the animal.

[Ashen.2907]

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blocki.4931 said:I'm not playing a game to be reminded what would or wouldn't work irl to be honest.

Leather armor didn't really exist either, at least not in the way games and movies taught us. While immersion sure is important, a few reminders that this is fantasy in terms of armor as well wouldn't hurt anybody.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Opinions.

Also using and linking to resetera in any argument is an automatic loss lol

How far does one take fantasy though? You can sit there and say "well, it's a game" but the fact remains that the game starts to break from reality in more ways than it already has. One thing to have dragons, Asura, etc. But when you have the female armor set that leaves a lot exposed you're just being more perverted than fantasy. Example, you take a male warrior and shoot an arrow at him. Realistically it would bounce off the armor. Do the same with a female character and all the archer would have to do is aim and the female warrior is either dead or badly injured. The only defense to this is that fighting/injuries are determined by stats and RNG mechanics. So you can sit there and say "well the armor's visual doesn't matter as long as the stats stay similar to the male counter part." You going into a fight with very sharp objects...why would you go into it exposed?

And yet the setting calls limited coverage cloth, "armor," giving it the power to protect from that arrow. "Realiticaly," very little armor currently in the game would work.

[Ashen.2907]

@kapri.5918 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blocki.4931 said:I'm not playing a game to be reminded what would or wouldn't work irl to be honest.

Leather armor didn't really exist either, at least not in the way games and movies taught us. While immersion sure is important, a few reminders that this is fantasy in terms of armor as well wouldn't hurt anybody.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Opinions.

Also using and linking to resetera in any argument is an automatic loss lol

How far does one take fantasy though? You can sit there and say "well, it's a game" but the fact remains that the game starts to break from reality in more ways than it already has. One thing to have dragons, Asura, etc. But when you have the female armor set that leaves a lot exposed you're just being more perverted than fantasy. Example, you take a male warrior and shoot an arrow at him. Realistically it would bounce off the armor. Do the same with a female character and all the archer would have to do is aim and the female warrior is either dead or badly injured. The only defense to this is that fighting/injuries are determined by stats and RNG mechanics. So you can sit there and say "well the armor's visual doesn't matter as long as the stats stay similar to the male counter part." You going into a fight with very sharp objects...why would you go into it exposed?

chainmail/platemail armor great against arrows(unless they are from longbows as the English longbow could penetrate all mail except high quality steel plate...….. not so great for swimming(reality is you should sink), not great against lightning attacks

so are we going to apply reality across the board or be selective with where we apply reality? It's a fantasy game and if skimpy light armors composed of silk, cotton, etc. can afford protection in this game. I think a chainmail bikini has no problem fitting in.

But this is where fantasy makes sense. And is backed up through characters throughout the genre. For one, just because it is cloth do we sit there and say that you can then run around in skimpy attire. No. Because for each armor goes the story of the class that wears it. Thieves, hunters, rangers, etc have always worn leather armor (mixed with mail) throughout the genre. Where as priests, mages, warlocks, etc have worn cloth. And (ignoring the visuals) despite the protection they garner they still did not afford the same protection as plate armor. And with it came a specific reason why they wore certain armors. Leather for a decent amount of protection but the the maneuverability. Plate for tanks. Cloth because...well I don't know the specific Guild Wars lore why cloth armor is used but to use old D&D logic it is because too much iron/metal effects spells in a negative way. But to go on further, not until the visual rise of fantasy did we start sexualizing women of the genre. In fantasy books you always had women either in dresses that worked with whatever environment they were in that did not over expose any part of the body or you had warrior women fully clad in armor. No matter what kind. Never in books did you see women of fantasy going forth into battle with her breasts hanging out. But yet, with the rise of visual fantasy (comics, tv, movies) you see most of the women with little armor. J.R. Tolkien would hate fantasy today. GRR Martin probably hates the genre in relation to women. And look at his most prominent female warrior. Brienne Tarth. Clad in full plate when entering a battle...not some skimpy outfit. She is a warrior through and through. The women of GoT who are warriors or become warriors are covered in some sort of protection and even the "mages" have full covering with some showing of skin but not the levels of exposure that a lot of the armor here in GW2 has.

Are you familiar with Red Sonja?

Are you familiar with Dejah Thoris…….. WAY before the Tolkien books and naked as a jaybird

Have to say I was not familiar with her. Had to look her up. Interesting concept though...to build a society where nudity is paramount to the system. Did armor have any relevance to them or did they fight naked as well? Do not know as that when I watched the movie it kind of turned me away from getting into the books.

all martians were naked fighting or otherwise.... they wore ornamental metals but it was not armor. They fought with swords and had pistols and rifles..... The book A Princess of Mars by Edgar Rice Burroughs was published in 1917

I'm guessing the death count was pretty high as well. Nothing against the books but having armor seems like an intelligent decision. Funny thing though is in real life there have been actual societies who went into battle butt naked. Forget the name of the particular one I am thinking of (Celts?) but they also got so excited in battle that their weapons were not the only thing hard. Further in history on why armor of some sort is a smart idea but during the American Civil War, the only thing one wore was the uniform. A lot of deaths and, most importantly, loss of limbs did not happen when getting shot but after the matter when disease and infection set into the wound. Where if the soldiers had worn adequate protective armor they would have bounced the shots and protected themselves...history would be a lot different if the Confederacy used shields.

Agreed, a lot would have been different had the confederacy used shields. Many more union soldiers would have survived as the war ended sooner due to a quicker union victory.

[Fenom.9457]

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Yeah and you already have it, as demsontrayed by your in game screenshots. Other people don’t have the kind of fashion they’re asking for

[Blocki.4931]

@kapri.5918 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blocki.4931 said:I'm not playing a game to be reminded what would or wouldn't work irl to be honest.

Leather armor didn't really exist either, at least not in the way games and movies taught us. While immersion sure is important, a few reminders that this is fantasy in terms of armor as well wouldn't hurt anybody.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Opinions.

Also using and linking to resetera in any argument is an automatic loss lol

How far does one take fantasy though? You can sit there and say "well, it's a game" but the fact remains that the game starts to break from reality in more ways than it already has. One thing to have dragons, Asura, etc. But when you have the female armor set that leaves a lot exposed you're just being more perverted than fantasy. Example, you take a male warrior and shoot an arrow at him. Realistically it would bounce off the armor. Do the same with a female character and all the archer would have to do is aim and the female warrior is either dead or badly injured. The only defense to this is that fighting/injuries are determined by stats and RNG mechanics. So you can sit there and say "well the armor's visual doesn't matter as long as the stats stay similar to the male counter part." You going into a fight with very sharp objects...why would you go into it exposed?

chainmail/platemail armor great against arrows(unless they are from longbows as the English longbow could penetrate all mail except high quality steel plate...….. not so great for swimming(reality is you should sink), not great against lightning attacks

so are we going to apply reality across the board or be selective with where we apply reality? It's a fantasy game and if skimpy light armors composed of silk, cotton, etc. can afford protection in this game. I think a chainmail bikini has no problem fitting in.

But this is where fantasy makes sense. And is backed up through characters throughout the genre. For one, just because it is cloth do we sit there and say that you can then run around in skimpy attire. No. Because for each armor goes the story of the class that wears it. Thieves, hunters, rangers, etc have always worn leather armor (mixed with mail) throughout the genre. Where as priests, mages, warlocks, etc have worn cloth. And (ignoring the visuals) despite the protection they garner they still did not afford the same protection as plate armor. And with it came a specific reason why they wore certain armors. Leather for a decent amount of protection but the the maneuverability. Plate for tanks. Cloth because...well I don't know the specific Guild Wars lore why cloth armor is used but to use old D&D logic it is because too much iron/metal effects spells in a negative way. But to go on further, not until the visual rise of fantasy did we start sexualizing women of the genre. In fantasy books you always had women either in dresses that worked with whatever environment they were in that did not over expose any part of the body or you had warrior women fully clad in armor. No matter what kind. Never in books did you see women of fantasy going forth into battle with her breasts hanging out. But yet, with the rise of visual fantasy (comics, tv, movies) you see most of the women with little armor. J.R. Tolkien would hate fantasy today. GRR Martin probably hates the genre in relation to women. And look at his most prominent female warrior. Brienne Tarth. Clad in full plate when entering a battle...not some skimpy outfit. She is a warrior through and through. The women of GoT who are warriors or become warriors are covered in some sort of protection and even the "mages" have full covering with some showing of skin but not the levels of exposure that a lot of the armor here in GW2 has.

Are you familiar with Red Sonja?

Are you familiar with Dejah Thoris…….. WAY before the Tolkien books and naked as a jaybird

Have to say I was not familiar with her. Had to look her up. Interesting concept though...to build a society where nudity is paramount to the system. Did armor have any relevance to them or did they fight naked as well? Do not know as that when I watched the movie it kind of turned me away from getting into the books.

all martians were naked fighting or otherwise.... they wore ornamental metals but it was not armor. They fought with swords and had pistols and rifles..... The book A Princess of Mars by Edgar Rice Burroughs was published in 1917

I'm guessing the death count was pretty high as well. Nothing against the books but having armor seems like an intelligent decision. Funny thing though is in real life there have been actual societies who went into battle butt naked. Forget the name of the particular one I am thinking of (Celts?) but they also got so excited in battle that their weapons were not the only thing hard. Further in history on why armor of some sort is a smart idea but during the American Civil War, the only thing one wore was the uniform. A lot of deaths and, most importantly, loss of limbs did not happen when getting shot but after the matter when disease and infection set into the wound. Where if the soldiers had worn adequate protective armor they would have bounced the shots and protected themselves...history would be a lot different if the Confederacy used shields.

The odd Celtic or Viking "Berserker" definitely existed here and there, but they were pretty rare. "Berserker" back then "bare shirt", aka a person who doesn't wear armor but just his normal shirt to battle. The rage-filled, battle trance like Berserker we know nowadays is also largely fiction, because yes, their lack of armor proved fatal more often than not. Besides that, it is also the translation of "champion" in Norse, in which case they could have also been warriors clad in "bear skin". These berserkers were used to fight duels for the lord they served.

Really fascinating stuff and I am just poorly paraphrasing because I haven't had a refresher on this topic for years. People aren't really certain where it originated, those two I brought up are the most likely theories and deductions based on old text.

[Dashingsteel.3410]

@Trise.2865 said:

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:In gw2 wearing full metal armor would be terrible against a guy with a rifle if we were applying realism. First the bearer of full metal armor would be extremely slow making a great target and the armor would offer scant protection against bullets. This is only if we are looking at it realistically..... In fact the female in the chain mail bikini would have a greater chance than her fully armored female counterpart because of a greater ability to dodge, duck and run quickly

Steel plate mail is quite effective at stopping handheld black powder weapons and lead ball shot. Only a precision strike to a joint (which was nigh-on impossible) or a point-blank shot from a magnum-charged blunderbuss (which may as well have been a canon blast) were able to penetrate it effectively in lab testing. Even a rifled musket could only dent the plates at range.

Full plate mail is not nearly as cumbersome as one may assume, and soldiers trained in it are quite comfortable and agile wearing it. They are able to perform all kinds of martial maneuvers, including full-run marching, combat rolls, and wrestling grapples. The main, significant hindrance was in trying to mount a horse, as the saddle could not support enough weight on one side without injuring the animal.

16th and 17th century firearms could penetrate plate armor at a range of 30 meters or less. The resulting wound to the recipient was further complicated by the shrapnel of the damaged armor. There were some armors created to prevent this but they were extremely heavy. Plate armor died out in the early to middle 17th century.

A modern rifle would make swiss cheese out of plate mail.

[kapri.5918]

@Ashen.2907 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blocki.4931 said:I'm not playing a game to be reminded what would or wouldn't work irl to be honest.

Leather armor didn't really exist either, at least not in the way games and movies taught us. While immersion sure is important, a few reminders that this is fantasy in terms of armor as well wouldn't hurt anybody.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Opinions.

Also using and linking to resetera in any argument is an automatic loss lol

How far does one take fantasy though? You can sit there and say "well, it's a game" but the fact remains that the game starts to break from reality in more ways than it already has. One thing to have dragons, Asura, etc. But when you have the female armor set that leaves a lot exposed you're just being more perverted than fantasy. Example, you take a male warrior and shoot an arrow at him. Realistically it would bounce off the armor. Do the same with a female character and all the archer would have to do is aim and the female warrior is either dead or badly injured. The only defense to this is that fighting/injuries are determined by stats and RNG mechanics. So you can sit there and say "well the armor's visual doesn't matter as long as the stats stay similar to the male counter part." You going into a fight with very sharp objects...why would you go into it exposed?

And yet the setting calls limited coverage cloth, "armor," giving it the power to protect from that arrow. "Realiticaly," very little armor currently in the game would work.

Why are we even talking about cloth armor? And whether or not it protects from an arrow? If you really want to know something here is a piece if info recently brought up about cloth armor and how good it actually was. Kudos towards Blocki for informing and correcting me about this.

[Dashingsteel.3410]

@kapri.5918 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blocki.4931 said:I'm not playing a game to be reminded what would or wouldn't work irl to be honest.

Leather armor didn't really exist either, at least not in the way games and movies taught us. While immersion sure is important, a few reminders that this is fantasy in terms of armor as well wouldn't hurt anybody.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Opinions.

Also using and linking to resetera in any argument is an automatic loss lol

How far does one take fantasy though? You can sit there and say "well, it's a game" but the fact remains that the game starts to break from reality in more ways than it already has. One thing to have dragons, Asura, etc. But when you have the female armor set that leaves a lot exposed you're just being more perverted than fantasy. Example, you take a male warrior and shoot an arrow at him. Realistically it would bounce off the armor. Do the same with a female character and all the archer would have to do is aim and the female warrior is either dead or badly injured. The only defense to this is that fighting/injuries are determined by stats and RNG mechanics. So you can sit there and say "well the armor's visual doesn't matter as long as the stats stay similar to the male counter part." You going into a fight with very sharp objects...why would you go into it exposed?

And yet the setting calls limited coverage cloth, "armor," giving it the power to protect from that arrow. "Realiticaly," very little armor currently in the game would work.

Why are we even talking about cloth armor? And whether or not it protects from an arrow? If you really want to know something here is a piece if info recently brought up about cloth armor and how good it actually was. Kudos towards Blocki for informing and correcting me about this.

The reason skimpy cloth armor that exists in the game keeps being mentioned is that for some reason people keep trying to hold bikini chainmail to a higher "realistic" standard. Trying to apply "realism" to one piece of armor(chainmail bikini) and not all the armors that the game already has is unfair.

[TheBravery.9615]

nah no bikini armors. give me more butt capes pls

[Ashen.2907]

@kapri.5918 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@kapri.5918 said:

@Blocki.4931 said:I'm not playing a game to be reminded what would or wouldn't work irl to be honest.

Leather armor didn't really exist either, at least not in the way games and movies taught us. While immersion sure is important, a few reminders that this is fantasy in terms of armor as well wouldn't hurt anybody.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@"Liewec.2896" said:this is a bit of a

hot

topic

(pun intended!)

, i know some people are totally against the idea,but i'm wondering when we will finally get some super awesome bikini armour!?it is pretty much a requirement in an RPG!

my Red Sonja is ready!

i was hoping that we'd get some during this summer! but i'm still hoping that we'll get some for christmas! :blush:i'm ready to throw lots of money at my screen! :smile:

is anyone else eagerly awaiting bikini armour? :grin:

Nah

. I'd rather

not

.

I mean hell, I'm still annoyed at how ugly the female Phalanx armor looks compared to the male variant.

And this is far better fashion wars anyway.

Opinions.

Also using and linking to resetera in any argument is an automatic loss lol

How far does one take fantasy though? You can sit there and say "well, it's a game" but the fact remains that the game starts to break from reality in more ways than it already has. One thing to have dragons, Asura, etc. But when you have the female armor set that leaves a lot exposed you're just being more perverted than fantasy. Example, you take a male warrior and shoot an arrow at him. Realistically it would bounce off the armor. Do the same with a female character and all the archer would have to do is aim and the female warrior is either dead or badly injured. The only defense to this is that fighting/injuries are determined by stats and RNG mechanics. So you can sit there and say "well the armor's visual doesn't matter as long as the stats stay similar to the male counter part." You going into a fight with very sharp objects...why would you go into it exposed?

And yet the setting calls limited coverage cloth, "armor," giving it the power to protect from that arrow. "Realiticaly," very little armor currently in the game would work.

Why are we even talking about cloth armor? And whether or not it protects from an arrow? If you really want to know something here is a piece if info recently brought up about cloth armor and how good it actually was. Kudos towards Blocki for informing and correcting me about this.

Because you brought up the, "realistically," element of armor here. It is established in game that actual coverage by something that would actually provide protection by nature of its materials, coverage, and design is irrelevant to armor protective value. Realism has no place (unfortunately IMO) in discussion of the merits of armor design in GW2.

Great video BTW. I have been a Shadiversity subscriber for some time. Keep in mind that light armor in GW2 would rarely, if ever, qualify as a gambeson. An open front cotton or linen blouse or mini-skirt comes nowhere near, on merits of its physical structure and materials, to being armor...and yet they provide protective value against assault-rifle fire in GW2. Pretty solid evidence that its something else entirely about the clothing that gives its defensive value.

[Shivvies.3921]

@"kapri.5918" said:If you applied any realism to some of the heavy armor of the game it would clash. With the armor of GW2 yes they would be slow, makes a great target, but the armor would be great protection against bullets tbh...just because there is so much of it. Real bullets of our world...don't know. But strictly in GW2 then heavy plated armor should be able to bounce most rifle shots. And to be honest, just cause you can move quicker in a chain mail bikini does not make you safer from a bullet traveling thousands of times faster than you. You cannot outrun a bullet nor would you stand a chance on dodging every shot coming from a rifle from a competent shooter.

I remember the wise words of Sean, line editor of GURPS 4th Edition Characters, when I see such things... "You can't dodge a bullet because you can't see it coming." THis, of course, does not mean you can't anticipate the shooter and get out of the way.

However, "mail and plate armour restricting movement" is a bit of a film trope. I am a materials scientist and a nerd. I have friends who make historically accurate weaponry, armour etc. - even better, using historically accurate methodology. It is significantly more work for lower quality but clears the "but this is modern steel" argument which is not really an accurate argument but good job I have nerdier friends who like hitting hot iron with a hammer for hours.

You can dodge roll, wrestle, jump, pirouette, dance (until you can't - it IS tiring) in a well made mail and plate made to the specs.

Cheers!

[Ashen.2907]

@Shivvies.3921 said:

@"kapri.5918" said:If you applied any realism to some of the heavy armor of the game it would clash. With the armor of GW2 yes they would be slow, makes a great target, but the armor would be great protection against bullets tbh...just because there is so much of it. Real bullets of our world...don't know. But strictly in GW2 then heavy plated armor should be able to bounce most rifle shots. And to be honest, just cause you can move quicker in a chain mail bikini does not make you safer from a bullet traveling thousands of times faster than you. You cannot outrun a bullet nor would you stand a chance on dodging every shot coming from a rifle from a competent shooter.

I remember the wise words of Sean, line editor of GURPS 4th Edition Characters, when I see such things... "You can't dodge a bullet because you can't see it coming." THis, of course, does not mean you can't anticipate the shooter and get out of the way.

However, "mail and plate armour restricting movement" is a bit of a film trope. I am a materials scientist and a nerd. I have friends who make historically accurate weaponry, armour etc. - even better, using historically accurate methodology. It is significantly more work for lower quality but clears the "but this is modern steel" argument which is not really an accurate argument but good job I have nerdier friends who like hitting hot iron with a hammer for hours.

You can dodge roll, wrestle, jump, pirouette, dance (until you can't - it IS tiring) in a well made mail and plate made to the specs.

Cheers!

Yeah.

I have no personal experience moving in heavy armor in a combat situation (although my wedding was medieval themed and I wore a chain hauberk and coif) but I have fairly extensive experience using firearms. Shooting at a target that is moving to escape or avoid being hit, call it dodging if you like, is significantly more difficult than at a stationary target or even one moving slowly and predictably (such as in a normal walk).

[Shivvies.3921]

@"Ashen.2907" said:Yeah.

I have no personal experience moving in heavy armor in a combat situation (although my wedding was medieval themed and I wore a chain hauberk and coif) but I have fairly extensive experience using firearms. Shooting at a target that is moving to escape or avoid being hit, call it dodging if you like, is significantly more difficult than at a stationary target or even one moving slowly and predictably (such as in a normal walk).

Without a question. There being a "heavy armour makes you look like a doofus" Hollywood trope does not preclude the "Hollywood shooters are extremely accurate" trope. We also are talking about really old, much fail prone weapons in conjunction with medieval armour AND lack of proper, scientifically reached techniques from breathing to posture.

In any case, I do understand this is not an actual discussion of realism - I mean, it is a fantasy game. We throw magical energies around, hit 8 times to everything around us within 2-3 seconds, throw greatswords and have them come back to us etc. I just wanted to chime in with the trope versus reality checks.

I despise overly sexualised women's armour in games. I do not despise "sexy clothing" for anyone. When it is for the proverbial male gaze, it is disturbing and alienating, in my opinion. I do not want GW2 to be that game. We already have Vegas Cloth Armour which is the weirdest, out of place kitten in this game which is meh of the highest calibre.

However, these are my opinions and ideas. I will leave it at "I despise this type of sexualisation" and will not bring realism or another pointless point of discussion into it.

Cheers!

[kapri.5918]

Alright let's try to handle the realism versus fantasy factor towards armor. Set of facts to lay down. Plate armor is stronger than cloth and leather. Whether by game or real life standards. So with that comes the fact that if plate armor could deflect or minimize the damage of an arrow then the leather and cloth armor would be inherently worse. The thing is now on cloth armor. Would the argument be null and void because cloth armor, no matter by full coverage of the body or not, would not stop an arrow. But now we get into fantasy logic. The people who predominantly wore cloth armor used magic/spells of various nature. So would they not have spells that helped them in the armor department? You do have in game certain cloth armor that has toughness and vitality (or whatever else stat that adds to defense) and can add insignias to add to the defense. It probably does not put it on par with plate armor defense. In the end, Guild Wars 2 is a world created by a group of people who set what is and isn't. I have absolutely no say in the end if they create a bikini armor set. I am not happy nor comfortable with it but that does not give me the right to condemn those who may enjoy it. It's wrong on so many levels to me. But each person plays this game for their own reasons and I have no right to dictate how a person plays. I don't think AreanNet should put something like this in but it is their game.

[Dashingsteel.3410]

@Shivvies.3921 said:

@"kapri.5918" said:If you applied any realism to some of the heavy armor of the game it would clash. With the armor of GW2 yes they would be slow, makes a great target, but the armor would be great protection against bullets tbh...just because there is so much of it. Real bullets of our world...don't know. But strictly in GW2 then heavy plated armor should be able to bounce most rifle shots. And to be honest, just cause you can move quicker in a chain mail bikini does not make you safer from a bullet traveling thousands of times faster than you. You cannot outrun a bullet nor would you stand a chance on dodging every shot coming from a rifle from a competent shooter.

I remember the wise words of Sean, line editor of GURPS 4th Edition Characters, when I see such things... "You can't dodge a bullet because you can't see it coming." THis, of course, does not mean you can't anticipate the shooter and get out of the way.

However, "mail and plate armour restricting movement" is a bit of a film trope. I am a materials scientist and a nerd. I have friends who make historically accurate weaponry, armour etc. - even better, using historically accurate methodology. It is significantly more work for lower quality but clears the "but this is modern steel" argument which is not really an accurate argument but good job I have nerdier friends who like hitting hot iron with a hammer for hours.

You can dodge roll, wrestle, jump, pirouette, dance (until you can't - it IS tiring) in a well made mail and plate made to the specs.

Cheers!

Just remember we are comparing a chainmail bikini to full plate armor. This comparison would be females wearing the armor. The lightest full plate armor is around 42-45 pounds of armor. A woman wearing 45 pounds of armor would be much slower than a woman wearing a chain mail bikini.

of course to deflate my own argument I could argue that mithril plate would be much much lighter : )

[Ashen.2907]

@kapri.5918 said:Alright let's try to handle the realism versus fantasy factor towards armor. Set of facts to lay down. Plate armor is stronger than cloth and leather. Whether by game or real life standards. So with that comes the fact that if plate armor could deflect or minimize the damage of an arrow then the leather and cloth armor would be inherently worse. The thing is now on cloth armor. Would the argument be null and void because cloth armor, no matter by full coverage of the body or not, would not stop an arrow. But now we get into fantasy logic. The people who predominantly wore cloth armor used magic/spells of various nature. So would they not have spells that helped them in the armor department? You do have in game certain cloth armor that has toughness and vitality (or whatever else stat that adds to defense) and can add insignias to add to the defense. It probably does not put it on par with plate armor defense. In the end, Guild Wars 2 is a world created by a group of people who set what is and isn't. I have absolutely no say in the end if they create a bikini armor set. I am not happy nor comfortable with it but that does not give me the right to condemn those who may enjoy it. It's wrong on so many levels to me. But each person plays this game for their own reasons and I have no right to dictate how a person plays. I don't think AreanNet should put something like this in but it is their game.

Light armor that stats for toughness provides more defense than heavy armor that does not. In both cases the actual coverage of the armor has no bearing on how much protection it provides. Take a look at any of the male heavy armors that leave the chest bare and one cannot really expect it to provide protection against an assault rifle, artillery fire, or even an arrow.

I am not arguing for the aesthetic of the chain-mail bikini, but rather against any attempt to use some form of realism or real world logic in dismissing it. Personally I do not have a problem with scantily clad male and female warriors, but would prefer a more realistic approach to armor (and weapons) than is the standard set in GW2 (and most other fantasy games that I have seen).