• Adults Only Website 18+

    If you are under 18 you are not permitted to submit personal information to us or use this website. If discovered you will be banned.

    We will ban and report anyone posting illegal content.

    We will ban any forum user who breaks our terms.

    Freedom of speech should be wide open as long as it doesn't incite violence.

    We have a 15 year old thriving community here with 400,000+ members and hundreds of people online at any given moment, we encourage you to join!, there are 1000's of topics to discuss. Please be aware before registering and read our terms of service and privacy policy.

    By dismissing this notice and proceeding, you agree to the above.

fights Medieval armor v medieval arrows

no armor is better because of speed and visuality , you just dont see very good with a helmet on and you move too slow if opponent is experienced ,, and muslims dont need it because they have allah swt thats why pieces of shit movies like 300 stole the story of the best battles ever fought from Mohamed peace be upon him
 
Funny thing is breastplate armor continued to be worn by soldiers well into the firearms era, especially by the nobles who wanted to appear very shiny all the time. This is what good it did for one french calvary man hit by a cannon ball in the 1815 battle of Waterloo:
483131_1-tt-width-600-height-776-crop-1-bgcolor-ffffff-lazyload-0.jpg
 
Funny thing is breastplate armor continued to be worn by soldiers well into the firearms era, especially by the nobles who wanted to appear very shiny all the time. This is what good it did for one french calvary man hit by a cannon ball in the 1815 battle of Waterloo:
View attachment 709058

Some prest plates could stop soft lead rounds. The angle and steel made this possible of course black powder back then was deadly but not as spicey as today's stuff. AR 500 steel stops modern rifle rounds today.
 
no armor is better because of speed and visuality , you just dont see very good with a helmet on and you move too slow if opponent is experienced ,, and muslims dont need it because they have allah swt thats why pieces of shit movies like 300 stole the story of the best battles ever fought from Mohamed peace be upon him
Bout time this turd got flushed.
 
Allah protects the moslims. They dont need armor.
Agreed, my cousin was deployed in Afghanistan for several years as a sniper. He shot this Al-Qaeda leader once with a .50 and watched through the scope as the bullet struck him in the head only to be deflected by an invisible force. The al-Qaeda leader wasn't even aware the bullet had hit him as he continued on his buisness. The crazy part is this happened all the time, US soldiers just couldn't kill the very devoted Muslims with bullets. The non-strict muslims were easy to kill though, especially the ones who partook in haram activities, such as neglecting their prayers, consuming forbiden foods, ogling the exposed ankles of passing women, etc.
 
Funny thing is breastplate armor continued to be worn by soldiers well into the firearms era, especially by the nobles who wanted to appear very shiny all the time. This is what good it did for one french calvary man hit by a cannon ball in the 1815 battle of Waterloo:
View attachment 709058
That’s what gurgled sliced throat’s vagina looks like

IMG_2509.webp
 
This is how Henry V of England got fucked. Fighting in Wales a arrow bounced off somebodies armour and hit him straight in the face. The doctor that operated on him invented a tool and a smithy forged it and delivered it while Henry V wad dying. Luckily (or not, if you're French) Henry V lived and the doctor got paid a heavy pension for the rest of his life.
 
Back
Top