Active Users:992 Time:14/11/2024 11:14:33 PM
Maybe, maybe not HyogaRott Send a noteboard - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM
RJ never really went into the OP defying properties of C. The fireballs are pure weaves of fire, no weave, no fire, no heat. We also do not know about the heat transferance properties of C. For all we know it could pass heat like tin foil, or be so resistant to it you could hold it in your hand while someone plays a palsma torch over it. We just don't know. Lightning might or might not be effective. C started as iron, but is it still ferrous? If not, just how perfect an insulator is it? It could be such a high value insulator that lighting will not strike it, again we just don't know.

An interesting debate might be what would happen if someone wearing C armor got hit by balefire. Balefire is pure OP that burns you out of the pattern backwards, but C is immune to the OP. Would it just wash off you, or could (theoretically) a channeler use enough OP to burn far enough back to before you put it on, or before the armor was converted from iron...

My position is simple. C armor would not be hard to make, making it would not violate any of the oaths, and C armor is substantially better than normal armor. just how much better is something we can go round and round on because only RJ could have given a definitive answer; but he never did.

Reply to message
Functional Cuendillar Armor: Possible or impossible? - 10/02/2012 04:45:34 PM 1401 Views
You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 10/02/2012 06:29:28 PM 851 Views
You busted him! I wonder why he would post it again... *NM* - 10/02/2012 07:25:47 PM 454 Views
I suppose I am on a... - 10/02/2012 11:00:47 PM 755 Views
No, you go back and re-read what everyone said. - 11/02/2012 11:02:47 PM 854 Views
We're actually losing them by the troves. My apologies. *NM* - 12/02/2012 02:52:01 AM 416 Views
I rest my case. - 10/05/2012 04:34:02 PM 750 Views
Re: You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 11/02/2012 01:37:27 PM 947 Views
Agreed. - 11/02/2012 06:24:36 PM 741 Views
why not some plate armor. duh. *NM* - 12/02/2012 09:54:43 PM 455 Views
See? - 10/05/2012 04:35:25 PM 726 Views
Possible, but hard. - 11/02/2012 01:56:03 AM 848 Views
scale or plate armor would be quite easy *NM* - 11/02/2012 01:38:47 PM 385 Views
My thought was always about weapons. - 11/02/2012 06:31:45 AM 919 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 12/02/2012 10:51:43 AM 791 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 14/02/2012 01:53:59 PM 757 Views
Should be perfectly feasible - 11/02/2012 12:28:47 PM 754 Views
Exactly - 11/02/2012 01:53:24 PM 799 Views
Certainly possible, but given the effort most women have to put toward changing even a small item - 12/02/2012 05:10:35 AM 839 Views
Ummm, Warders... - 14/02/2012 01:39:23 PM 684 Views
How would Cuendillar armour help against channelers? - 14/02/2012 07:58:58 PM 751 Views
It can not be directly effected by the OP - 14/02/2012 09:08:57 PM 654 Views
some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 09:52:41 PM 792 Views
Re: some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 10:54:26 PM 638 Views
which way is it? - 15/02/2012 04:14:41 AM 651 Views
Actually I'd call the Seanchan tactically inferior to the White Tower in using the power - 15/02/2012 01:48:55 PM 766 Views
That's really not my point. - 15/02/2012 03:21:15 PM 643 Views
My point is - 15/02/2012 03:52:43 PM 636 Views
Agree on all points *NM* - 15/02/2012 07:06:09 PM 531 Views
I never said that they could not be stopped - 15/02/2012 01:58:41 PM 744 Views
I really think you're over-estimating how difficult it would be. - 15/02/2012 03:22:44 PM 679 Views
Not nesecarrily - 15/02/2012 04:01:45 PM 693 Views
You just said that most of their tactics are indirect. - 15/02/2012 05:44:22 PM 796 Views
..and you are creating new tactics - 15/02/2012 06:32:02 PM 638 Views
*shrug* I don't see it as some world-shaking action - 15/02/2012 08:47:40 PM 655 Views
Not accurate - 15/02/2012 03:54:00 PM 749 Views
You are thinking too far inside the box - 15/02/2012 04:23:28 PM 733 Views
I disagree - 15/02/2012 04:43:33 PM 696 Views
If armor is of no benefit... - 15/02/2012 06:19:30 PM 600 Views
Missing my point ... Cuendillar armor is impractical not useless - 15/02/2012 07:00:48 PM 734 Views
nope - 15/02/2012 07:21:03 PM 622 Views
*Shrug* - 15/02/2012 08:28:48 PM 748 Views
Re: *Shrug* - 15/02/2012 09:07:24 PM 913 Views
Re: It can not be directly effected by the OP - 15/02/2012 02:37:40 AM 642 Views
Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM 615 Views
Re: Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 06:11:42 PM 757 Views
I'll happily amend my initial statement to "maybe even challeling ones" - 15/02/2012 07:03:48 PM 652 Views
Fair enough. - 16/02/2012 02:08:19 AM 648 Views
what a lot of people are forgetting with their suggestions of plate armor... - 13/02/2012 02:36:50 PM 815 Views
Your understanding of how plate armor functions is in error - 14/02/2012 01:45:37 PM 642 Views
I believe AND I was hoping you would go into the physics of it :p - 14/02/2012 11:01:18 PM 626 Views
here ya go, I still skipped almost all of the math though. - 15/02/2012 03:00:09 PM 691 Views
Two things: *NM* - 16/02/2012 04:03:52 PM 422 Views

Reply to Message