Active Users:668 Time:23/02/2025 10:20:49 AM
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 1461 Views
You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 10/02/2012 06:29:28 PM 924 Views
You busted him! I wonder why he would post it again... *NM* - 10/02/2012 07:25:47 PM 490 Views
I suppose I am on a... - 10/02/2012 11:00:47 PM 828 Views
No, you go back and re-read what everyone said. - 11/02/2012 11:02:47 PM 927 Views
We're actually losing them by the troves. My apologies. *NM* - 12/02/2012 02:52:01 AM 451 Views
I rest my case. - 10/05/2012 04:34:02 PM 824 Views
Re: You posted this exact same question one year ago, with a lot of discussion - 11/02/2012 01:37:27 PM 1016 Views
Agreed. - 11/02/2012 06:24:36 PM 808 Views
why not some plate armor. duh. *NM* - 12/02/2012 09:54:43 PM 490 Views
See? - 10/05/2012 04:35:25 PM 796 Views
Possible, but hard. - 11/02/2012 01:56:03 AM 932 Views
scale or plate armor would be quite easy *NM* - 11/02/2012 01:38:47 PM 417 Views
My thought was always about weapons. - 11/02/2012 06:31:45 AM 988 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 12/02/2012 10:51:43 AM 863 Views
Re: My thought was always about weapons. - 14/02/2012 01:53:59 PM 827 Views
Should be perfectly feasible - 11/02/2012 12:28:47 PM 825 Views
Exactly - 11/02/2012 01:53:24 PM 860 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 911 Views
Ummm, Warders... - 14/02/2012 01:39:23 PM 754 Views
How would Cuendillar armour help against channelers? - 14/02/2012 07:58:58 PM 825 Views
It can not be directly effected by the OP - 14/02/2012 09:08:57 PM 718 Views
some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 09:52:41 PM 855 Views
Re: some simple ideas for defeating warders armoured such. - 14/02/2012 10:54:26 PM 704 Views
which way is it? - 15/02/2012 04:14:41 AM 718 Views
Actually I'd call the Seanchan tactically inferior to the White Tower in using the power - 15/02/2012 01:48:55 PM 831 Views
That's really not my point. - 15/02/2012 03:21:15 PM 713 Views
My point is - 15/02/2012 03:52:43 PM 703 Views
Agree on all points *NM* - 15/02/2012 07:06:09 PM 563 Views
I never said that they could not be stopped - 15/02/2012 01:58:41 PM 819 Views
I really think you're over-estimating how difficult it would be. - 15/02/2012 03:22:44 PM 764 Views
Not nesecarrily - 15/02/2012 04:01:45 PM 769 Views
You just said that most of their tactics are indirect. - 15/02/2012 05:44:22 PM 876 Views
..and you are creating new tactics - 15/02/2012 06:32:02 PM 709 Views
*shrug* I don't see it as some world-shaking action - 15/02/2012 08:47:40 PM 728 Views
Not accurate - 15/02/2012 03:54:00 PM 828 Views
You are thinking too far inside the box - 15/02/2012 04:23:28 PM 798 Views
I disagree - 15/02/2012 04:43:33 PM 764 Views
If armor is of no benefit... - 15/02/2012 06:19:30 PM 667 Views
Missing my point ... Cuendillar armor is impractical not useless - 15/02/2012 07:00:48 PM 776 Views
nope - 15/02/2012 07:21:03 PM 693 Views
*Shrug* - 15/02/2012 08:28:48 PM 823 Views
Re: *Shrug* - 15/02/2012 09:07:24 PM 984 Views
Re: It can not be directly effected by the OP - 15/02/2012 02:37:40 AM 706 Views
Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 02:12:59 PM 695 Views
Re: Maybe, maybe not - 15/02/2012 06:11:42 PM 841 Views
I'll happily amend my initial statement to "maybe even challeling ones" - 15/02/2012 07:03:48 PM 720 Views
Fair enough. - 16/02/2012 02:08:19 AM 724 Views
what a lot of people are forgetting with their suggestions of plate armor... - 13/02/2012 02:36:50 PM 894 Views
Your understanding of how plate armor functions is in error - 14/02/2012 01:45:37 PM 705 Views
I believe AND I was hoping you would go into the physics of it :p - 14/02/2012 11:01:18 PM 696 Views
here ya go, I still skipped almost all of the math though. - 15/02/2012 03:00:09 PM 756 Views
Two things: *NM* - 16/02/2012 04:03:52 PM 458 Views

Reply to Message