{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/17/2013 1:41:15 PM
11
[quote]Why does the world of Mass Effect require lady lumps on armor?[/quote]
Wouldn't your boobs being pressed up against a chest piece designed for a male with much smaller boobs be kinda uncomfortable?
English
-
You can have boob friendly armor that doesn't risk your health. Concave chest pieces for each boob isn't a good idea.
-
Edited by ArcGuard: 2/17/2013 4:02:26 PMConcave? Convex? Doesn't concave go in? And why is it not a good idea? So that your body isn't comfortable? So that you have restrictive armor since it doesn't accurately fit your body? Male armor doesn't work for female bodies. They're not the same types.
-
It's early and I'm mixing up vocabulary. My point was that breasts in armor dont need to be exaggerated and creating two cups for them on chest armor is dangerous. Besides, there's plenty of male armor with convex chest pieces that could already easily work for females, with little modification. I'm by no means saying no boobs ever. But you don't need armr pieces that double as unnecessary push up bras that could potentially kill you. There is a middle ground between comfort and practicality.
-
Edited by Kickimanjaro: 2/17/2013 4:10:02 PMI believe the reason for a convex boob-armor being a bad thing was explained in-depth in the Tumblr post on the subject (which I thought was linked in the OP but it seems only an image from the post was linked). In short, an impact on the front of the armor would exert so much pressure on the sternum that it would break and the wearer would die a painful death. Even shorter, it's like your armor killing you if you trip and fall. [url=http://martwhim.tumblr.com/post/40061546009/why-do-you-hate-the-shape-of-breasts-in-plate-armor-so]Full post[/url]
-
Funny enough, that post does link a set of armor that has a place for her boobs, as it should. Because if it doesn't, it's either going to press them into your chest - creating problems, or it's going to be loose around your stomach - creating problems. It doesn't have the indent in the middle, but it does have a protruding section for her chest. But then with the dent in the middle, you're just getting into artistic freedom. (Because kratos from god of war has totally battle-ready armor)
-
I do not understand the humor. Above the image you link it says "GREAT EXAMPLE OF FANTASY TORSO ARMOR THAT IS FEMININE BUT FUNCTIONAL:"
-
Because everyone is saying that having a space for her chest cut out is absolutely crazy and nonsensical. And it clearly is the case with that image. That article you linked argues the indent between a woman's boobs is bad, but a hollow cavity for them is definitely a must for comfort and functionality.
-
I think we're arguing the same thing and I misunderstood. Sorry.
-
Not that this really applies but when female knights, not that there were many, went to war they wore the same armor as men. Since both sets of armor had an expanded chest plate to better the deflection of blows from swords and such it didn't really matter if there was a tit cavity or not.
-
The reason they wore the "same armor" is because females in a military setting were so rare that they never [i]made[/i] armor for females.
-
This is pretty much what I always thoughts. Do they not want body armor that conforms to them? Would that not make it easier to maneuver and use while being more comfortable? And before anyone says "well, in history, armor has never been that way!" Well, historically, there have been very few women in combat, so of course that wouldn't be the case.
