(02-03-2015, 04:09 PM)MadWater Wrote: As for armor, in the real world, firearms defeated even the heaviest of plate armor. That's why soldiers stopped wearing armor in combat until the invention of modern synthetic composite materials.
Admittedly this may have very little to do with the discussion on Eorzean firearms, but in history, this change wasn't immediate in any sense. Plate armor and firearms coexisted on the battlefield for quite some time, several centuries in fact. As firearms progressed, the response wasn't an immediate disposal of armor, but rather refinements and improvements to the metallurgy so they could withstand various types of firepower.
One of my favorite examples of this is explained in Wikipedia here:
Quote:In the early years of pistol and arquebuses, firearms were relatively low in velocity. The full suits of armor, or breast plates actually stopped bullets fired from a modest distance. The front breast plates were, in fact, commonly shot as a test. The impact point would often be encircled with engraving to point it out. This was called the "proof". Armor often also bore an insignia of the maker, especially if it was of good quality. Crossbow bolts, if still used, would seldom penetrate good plate, nor would any bullet unless fired from close range.
The article goes on to point out that full plate armor was used by commanders and such all the way up to the early 1700's. Now of course the firearm eventually won out, but in no way was it an immediate or even quick change.
