Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

Have you gotten hit by lightning while wearing a suit of full plate?  Because right now this is sounding like you're trying to pass off speculation as a fact. There's plenty of reasonable ways why a guy wearing metal armor might get hurt by lightning, while still allowing the plate to mitigate the damage.

Have you?

If not, you're being a tad hypocritical.

I mean, you complain about passing of speculation as fact, then immediately start passing of speculation as fact.

Really, there's the soaking wet skin, which transmits electricity just fine,

No it doesn't. Wet skin conducts electricity better than dry skin, but is still very bad at doing it.

Wet skin has a resistance of roughly 500 - 1000 ohms. Iron is 0.000000097 Ω m (ohm meters)

That's more than 10 orders of magnitude difference.

heat transfer

As already said, heat transfer is insufficient, and even if it was sufficient, it would affect unarmored forces more than armored forces.

Lots of ways someone could get hurt, while still leaving it possible for the armor to mitigate some damage, or block it some of the time.  Like it's been being described.

No, what is being described is lightning being extra dangerous for armored warriors, rather than being slightly harmfull.

[Devastator]

Not much to say here.  I think the only thing to mention is that resistance does not equal resistivity, there's a few more steps that need to be done before you can get a meaningful comparison.  The rest is just loudly repeating your opinions, as if you were annoyed at them being called opinions.

[10ebbor10]

Typical. Don't have an argument, so go about attacking the man. You're simply trying to poison the well by insinuating that I'm not a reliable source because you think I'm getting annoyed. In fact, I am indeed restating my original position, because you never adressed the points. You simply dismissed them and moved the goalposts.

Anyway, unlike you, I'm willing to actual argue based on the argument, not by attacking the person making it. So let's do that.

Point by point

Arc Heating

My argument : Arc heating is not that harmful, only occurring on the outside of armor. Following graphic evidence provided. http://lightningsafety.com/nlsi_pls/car_strike_pix/pic1b.jpg

Your argument :

I'd also like to point out that metal does have great conductivity.  If it gets heated, it's extremely effective at transferring that heat to whatever it's touching.  Which would be you. Really, if the heat's enough to scorch the metal like that, I don't want to be wearing it.

as if it's hot enough to blister paint, it's enough to blister people

Additional note : I may not have made it clear enough, but the Arc happens on the outside of the armor. This means you get a very sharp and very short heat gradient. It does not last long enough to heat up the metal, merely scorches the surface. And anyway, having the spark directly on the skin will always be worse than having armor between.

Electrical resistance heating

My argument : Metal conducts, therefore there would be insufficient resistance to noticeably heat the material.

Your argument : [I don't think you've mentioned this point much. Others have, so I'll leave this here]

Further notes : This is evidenced by the fact that much thinner lightning rods exist and don't have to be replaced after every strike. A 12 mm copper wire can conduct a lightning strike without issues, and so you can't argue that a lightning strike would heat a far thicker armor to uncomfortable levels.

Lighting messing with your body

My argument : Metal conducts far better than skin, no noticeable amount of electricity will pass through.

Your argument: Wet skin conducts better

Note : You're going to have to do better than that. Currently you're posing your opinion as fact despite plenty of evidence (faraday cages, faraday suits, physics, ...) to the contrary.


For the rest, what you've done is move the goalpost. Originally, the point was whether or not lightning should heavily impact armored forces. So, it was a discussion between lightning impacts armor heavier, or lightning impacts armor weakly.

Then, you tried to change the goalposts, pretending that the argument was between whether it should lightly impact armored forces or not impact them at all. This is very dishonest, because from the beginning there was no one who argued against the fact that lightning would have at least some effect.


On a completely unrelated note. The idea that metal attracts lightning is a myth. Lightning is attracted to a point where a charge can build up. That means that the object needs to be high, needs to be pointy, and needs be relatively isolated. So, unless our armor features a 12 meter Pickelhaube, it won't attract lightning at all.

[evictedSaint]

Arstotzka has been using fireballs at sea the entire time.

However, their ships have the trade off of being worse at combat but having a higher bonus when landing troops.  Moskurgs needed to develop research to do sea magic likely as a balancing mechanism - once they did things began tipping in their favor.  Once Arstotzka shifted their ships back into one massive fleet, things became balanced again.

[10ebbor10]

I must say, I hate the artificial difficulty of not knowing what the hell is going on.

Obscure rules, not knowing what effects what, not knowing where we are in comparison to the enemy, not knowing what the problem points are. A few vague hints exist, but without an index or central repository, trying to compile those is simply an exercise in frustration.

I'm pretty sure the Moskurgians never knew that they didn't have magic at sea while we did. I certainly didn't notice.

[S34N1C]

No, we didn't know about our lack of magic at sea until I asked the GM why our wind magic had done nothing to improve our sailboats. We were then informed, and made our revision(might have been a design, I don't remember)

[evictedSaint]

It was a design.

[NUKE9.13]

It was a design.

Like 95% sure it was a revision.
...
Just checked, and yeah, it was a revision.

Revision: Naval Weather Mages

[evictedSaint]

Oops, I was mistaken.  I could have sworn it was a design...

[ATHATH]

I accidentally opened the Arstotskan thread. I immediately exited, but I did see one post:

Spoiler: Don't read this if you're a Moskurgian (click to show/hide)

Bigger fireballs.

Sorry about that.

[FallacyofUrist]

As it happened, I accidentally opened the Moskurgian thread. As soon as I realized what I was reading, I exited. The only thing I recall was this:

Spoiler: Don't read this if you're an Arstozkan (click to show/hide)

Something about staffs.

Sorry about that. I don't intend to use my meta knowledge in any way.

[Radio Controlled]

If we're all coming clean anyway, might as well admit it: I've looked at both the threads, and recall one thing in particular:

Spoiler: Don't open if you're Arstozkan (click to show/hide)

They're all insane.

Spoiler: Don't open if you're Moskurgian (click to show/hide)

They're all insane.

[Azzuro]

I accidentally opened the Arstotskan thread. I immediately exited, but I did see one post:

Spoiler: Don't read this if you're a Moskurgian (click to show/hide)

Bigger fireballs.

Sorry about that.

I am curious as to why you had to post that information on this thread as well, rather than not saying what you saw. Is this Moskurg's attempt to start spy games?

[ATHATH]

I accidentally opened the Arstotskan thread. I immediately exited, but I did see one post:

Spoiler: Don't read this if you're a Moskurgian (click to show/hide)

Bigger fireballs.

Sorry about that.

I am curious as to why you had to post that information on this thread as well, rather than not saying what you saw. Is this Moskurg's attempt to start spy games?

I posted it there so that you guys would know what I had seen and would be able to plan accordingly. There was nothing malicious about it.

[RAM]

This game does run on the honesty system, so a spoiler is not much worse than a second thread, except to O.C.D.: Spoiler Edition? I mean, I only checked the Radio's ones and even then only with peripheral vision to confirm that it looked like the same joke in both of them. And then I wondered if Fallacy's was revenge or a joke so I did the peripheral vision thing there and think it was probably real, couldn't say what it is though... Okay, so maybe I am not perfect but still, we are just trusting everyone to stay out of each other's threads...

 Although you should just refrain from contributing for the turn if you think that there would be anything for us to plan around. If we have to go around planning for things that we shouldn't then that is affecting the game in a pretty large way even if we know about it.