Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 aka_mythos wrote:
The boob plate "problems" some people have... It's silly to be bothered by it.

Saying "I think it'd be better this way" isn't the same as being "bothered" by it.

 Melissia wrote:
Looks like three separate sets of armor, to me.

Looking again, it seems so. However, the drawing clearly featured the pauldron shape typical of power armor rather than terminator armor.

 andrewm9 wrote:
Personally, I like the models shape right now. I never thought of them as over sexualized or even just sexualized.

Me too. But I am still annoyed by people saying that male should be the default and that having women in gender-neutral armor is boring, implying that having only men in all those gender-neutral armor is any less boring…

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Looks like three separate sets of armor, to me.

Looking again, it seems so. However, the drawing clearly featured the pauldron shape typical of power armor rather than terminator armor.

 andrewm9 wrote:
Personally, I like the models shape right now. I never thought of them as over sexualized or even just sexualized.

Me too. But I am still annoyed by people saying that male should be the default and that having women in gender-neutral armor is boring, implying that having only men in all those gender-neutral armor is any less boring…

Well just to nitpick, men are always the majority party involved in any actual fighting of a war, so we'll remain the "default" for a wargame model. Only thing that will replace us is drones lol.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Me too. But I am still annoyed by people saying that male should be the default and that having women in gender-neutral armor is boring, implying that having only men in all those gender-neutral armor is any less boring…

Human armour was designed to follow the curvature of the male body. It's not gender neutral.

 nullBolt wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Me too. But I am still annoyed by people saying that male should be the default and that having women in gender-neutral armor is boring, implying that having only men in all those gender-neutral armor is any less boring…

Human armour was designed to follow the curvature of the male body. It's not gender neutral.

PICTURE TIME!!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I know what this thread needs right now. A bunch of pictures of actual women using actual armor:
http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/96765743738/safetytank-submitted-footage-of-women-in-proper
http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/113693276506/sarah-hays-recent-jousting-victory-showcases-not
and now for something more modern:
http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/91353682893/girlslovegamestoo-the-real-women-of-steel

 Melissia wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
The boob plate "problems" some people have... It's silly to be bothered by it.

Saying "I think it'd be better this way" isn't the same as being "bothered" by it.

Having the thought "I think it'd be better this way" and then posting a dozen or so times over the space of an evening pretty much fills the definition of being "bothered". Not being bothered would be not being interested or caring enough to bother with that

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

PICTURE TIME!!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I know what this thread needs right now. A bunch of pictures of actual women using actual armor:
http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/96765743738/safetytank-submitted-footage-of-women-in-proper
http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/113693276506/sarah-hays-recent-jousting-victory-showcases-not
and now for something more modern:
http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/91353682893/girlslovegamestoo-the-real-women-of-steel

What does that have to do with what I said? They might be wearing it, but it's not designed for them. You can see on the female modern soldiers that the shirts start to hang past the chest area, which is very bad.

Also, how to put it politely... None of those ladies are particularly well endowed? Either that or they practice severe breast binding which must be agony.

I mean, Christ, you're complaining about how unrealistic female armour is without realising how unrealistic fiction armour is in general.

If we were going down to redesign armour for women, it wouldn't look anything like what we think of. It'd probably have a much greater curve in the chest area (to allow for breathing space) and would place the majority of the weight on the hips instead of the shoulders.

The armour would be much closer to what is shown in Dark Souls and the like than what we consider an appropriate armour. And then the question would be how many women could actually carry that armour? All day?

Examples:

You do realize that Dark Souls armor is based upon armor from the Late Middle Ages, where all armor (which was made for men) was favoring bulky breasts to divert blows away from the breast?



And such armor is not bulky or heavy at all. It weighs less than the kit of a modern soldier, and its weight is distributed across the entire body.

 Wyzilla wrote:
You do realize that Dark Souls armor is based upon armor from the Late Middle Ages, where all armor (which was made for men) was favoring bulky breasts to divert blows away from the breast?



And such armor is not bulky or heavy at all. It weighs less than the kit of a modern soldier, and its weight is distributed across the entire body.

I do, but the Dark Souls armour is notably more emphasised on every point.

Look at the armour you've shown. The chest is much flatter than any of the Dark Souls stuff and it wouldn't fit the vast majority of women.

 nullBolt wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
You do realize that Dark Souls armor is based upon armor from the Late Middle Ages, where all armor (which was made for men) was favoring bulky breasts to divert blows away from the breast?



And such armor is not bulky or heavy at all. It weighs less than the kit of a modern soldier, and its weight is distributed across the entire body.

I do, but the Dark Souls armour is notably more emphasised on every point.

Look at the armour you've shown. The chest is much flatter than any of the Dark Souls stuff and it wouldn't fit the vast majority of women.

It's called an ace bandage.

 Wyzilla wrote:

It's called an ace bandage.

It's called agony and difficulty breathing. :p It's usually not a good idea to give yourself a hard time breathing in combat.

Anyway, that kind of proves my point. Women have to force their bodies into a masculine shape to comfortably fit armour.

 nullBolt wrote:
What does that have to do with what I said? They might be wearing it, but it's not designed for them. You can see on the female modern soldiers that the shirts start to hang past the chest area, which is very bad.

Are you kidding? Do I need to dig in the article about the flakk jacket designed for women by the U.S. army?
http://www.army.mil/article/95468/Army_surgeon_general_dons_new_female_body_armor/
Such a slender waist! What an hourglass figure! We can totally see a breast bulge!

 nullBolt wrote:
Also, how to put it politely... None of those ladies are particularly well endowed?

And… how would you know that?

 nullBolt wrote:
Either that or they practice severe breast binding which must be agony.

Maybe we should ask someone who has breasts. I mean, is that not exactly what sports bra are designed for?

 nullBolt wrote:
I mean, Christ, you're complaining about how unrealistic female armour is without realising how unrealistic fiction armour is in general.[…]And then the question would be how many women could actually carry that armour? All day?

Self-contradiction mode: activated!

 nullBolt wrote:
If we were going down to redesign armour for women, it wouldn't look anything like what we think of. It'd probably have a much greater curve in the chest area (to allow for breathing space) and would place the majority of the weight on the hips instead of the shoulders.

What about we look at historical and modern examples? Maybe click again on my link above ( http://www.army.mil/article/95468/Army_surgeon_general_dons_new_female_body_armor/ )? Maybe let's get another look: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2013/09/26/new-body-armor-women-military/ ? Hum, that's so boobilicious! Anyone looking at the armor in 28mm would definitely recognize a woman based on… stuff.

So to summarize:

a number of people like the boob plated style or SoB and would like to keep that desing aproach.

a other amount of people would like to have a more serious aproach with a more realistic designed armour.

The reasons why some prefers one aproach above another are very different.

Aestaetics

historical ( in a 40k sense)

Feministical (wathever you want to call it, there is a huge amount of different names AND different aoriaches ( detail and systemical))

realistic

But why is there so much talk about the armour of the SoS ?

Nobody can deny the fact that a SoS with breasted armour is much easier to identify as a femal model when you look at it while its on a game table compared to a style that is more realistic but will end up pretty much into something space marine like.


Anyway. Whats the point of this debate?
How does the debate about real life armour improve the hobby?

I guess this here is one of the reasons GW dont redo them. It is a hot topic. thats sure. In addition SoS were never be a well suported army. They were eighter optional choices depending on oponents agreement. highliy outdated modelwise. and that they curently only have a eDex doen't help.
No wonder they are not that prominent.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
*snip*

So that's a lovely post of completely off topic. For all your posts in this thread, unless I missed it (the last few pages of boob plate I mostly ignored), I'm yet to hear your opinion on "why don't you think GW will redo the Sisters line?" Or do you think they will redo it? Or why do you think they haven't done it yet?

Maybe we can get a separate thread on boob plates which in future we can just link to when it inevitably comes up and drags us off topic in every SoB thread.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
For all your posts in this thread, unless I missed it (the last few pages of boob plate I mostly ignored), I'm yet to hear your opinion on "why don't you think GW will redo the Sisters line?" Or do you think they will redo it? Or why do you think they haven't done it yet?

I think I did in another topic, or something? Maybe in the News section? I remember very well posting something about it. Basically, “because GW hates us, and wants us to suffer”. Cannot find any better explanation.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Are you kidding? Do I need to dig in the article about the flakk jacket designed for women by the U.S. army?
http://www.army.mil/article/95468/Army_surgeon_general_dons_new_female_body_armor/
Such a slender waist! What an hourglass figure! We can totally see a breast bulge!

Flak jacket =/= Hard armour.

Anyway, look at it. It's still got a notable gap under it where her breasts raise it up.

You've kind of contradicted yourself here and proved me right. They were required to design an entirely new jacket for women because the one designed for men doesn't fit their physique. Thanks for the link proving I'm correct!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
And… how would you know that?

I have eyes?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Maybe we should ask someone who has breasts. I mean, is that not exactly what sports bra are designed for?

Sports bras hold them in place so they don't swing all over the place. They're not made to completely flatten them to fit.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Self-contradiction mode: activated!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
What about we look at historical and modern examples? Maybe click again on my link above ( http://www.army.mil/article/95468/Army_surgeon_general_dons_new_female_body_armor/ )? Maybe let's get another look: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2013/09/26/new-body-armor-women-military/ ?

Another link that proves my point!

Thanks for that, you're really helpful!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Hum, that's so boobilicious!

Holy strawman, Batman! I don't know who you're going on a crusade against, but my arguments bear no resemblance to this.

 _ghost_ wrote:
Nobody can deny the fact that a SoS with breasted armour is much easier to identify as a femal model when you look at it while its on a game table compared to a style that is more realistic but will end up pretty much into something space marine like.

I disagree with the part I put in italics. They have an armor that is distinct way beyond “boobies”. While marines look very high-tech sci-fy, Sisters are made to evoke the excess of the catholic church, wih tons of bling and a way less clean, technological look.
That's why they have cloths, leather gloves, little spikes on the backpack and on some parts of the armor, more irregular shape for the pauldrons, …

Oh for feths sake, why can I not enter any single area on the internet these days without seeing SJW's being offended by some minor detail?

I, personally, like the look of the current armour but I feel that the kits do need an update and a new plastic set. Something with boob armour and faces that do not look like men in drag.

Fine. but what makes them noticable as females?

the breasted plates part
the corset thing.
their heads

http://wh40k-de.lexicanum.com/mediawiki/images/e/e8/Sororita_sister.jpg

thats my point. if you skip these parts we have a genderless Marine armour with a lot of bling bling

 nullBolt wrote:
You've kind of contradicted yourself here and proved me right. They were required to design an entirely new jacket for women because the one designed for men doesn't fit their physique. Thanks for the link proving I'm correct!

Nah, because we can clearly see that the flak jacket looks just very, very similar to the male one. Something you would not noticed on a 28mm scale. Something completely irrelevant. Just like nobody complains that models are all the same size when actually there are height difference in the population…

 nullBolt wrote:
I have eyes?

Yeah, but do you get something to analyze what your eyes see?

 nullBolt wrote:
Sports bras hold them in place so they don't swing all over the place. They're not made to completely flatten them to fit.

Yeah, but they do flatten them. And the result is that there is no noticeable difference when wearing armor. Of course, when confronted with actual pictures and videos that demonstrate this perfectly, you are just going to say “They are not well endowed, I know it even though I never saw them out of armor because I master the art of circular reasoning!”.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Oh for feths sake, why can I not enter any single area on the internet these days without seeing SJW's being offended by some minor detail?

Does it trigger you? You seem pretty sensitive…

 _ghost_ wrote:
thats my point. if you skip these parts we have a genderless Marine armour with a lot of bling bling

Yes. Would that be a bad thing? I never saw anyone suggesting we should remove the heads, though. I think we all agree those should stay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
For all your posts in this thread, unless I missed it (the last few pages of boob plate I mostly ignored), I'm yet to hear your opinion on "why don't you think GW will redo the Sisters line?" Or do you think they will redo it? Or why do you think they haven't done it yet?

I think I did in another topic, or something? Maybe in the News section? I remember very well posting something about it. Basically, “because GW hates us, and wants us to suffer”. Cannot find any better explanation.

Found it.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/672440.page#8312187
That's my theory. Anyone agree?

 master of ordinance wrote:
I, personally, like the look of the current armour but I feel that the kits do need an update and a new plastic set. Something with boob armour and faces that do not look like men in drag.

I agree

I know the arguments against boob armour but frankly I don't care. They're 28mm models, sure they could look like genderless blobs and I could just imagine what sex they are, but I prefer it to be cartoonishly exaggerated without it looking like some weird fetish thing.... the basic SoB armour does that already so I'm happy enough with that.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
For all your posts in this thread, unless I missed it (the last few pages of boob plate I mostly ignored), I'm yet to hear your opinion on "why don't you think GW will redo the Sisters line?" Or do you think they will redo it? Or why do you think they haven't done it yet?

I think I did in another topic, or something? Maybe in the News section? I remember very well posting something about it. Basically, “because GW hates us, and wants us to suffer”. Cannot find any better explanation.

Found it.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/672440.page#8312187
That's my theory. Anyone agree?

I think that's brief enough that you didn't need to post a link

But what makes you think they hate us to the point they wouldn't give us something that would make them money? They sounds as illogical as anything else I've heard. I agree that GW don't respect the customer and probably would be happy if they could make money without dealing with us But at the same time I don't see why they'd ignore something that could make them money unless they either don't think it would make money or it would be too costly for them to do.

That's why I wonder if Sisters sold poorly waaaaay back in 2nd edition and GW are basing their projections off that. That's why I brought up Necrons way back when, back in 2nd edition Necrons and Sisters weren't too far apart, Sisters actually had a codex, Necrons just had some White Dwarf articles, both had very limited army lists with metal models making up the core. Necrons got converted to plastic, Sisters did not.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
But what makes you think they hate us to the point they wouldn't give us something that would make them money?

Bitterness, of course. I am very bitter. It's in my sig.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
They sounds as illogical as anything else I've heard.

So… do you mean that this sound like something GW would do? Historically I think GW was pretty strong in the “illogical decisions”. For instance, updating all the translations for one or two codex, including names that had never been translated before to begin with (like genestealer), and suddenly changing to stop translating the name of ANY unit, leaving us with atrocious text when a common name like Commissar is left in English in the middle of a French text…

Wait, did someone say "realistic"?

Moment, rolling on the floor laughing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 _ghost_ wrote:
thats my point. if you skip these parts we have a genderless Marine armour with a lot of bling bling

So you're saying every armor ever that has ever been made that does not include these things is marine armor?

Wow.

Not sure if you've actually compared the two, but even without the corset and boob-plate, there's a huge difference, aesthetically, between Sororitas power armor and Astartes power armor.

 Melissia wrote:
Wait, did someone say "realistic"?

Moment, rolling on the floor laughing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 _ghost_ wrote:
thats my point. if you skip these parts we have a genderless Marine armour with a lot of bling bling

So you're saying every armor ever that has ever been made that does not include these things is marine armor?

Wow.

Did you somehow lost the kontext?
My Point was directed at 40k. Comparing the existing SoB armour with the space marine armour. and i said it would be a kind of marine armour with lots of bling bling.

It doesn't look anything like "space marine armor with bling bling" even without the corset and boob-cups. Have you ever actually looked at the two side by side? They're drastically diffrent.

So what are the great differences? Ripp of the cups , corset and the bling bling. ... suddenly the drastic differences become thinner. .. well if anything the SoB armour becomes more skinny compared to a SM.

Then i could create a new Chapter: The Thin-Marines

 _ghost_ wrote:
So what are the great differences?

The shape of the shoulders is dramatically different, not even having the same technical name (pauldrons vs epaulets); the Sororitas gauntlets have a far softer look to them, with studs around the wrists compared to the hi-tech power armor look of the Astartes armor; the boots of the Sororitas armor look far more like platemail, whereas the Astartes armor looks like the sci-fi powered armor boots that they are. The sleeves hanging from the epaulets are distinct from anything else in the Imperium, and though some astartes chapters do use the skirt-loincloth, it's still very distinctive of the Sisters. Even the helmet is dramatically different, looking closer to helmets associated with platemail than like a helmet suited for powered armor.

Honesly, have you never actually looked at the two side by side?

I looked at both Melissia. But Sorry, thes "huge" differences you claim are as huge as the differences between the different marine armour types ( Mark IV,....)

Epauletes are NOT a part of the armour itself. they fall into the bling bling category. also sleeves are a kind of bling bling and no armour. DA have this also.

The praised plate boots... take a look at the Mark II armour. suprisingly they also have that style...

Im sorry but all of what you say comes down to a DA in Mark II armour that is slightly thiner i napearence and uses a ver personal style of sleeves...

Now that that model put it on the table and then ask someone that is not familiar with 40k at all what person wears this piece of armour.




I

 _ghost_ wrote:
I looked at both Melissia. But Sorry, thes "huge" differences you claim are as huge as the differences between the different marine armour types

So basically your argument is "unless it has boobs it's marine armor". Might as well say "eldar armor is too marine-like" then.

And you expect me to respect that argument as serious and well thought out?

I don't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I seriously find it difficult to believe that you can't tell the difference between these two:



.. unless the first one has boobs on it. That's like saying "That Ork has a gun therefor it must be a shootaboy", ignoring the fact that the gun is a pistol and it's also carrying an axe.

 Melissia wrote:

So basically your argument is "unless it has boobs it's marine armor". Might as well say "eldar armor is too marine-like" then.

And you expect me to respect that argument as serious and well thought out?

I don't.

So you see the Space Marine Armour as a default male one. ... Based on proportions that are made on a unrealistic scale,.. matching modified humans with abnormal proportions.
Well done.
Eldar are not here to debate. we are talking about human armour.

Why do you try so hard to twist my argument?
I said that it becomes at best very hard to tell the difference between a male or female model. U can put as much bling bling and such on that model as you want. on a 28mm style you cant tell for sure if theres a male or female.

Further i said that boob-cups and such makes it very easy to identify a female one on the game table.


Are you seriously telling me that both points are just wrong? Funny. because i debunced your "bling bling" style argument. You are right this stuff sets SoB apart from other things of the IoM but the bling bling doesn't make them obviously female.


The issue if someone should model such armour with obviously shows sexual aspects is a completly different topic. you seem to mix this one up with the points i stated above.

Edit: fine you added pics..

rip of every piece of paper and textiles on both models. then continue and replace the boob-cups with something familiar to the one the SM has. this would be a reasonable step desing wise. then change the belly part of the Sororita that it beomes a less sexual apealing one....

And now we get a Armour that loops pretty much like the one the SM uses... the shoulderpats are kinda different ... the armour is thiner... but in fact it pretty muck looks like the same.