Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward
In any case, the CF is based purely on the material. Bronze costs four times more than iron. Any differences in construction have their own separate CFs.
|
If bronze really does cost no more than four times as much as iron, then multiplying the entire cost (including labor) by four will clearly produce an erroneous result (unless the labor requirements are, by an astonishing coincidence, also roughly four times as expensive for all types of armor), and the result will be more erroneous for armor types that require (and therefore have a cost based on) more labor or more skilled labor- which brings us right back to the start of this thread.
EDIT: My assumption that bronze is, in some ways, easier to work (although doubtless more troublesome in others) are based on this: working with iron, the difficulty in forming it into large plates was such that armor based on such did not become common until the late middle ages (and, if I am understanding correctly, tended to require a higher grade of iron/steel than was needed for mail, scale, etc.), in contrast to classical-age and earlier bronze cuirasses. If this was caused by factors other than the practical difficulties of working iron, I would be interested to hear them.