(This chapter has no money deducted for free, please don’t panic) I have also read the complaints about equipment farming in the past two days. I originally wanted to explain it in the plot, but I thought it was not appropriate to read it. It would be a money to charge. Most people are still not interested, so I would like to say a few words in a single chapter for free.

The point that everyone mainly talks about is that "the Shanwenjia and Modao in history are not strong enough." I admit this, but I didn't say what I did in my book is "the Shanwenjia and Modao in history", right? How did I create this thing? The technical principles and routes are roughly deduced without the number of words, so this is actually not the same thing.

The reason I want to borrow these names is because if it is not so conventional, the description will be more difficult. If I write "stamping standardized iron leaf inlaid armor" every time, it must be that some people will say that I have a water word count, and the second is that the leaves are not conducive to readers' imagination.

Just like those who write history, many people do copywriting not because the poems of ancient people are really good, but because readers can easily imagine how awesome it is after you ask the famous ones.

I made up the fu essays of Cai Yan in today's chapter. If I tell you directly that I wrote them, you will think it's "so trash".

But if I am vaguely dealing with it, I deceive everyone, "this is written by Cai Yan in history." Those readers who cannot understand Chinese fu might think, "This fu seems to be quite powerful. Since I can't understand it, it shouldn't be very bad."

Specifically speaking of weapons and equipment, it is entirely possible that "the defense of Shanwen Armor in history is worse than that of fish scale armor" (of course, it cannot be completely concluded. After all, everyone has insufficient evidence, so I believe that there is an 80% chance that it is not as good as fish scale armor).

But if you analyze it yourself, it is easy to think of several reasons - note that the following is not what I searched for information online, but my own thinking. I can guarantee that it is not something that a writer of online literature can do. You must have a foundation in science and engineering.

First of all, I think that when the thickness of the armor sheet is the same, the weak Shanwen armor is in that "the mutual connection between the armor sheets is easy to fall off", and "the gap between the armor sheets is too large, there are defense loopholes, which is similar to a chain mail". These two points have actually been mentioned in the article.

So, why does it happen? Readers with some common sense of machining are not difficult to imagine that it is likely that "the Shanwen armor in history was hand-made forging the armor leaves." It is impossible to ensure standardization by forging with a hammer in hand. Each piece is not completely consistent in shape, and at this time, it is easy to be unable to be put together.

Anyone who has worked as a fitter knows that in this case, craftsmen will definitely tend to "better small than big than big, but better grind than grind" because if it is fine, there is nothing more than the remaining amount after being stuck in, which is loose and loose, but if it is thick, it cannot be inserted directly and cannot be assembled. All craftsmen leave the error in the direction of "better to be fine", which eventually leads to the actual gap in the mountain mana and the defense is not comprehensive.

The piston is smaller than the cylinder, but at best it is not airtight. The piston is thicker than the cylinder, so it cannot be inserted directly.

These problems do not exist when the protagonist uses stamping technology and standardized production. In other words, Shanwenjia in history is not good, but this model can get more room for improvement under the guiding ideology of "standardized parts production" than other models. This is using the industrial thinking of the 20th century to guide the industrial technology of the 15th century.

(I simply used structural software to build a mold in a few minutes. The shape of the arbor leaves is well designed and can be put into it without leaving any gaps.)

As for the problem of plate armor, my latest chapter also said: defense is the most powerful, and the best plate armor does not affect the moves-but the ones you see in the video are worn by ancient kings or at least the Count Marquis and Dukes, so those are left as cultural relics.

Ordinary "Knight" and "Baron" might still be wearing helmets with edges and angular sides like iron barrels in the early 16th century. They are also plate armor helmets with superb defense, right? That kind of thing doesn't affect the flexibility of the move?

So, I still said the same thing, which influences everyone's conventions and cognition. This is my problem. I really try not to do this kind of thing in the future. But I have done it all, I hope everyone has the energy to look at it a few more times and don't skip it. It's best not to "see a historical noun", just glance at it and skip the next few paragraphs, and then think that when you mention this historical noun in the later text, "it refers to the thing in history."

The above is just a random example. The example itself is not important, so I won’t explain Mo Dao later, just give one example.

I also want to continue to review how to improve my communication rate and convey those difficult ambiguities more easily understood.

...

Finally, I would like to say: Everyone knows that the upper limit of the protagonist is the writer. If Li Su is on the fifth floor, I will at least be on the fifth floor, so I can write a protagonist on the fifth floor.

In fact, if I want to write about thousands of people and some things that "others understand but the protagonist doesn't understand", then I have to be at a higher level. In a book, the more omniscient the protagonist is, the more omniscient the protagonist, it needs a writer who is much more omniscient and omniscient than the protagonist to fight with each other, otherwise it will look like a farce that "the enemy of Flegg just falls into the pit."

I am not saying this here for self-blow, but rather that I realize that one problem I will face when writing such a book, that is, how I imagine that "the author understands some things, but the protagonist does not."

Just like Li Su's analysis in recent chapters, even if it is not hard knowledge, but just "thinking habits", in fact, as a liberal arts student, Li Su should not understand. And I feel embarrassed to understand, but I often forget to control it, which only limits Li Su's understanding of hard knowledge, which leads to his occasional exceeding what he should understand in soft knowledge.

In this regard, I will pay attention to thinking from the perspective of others. To be unmodest, this may also be a "curse of the wise man", because if you are familiar with something, it is difficult for you to imagine "how an unfamiliar person is not familiar". Maybe you think that after you cut off this knowledge point, it is the way an unfamiliar person should look like. But in fact, if you cut this point, you have to cut all the lines leading to this point so that it will not appear abrupt.

...

Speaking of this, it can also answer a question from many readers before reading this book: I have encountered many complaints about this book, saying, "Why do the Liu Bei camp in the Three Kingdoms texts seem to be a little bit novice than the Cao Cao camp, but this book doesn't seem so little novice."

I think it might as well assume this: You can recall that when you were a child, especially before the fourth grade of elementary school, because the literacy and reading habits at that time did not support reading the original text of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, most people either do not know the characters of the Three Kingdoms or like Liu Guanzhang. This is an ignorant cognitive state of "the beginning of human beings".

After the fifth grade of elementary school, many people began to like Cao Cao because they felt that they were deceived when they were young and Liu Bei was so whitewashed. They were a hypocrite. This is not surprising. Although everyone has different ages when this step occurs, I will analyze it myself here. I started like this in the fifth grade of elementary school.

Then, some people will experience several twists, such as finding that they have overcorrected themselves, Cao Cao also has massacres and other black spots, and later found that Liu Bei also has other black spots... Then later, perhaps it was purely because he had successfully entered the society for the first time, and then looked down on Liu Bei, who had been wasting a long time, and it was also possible that some people succeeded after struggling in society, and felt that they understood Liu Bei's continuous entrepreneurial tenacity...

No matter what the reason, it can be seen from the above that one person holds Liu Yongcao constantly switches throughout his life, and some switch to two people who are not biased and look open-minded and look down on the good and evil likes and dislikes.

Therefore, everyone sees that "the rate of novice in the Three Kingdoms literature that supports Liu seems to be relatively high". This question is actually "those target consumer groups are written for me, in the context of my description, the articles that potential consumers at the first level who are below the fourth grade of elementary school are relatively novice."

The target readers who own Cao Wen must at least be "the second level of the rebellious period of elementary school grade 4 or above."

Therefore, although there is no distinction between good and bad in the three mentality of "being rich, supporting Liu, supporting Cao, and "jumping out likes and dislikes", its lowest form is divided into good and bad in the end. If you suffer losses, you suffer losses on the first level, the one who supports Liu.

A bigger problem this leads to is that when both users of the two sides criticize, they often don’t know which level the other party is on.

For example, a reader who is a fifth-grade elementary school student, may feel proud when he hears the other party "adhering to Liu" and thinks proudly: He is a person as superficial as before the fourth-grade elementary school student. He doesn't even know that Liu Bei is a hypocrite, so he is really ignorant.

A first-year high school student who is on the third floor of the Liu School, saw the Cao Cao and thought: That was a person who was similar to my second year of junior high school, and I have never read the original text of "The Three Kingdoms".

And here, there is another "curse of knowledge": the person on the second level treats the other party as the first layer, but cannot imagine the existence of the third and fifth layers. The person on the third level treats the other party as the second layer, but cannot imagine that the other party may be the fourth and sixth layers.

Take my book for example. I think I am currently reading this. This is a book with the fifth level. The protagonist has the position of Liu, but it is not considered a book. And if I want to write this book, I actually have to be slightly higher than the fifth level, and I have to control other aspects.

There are higher existences above me that I can't imagine, because no one can imagine what they don't understand.

I said this just to inspire readers' imagination: when you see a book, don't directly summarize it as "supporting the first layer" or "supporting the second layer". It is possible that a book supports 135 and a book supports 246. There are many layers on it. I often look up and look at it. Even if I can't see it clearly, at least I know that there are people on it.
Chapter completed!