The only asymmetry I've ever seen in armors in any of my books has been larger more restrictive plates in the necks and shoulders of later century jousting armors. I have several books of period illustrations and have not ever seen asymmetrical battle plate. I might have existed but my books suggested that the asymmetry was a specifically jousting thing. Unless they made armor for greatsword wielders that had more armor on one side in place of a shield I don't see why they would. And every illustration I've seen with somebody wielding a Flamberge or other greatsword is in a breastplate rather than platemail. I knew an SCA guy who did do greatsword with plate but he was usually the first man out of the melee but he probably just sucked at fighting.
Probably the only advantage you'd get against a Samurai is that his blade and attack technique are tailored to chopping motions which are less effective for killing blows on metal armor than thrusting motions, and by the same token western greatswords are often designed with an extra grip in front of the hilt to make them usable as thrusting weapons or even set defense weapons mot unlike pikes. So if you were thrusting with a European greatsword against a samurai chopping with a Katana you would have an easier time delivering a fatal wound but remember one well placed blade in a joint or one good bell ringer to the head (even with a helm) can mean the difference between life and death.
Yeah, I'm beating myself over the head trying to design plate mail for a character that looks traditional but is more figure flattering (which does not happen in the history of western armor) and I'm starting to think this was brilliance on the order of trying to design heavy armor based on cultures where light armor was basically non-existent (yes, I tried that before).
Probably the only advantage you'd get against a Samurai is that his blade and attack technique are tailored to chopping motions which are less effective for killing blows on metal armor than thrusting motions, and by the same token western greatswords are often designed with an extra grip in front of the hilt to make them usable as thrusting weapons or even set defense weapons mot unlike pikes. So if you were thrusting with a European greatsword against a samurai chopping with a Katana you would have an easier time delivering a fatal wound but remember one well placed blade in a joint or one good bell ringer to the head (even with a helm) can mean the difference between life and death.
Yeah, I'm beating myself over the head trying to design plate mail for a character that looks traditional but is more figure flattering (which does not happen in the history of western armor) and I'm starting to think this was brilliance on the order of trying to design heavy armor based on cultures where light armor was basically non-existent (yes, I tried that before).
Ditto on the chainmail armor design. The only way out is to add figure-flattering(or defining) plates (courboulli, wood, bone, beads or metal - you decide). I often end up adding plates of various materials when dealing with chain or scale - that gives more personality to the armor and breaks up the pattern, plus adds a bit of protection. (And it's not unheard of historically - the middle East and even Europe around 11th century AD, for example). Or just go for the Roman or Greek type sculpted breastplate, worn over a hauberk. Unless you want a specific era, of course, where it would be trickier.
The katana is a really fine tuned weapon, but the chopping motions are useless against plate and a samurai wouldn't be used to using thrusting motions - their fighting style was to a great extent based on the presumption, that they'd be fighting each other. I don't know how close their fencing would be to the modern kendo (with which I've dabbled), but the kendo stances are quite open and kendoka have just one thrusting attack in their arsenal - one aimed at the throat.
I know about the extra grip, but I'd prefer to avoid close quarter combat - I'd probably just go for the legs - a greatsword can seriously hinder your movement, even with a glancing blow, and Samurai armor is roughly equivalent to chain armor as far as protection goes. Unless it's the 17th century armors, which included plate breastplates and other body part armor imported from Europe.
I've never seen a greatsword-specific plate armor - all period cutouts and drawings depict the Landsknechte and other greatsword-wielding yahoos with barely more than a breastplate, as you said. I've also seen maybe 5 or 6 examples of non-symmetrical non-jousting armors, 3 of them were British, one was Spanish. Definitely not a high number, but they did exist. Mind you, they were also not extremely asymmetrical, just a higher collar on the left shoulder pad and one extra plate underneath in one occasion, in one of the others the gauntlet was relatively open because of the shield. I think the Spanish one could've had a missing or a misplaced piece, but it did look cool. It was not the norm - plate armor in general never was, even though the first example can be traced back to the battle of Troy - a 14 piece suit of bronze plates, awesomely designed but extremely heavy and used by a charioteer. Still, he must've been pretty tough.
The katana is a really fine tuned weapon, but the chopping motions are useless against plate and a samurai wouldn't be used to using thrusting motions - their fighting style was to a great extent based on the presumption, that they'd be fighting each other. I don't know how close their fencing would be to the modern kendo (with which I've dabbled), but the kendo stances are quite open and kendoka have just one thrusting attack in their arsenal - one aimed at the throat.
I know about the extra grip, but I'd prefer to avoid close quarter combat - I'd probably just go for the legs - a greatsword can seriously hinder your movement, even with a glancing blow, and Samurai armor is roughly equivalent to chain armor as far as protection goes. Unless it's the 17th century armors, which included plate breastplates and other body part armor imported from Europe.
I've never seen a greatsword-specific plate armor - all period cutouts and drawings depict the Landsknechte and other greatsword-wielding yahoos with barely more than a breastplate, as you said. I've also seen maybe 5 or 6 examples of non-symmetrical non-jousting armors, 3 of them were British, one was Spanish. Definitely not a high number, but they did exist. Mind you, they were also not extremely asymmetrical, just a higher collar on the left shoulder pad and one extra plate underneath in one occasion, in one of the others the gauntlet was relatively open because of the shield. I think the Spanish one could've had a missing or a misplaced piece, but it did look cool. It was not the norm - plate armor in general never was, even though the first example can be traced back to the battle of Troy - a 14 piece suit of bronze plates, awesomely designed but extremely heavy and used by a charioteer. Still, he must've been pretty tough.
The problem with plate is that it is the apex of trade-offs for defense. Unless you are cavalry, its probably not worth the extra heat, weight, fatigue, etc, especially since it only takes a couple of peasants to hold you down while somebody finds a good spot to plant a pointy object. Much more functional is the field plate styles where you have an open faced helmet, breastplate, vambraces, and cuisses over some kind of padding. If its good enough to keep in the era of moderately accurate and plentiful handguns and good enough to convince the new world you have invincible metal skin, it should be plenty good for adventurers.
Speaking of adventurers, they seem to be the ones with the most asymmetrical armors. In Darksun it makes sense since everything is scrapped together from pieces of wood and bone but adventurers elsewhere never lack for the money to equip themselves yet, especially in third edition, they seemed to have gear made up of random metal bits laced into leftover scraps of patchwork leather. My AD&D 1st Ed poor farmboy fighter wouldn't have been caught dead relying on that kind of gear after his first payday.
Speaking of adventurers, they seem to be the ones with the most asymmetrical armors. In Darksun it makes sense since everything is scrapped together from pieces of wood and bone but adventurers elsewhere never lack for the money to equip themselves yet, especially in third edition, they seemed to have gear made up of random metal bits laced into leftover scraps of patchwork leather. My AD&D 1st Ed poor farmboy fighter wouldn't have been caught dead relying on that kind of gear after his first payday.
I blame Blizzard and their awesometastic but inefficient designs, from way back in the Warcraft 2 days. As any other fantasy design from Frazetta on, come to think of it. Lately they've become more and more divorced with reality as they used to be.
Just as pretty much the entire genre of fantasy is derivative so are fantasy armor designs. People are now growing up with video game armor designs as their baseline so most armors will either be flexible because they cover nothing or completely inflexible because they are meant to be form fitting and interfere with joints. Dragon Age was the exception to that rule but they bored everybody to tears with about five armor designs for every suit of armor in all of Ferelden so they are moving to more stylized armor designs now too.