Would you say that a perfectly decade accurate kit for a poorer soldier is actually less accurate than a kit that's a mismatch from different decades?
First and foremost, this is just a random thought I had when sleep deprived and had nothing to think about, also I'm the prime example of an armchair historian so please take everything with a grain of salt and my bad is this is a stupid question.
Anyway, I've seen the topic of armor inheritance brought up a few times recently and that got me wondering
"If armor is expensive to the point where people would pass down helmets and maille shirts through multiple generations then would a poorer soldier in 1430~ who has all his equipment made in a style from the 1430s actually be less accurate than a poorer solifer in 1430~ who has a dagger from 1430~, a helmet from 1410~ and a cuirass from 1390~?"
I have heard about munition armor made from cheap wrought iron so I guess that could completely dismantle my idea but it's like a semi fun thing to wonder about, in my opinion.