Too bad that the original skin he posted of the muscular guy, is from PSYCHO, not from CA.Originally Posted by Big_John
Too bad that the original skin he posted of the muscular guy, is from PSYCHO, not from CA.Originally Posted by Big_John
The new skin is much more realistic. The shoulders could be broader though.
The muscles should definately not be as developed as in the first model. It just looks stupid to have a sixpack where every "pack" is about the same size as a biceps muscle...
Besides, I very much doubt that ancient barbarian soldiers was very much into doing crunches and the like. They probably practiced weapon skills more than they did physical excercises. Not even the professional soldiers like the Romans should have that little fat on their bodies, for the same reasons I stated in a previous post in this thread (half-naked barbarian with 4% body-fat standing in snow = hypothermia).
Just one question: Didn't they use clothes in battles? (the celts)
The muscular tonus of people of that era cannot be compared to the muscular tonus of people today. We spent everyday in a desk!!! Even farmers today use machines!!! In those days they used their hands. And they spent everyday in outdoor activities like hunting, farming, war trainning, etc...Originally Posted by GeWee
The most fit persons today (except bodybuilders) are what they should look like...
They used warm clothes and wool covers before they started the battle. They were only naked while fighting. Not while travelling and organizing the formations before battle.Originally Posted by GeWee
Besides, only some of them fought bare-chested. By 270BC, most fought clothed.
Last edited by Aymar de Bois Mauri; 01-19-2005 at 17:35.
yeah, and it's a huge improvement over that one too.Originally Posted by Aymar de Bois Mauri
gj PROM, keep up the great work.
:cheers:
now i'm here, and history is vindicated.
Bookmarks