just noticed this one is also yours, besides the crown and the noblemans guise... and I was wondering why there were so many talented moddelers out there...
Done with the crest; this is about as good as it gets while staying relatively historically accurate in structural design! There's still a lot of detailing and polishing to do, but the general silhouette is finally done.
Just something to remember with those feathers on top, the engine materials you need to use do not support opacity/alpha mask or 2 sided materials so keep that in mind when doing the low poly.
Yep, the feathers each use 16 tris each, but I'm pretty sure I can reduce it down to 10 per feather, and still have it look good. The rest of the helmet is a very polygon conservative shape, and most, if not all, of the detail will be with textures and a normal map(s).
I've started working on the maul. For some reason, it took me around 6-10 hours of tinkering around, and wondering what the maul should look like. I didn't want to make something that was incredibly heavy to use, like a giant rectangular rock on a stick, I wanted to make something that looked contemporary of 15th-16th century weapons, and something that a real person could use, fairly decently, in combat against armoured and unarmoured opponents. So that if I actually went and made this IRL, it would work.
Since mauls were basically never used in warfare (except maybe by a handful of peasants), I didn't have anything to base a historical maul off of, either.
Another thing I wanted was to make something that a person would take one look, and say, "Nope, don't wanna get hit by that in a million years." And, it also had to fit the name of "The Maul of Sanguine Retribution".
So this is what I came up with. Currently, I'm adding mesh to the inside of the maul head. I might go into zbrush and add some gore bits still stuck inside the maul, and maybe one or two on the spikes.
That's a really interesting maul design. Having that hollow in the area would allow the user to swing it faster although with a cut in the weight, the user would have to rely on the speed for the damage rather than the weight. Cool though!
actually, it would be impossible to use the vanilla Chivalry maul in combat. The maul I designed is probably fairly difficult to swing, too. I imagine after only 10-20 swings you'd start to feel tired. With the vanilla maul, you might get in 4-5 really awkward, clumsy swings before you give up and pick up a lighter weapon, because if the chivalry maul was solid steel, it would probably weigh about 50-60lbs, and you're doing that in full chainmail, which is even more cumbersome than plate armour.
But the really cool thing about the maul is that you can see through the holes and aim better mid-swing ;D With the vanilla maul, you have a giant anvil on a stick blocking 1/4 of your view.
It looks historical, it's realistic, it's designed to be effective against chainmail, it's really quite scary, and it gives a slight advantage over the vanilla maul because it's easier to see things while in first person.
Working on a francisca. It's a very simple model, but it's something I wanted to make ever since I used throwing axes as a knight, since it felt unnatural to throw a small wood axe (actually, it's like no axe I've ever seen before >_> ), rather than a true throwing axe. (A hole in the middle? What's that for? And throwing axes usually never have rivets. The handles are wedged in place. Also, once again the handle is round. Throwing axes need the precision of an oval handle to align the throw.)
This was my first time making any sort of wood texture in zbrush. It was really fun
Anyway, with a throwing axe, the handle is important, but not especially.
Throwing axe handles would become unusable much faster than, say, a hammer's handle, since it goes under much more stress (being thrown and hitting people in armour, and splintering shields, missing and smashing into rocks).
If you're a soldier out in the field, I would imagine that it would be more effective to whittle down a branch to correct proportions every now and then, and tap it into the axe head, instead of making a really nice, polished handle.
Basically done with the high-poly details that will be added to the normal map. It still needs hand-painting though, for it to really stand out. I also added my armourer's mark, and should probably do that to the rest of the stuff I've already made.
So since weapons can be set-specific now, I'm redoing the mace. Now it's going to be a truly evil weapon >:E3 Can you feel the aura of hate? It tastes like rainbows. Evil rainbows. Instead of a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, there's a sarlacc in a pit, asking you for about tree fiddy.
Yeah, it's evolved into more of a fantasy weapon; but having mauls as melee weapons in combat is borderline fantasy, anyway.
And it doesn't look Sauron-like, it looks gothic. Sauron was based off gothic aesthetics.
Damn! I am having a really tough time figuring out what the maul should look like. It's TRUE that mauls were used in combat by french peasants, however brief or rare that may have been. So if I don't want to get docked points for historical accuracy, I will have to make a maul.
...Soooooo that's what I'm going to make, right now. Goodbye, Sauron's mace.
Since there weren't railroads back then, they would have either used post mauls or splitting mauls. Splitting mauls basically look like axes, but the blade is really just a thick, sharpened wedge of steel.
...But then again, a person who has access to plate armour isn't going to use a maul! The closest, historically accurate thing to a Chivalry maul would be a two-handed war hammer.
And Masons have the symbols of red, and an uprising fist... which basically means the faction was influenced by communist Russia, and working class...
But wikipedia says,
"The maul is a long-handled hammer with a heavy metal head, either of lead or iron. Similar in appearance and function to a modern sledgehammer, it is sometimes shown as having a spear-like spike on the fore-end of the haft. The use of the maul as a weapon seems to date from the later 14th century. In 1382, rebellious citizens of Paris seized 3,000 mauls (French: maillet) from the city armoury, leading to the rebels being dubbed Maillotins.[1] Later in the same year, Froissart records French men-at-arms using mauls at the Battle of Roosebeke, demonstrating it was not simply a weapon of the lower classes.[2]
A particular use of the maul was by archers in the 15th and 16th centuries. At the Battle of Agincourt, English longbowmen are recorded as using lead mauls, initially as a tool to drive in stakes but later as an improvised weapon.[3] Other references during the century (for example, in Charles the Bold's 1472 Ordinance) suggest continued use.[4] They are recorded as a weapon of Tudor archers as late as 1562.[5]"
So that means the maul WAS being used as a true weapon of warfare. I won't be making a lead maul, since it was apparently an archer's weapon. But what did the men-at-arms maul look like?
So the maul was basically just used in the french revolt, late 13th century.
Soooo, it's a tossup between the lead french maul, which was only used in a few battles, compared to the warhammer, which was used regularly all the way up to... when guns were introduced.
So, since the person can afford chainmail and plate armour, and IS a knight (Owned land, had peasants working for him), I have to say that the most historically accurate representation for the maul would NOT be an improvised french revolt peasant weapon, rather it would be a two-handed warhammer, a weapon made for warfare, and the closest thing to the Chivalry maul without it being glaringly historically inaccurate.
Someone with the money to buy chainmail and plate armour would certainly be able to afford a proper two handed warhammer.
...But then again, Chivalry has what apparently looks like a steel maul, and they aren't called warhammers, they're called mauls.
So this is why I'm so conflicted about this now. Why can't things be more simple??
Making a contemporary maul of the maulliotin uprising, and putting it on a knight is ALREADY fantasy.
Wouldn't let yourself limit too much by historical accuracy because they don't give 2 flying fricks about that. Just look at the barbarian skins or "ev0l lava hide out maps" they made or even the already exsisting double axe and maul. They're clearly ok with weapons that weren't used in combat at all.
That said I'm more of a fan of your weapons than your helmets.
-I like the design of the agathian one but the big emerald stone just feels out of place.
-The mason helmet is is just over the top with all the spikes and pole sticking out of it imo.
-The wood on the axe looks a bit too yellowish. I think it might look better if it'd be dark brown the like the vanilla axe.
On a side note some of the colourings of the helmets or plainly the designs won't fit the armors or the DLC armor's at all even though the helmets on their own are pretty good. I wonder if TB will take that into account or will release new models to match the helmets.
Yeah... I suppose. I guess what they really want are just weapons that look like they fit in with medieval times, and are not too jarringly fantastic.
I agree about your opinion with the stone on the agatha helmet, it does look out of place. The mason helmet, however, is actually fairly contemporary. There were stechhelms that had large, elaborate crests on top.
The colors are all going to be changed for the most part, they're just there as placeholders.
Dear god, I think I'm done with the silhouette of the Maul of Sanguine Retribution. What a challenge, getting it to fit with the vanilla maul proportions while retaining the shape of the head. That was damn fun! Time for more fun; tweaking and details.
Still a lot to do... I should hurry up and try to get something into the SDK, only 20 more days left, and I hear it can be a little tricky =/
Next, I'm going to add details and slight alterations to steer it away from the fantasy gaming realm, and make it truly appear to be a weapon that could have existed in the medieval renaissance period, and give it more of a Mason look.
Oh yeah, I never made a reference chart, I hope that's ok for the competition. I feel that making a reference chart boxes me in, since I'm just looking at a couple images over and over again. What I use is use google images, or just recall from memory if I need something specific.
really liking your designs, weapons look bad-ass, especially the first one, the last itteration of the helmet is a little over the top for me though, remember they don't want fantasy but rather realistic medieval,
and keep texture space in mind for that last weapon bc it has a lot of details
Thanks Luch, however the last iteration of the helmet is very realistic, in terms of helmet style, crest shape, and intricacy.
The only thing that's not contemporary of this stechhelm is the helmet's proportions, and the detail on the helmet's surface. If they were judging purely by realistic medieval, only the guy who made the houndskull would win, but maybe not, since his sword isn't 100% accurate either.
You make a good point about the amount of detail on this weapon though, I'll have to be careful about adding too much.
Thanks Luch, however the last iteration of the helmet is very realistic, in terms of helmet style, crest shape, and intricacy.
The only thing that's not contemporary of this stechhelm is the helmet's proportions, and the detail on the helmet's surface. If they were judging purely by realistic medieval, only the guy who made the houndskull would win, but maybe not, since his sword isn't 100% accurate either.
You make a good point about the amount of detail on this weapon though, I'll have to be careful about adding too much.
actually he keeps saying that his sword is based on an actual 14 century sword :P
Replies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHFXG3r_0B8
but did you ever finish the other set?? that one was coming along nicely.
I might change up the weapons though, haha
"YOUR SOUL, YOUR FLESH, YOUR EYES. I SHALL TURN YOU INSIDE OUT, AND PAINT YOUR CASTLE WITH YOUR PATHETIC EXCUSE FOR BLOOD....AGATHA SCUM."
http://grooveshark.com/s/06+Seasons+Of+War/5S7CBu?src=5
Since mauls were basically never used in warfare (except maybe by a handful of peasants), I didn't have anything to base a historical maul off of, either.
Another thing I wanted was to make something that a person would take one look, and say, "Nope, don't wanna get hit by that in a million years." And, it also had to fit the name of "The Maul of Sanguine Retribution".
So this is what I came up with. Currently, I'm adding mesh to the inside of the maul head. I might go into zbrush and add some gore bits still stuck inside the maul, and maybe one or two on the spikes.
But the really cool thing about the maul is that you can see through the holes and aim better mid-swing ;D With the vanilla maul, you have a giant anvil on a stick blocking 1/4 of your view.
It looks historical, it's realistic, it's designed to be effective against chainmail, it's really quite scary, and it gives a slight advantage over the vanilla maul because it's easier to see things while in first person.
Anyway, with a throwing axe, the handle is important, but not especially.
Throwing axe handles would become unusable much faster than, say, a hammer's handle, since it goes under much more stress (being thrown and hitting people in armour, and splintering shields, missing and smashing into rocks).
If you're a soldier out in the field, I would imagine that it would be more effective to whittle down a branch to correct proportions every now and then, and tap it into the axe head, instead of making a really nice, polished handle.
Yeah, it's evolved into more of a fantasy weapon; but having mauls as melee weapons in combat is borderline fantasy, anyway.
And it doesn't look Sauron-like, it looks gothic. Sauron was based off gothic aesthetics.
...Soooooo that's what I'm going to make, right now. Goodbye, Sauron's mace.
Since there weren't railroads back then, they would have either used post mauls or splitting mauls. Splitting mauls basically look like axes, but the blade is really just a thick, sharpened wedge of steel.
...But then again, a person who has access to plate armour isn't going to use a maul! The closest, historically accurate thing to a Chivalry maul would be a two-handed war hammer.
And Masons have the symbols of red, and an uprising fist... which basically means the faction was influenced by communist Russia, and working class...
But wikipedia says,
"The maul is a long-handled hammer with a heavy metal head, either of lead or iron. Similar in appearance and function to a modern sledgehammer, it is sometimes shown as having a spear-like spike on the fore-end of the haft. The use of the maul as a weapon seems to date from the later 14th century. In 1382, rebellious citizens of Paris seized 3,000 mauls (French: maillet) from the city armoury, leading to the rebels being dubbed Maillotins.[1] Later in the same year, Froissart records French men-at-arms using mauls at the Battle of Roosebeke, demonstrating it was not simply a weapon of the lower classes.[2]
A particular use of the maul was by archers in the 15th and 16th centuries. At the Battle of Agincourt, English longbowmen are recorded as using lead mauls, initially as a tool to drive in stakes but later as an improvised weapon.[3] Other references during the century (for example, in Charles the Bold's 1472 Ordinance) suggest continued use.[4] They are recorded as a weapon of Tudor archers as late as 1562.[5]"
So that means the maul WAS being used as a true weapon of warfare. I won't be making a lead maul, since it was apparently an archer's weapon. But what did the men-at-arms maul look like?
Found it here: http://www.herodote.net/1er_mars_1382-evenement-13820301.php
Another website with the same image (but in english) says that they are made of lead. http://weaponsandwarfare.com/?p=28606
So the maul was basically just used in the french revolt, late 13th century.
Soooo, it's a tossup between the lead french maul, which was only used in a few battles, compared to the warhammer, which was used regularly all the way up to... when guns were introduced.
So, since the person can afford chainmail and plate armour, and IS a knight (Owned land, had peasants working for him), I have to say that the most historically accurate representation for the maul would NOT be an improvised french revolt peasant weapon, rather it would be a two-handed warhammer, a weapon made for warfare, and the closest thing to the Chivalry maul without it being glaringly historically inaccurate.
Someone with the money to buy chainmail and plate armour would certainly be able to afford a proper two handed warhammer.
...But then again, Chivalry has what apparently looks like a steel maul, and they aren't called warhammers, they're called mauls.
So this is why I'm so conflicted about this now. Why can't things be more simple??
Making a contemporary maul of the maulliotin uprising, and putting it on a knight is ALREADY fantasy.
That said I'm more of a fan of your weapons than your helmets.
-I like the design of the agathian one but the big emerald stone just feels out of place.
-The mason helmet is is just over the top with all the spikes and pole sticking out of it imo.
-The wood on the axe looks a bit too yellowish. I think it might look better if it'd be dark brown the like the vanilla axe.
On a side note some of the colourings of the helmets or plainly the designs won't fit the armors or the DLC armor's at all even though the helmets on their own are pretty good. I wonder if TB will take that into account or will release new models to match the helmets.
I agree about your opinion with the stone on the agatha helmet, it does look out of place. The mason helmet, however, is actually fairly contemporary. There were stechhelms that had large, elaborate crests on top.
The colors are all going to be changed for the most part, they're just there as placeholders.
Next, I'm going to add details and slight alterations to steer it away from the fantasy gaming realm, and make it truly appear to be a weapon that could have existed in the medieval renaissance period, and give it more of a Mason look.
Oh yeah, I never made a reference chart, I hope that's ok for the competition. I feel that making a reference chart boxes me in, since I'm just looking at a couple images over and over again. What I use is use google images, or just recall from memory if I need something specific.
http://grooveshark.com/s/Parade/6XtdI0?src=5
and keep texture space in mind for that last weapon bc it has a lot of details
The only thing that's not contemporary of this stechhelm is the helmet's proportions, and the detail on the helmet's surface. If they were judging purely by realistic medieval, only the guy who made the houndskull would win, but maybe not, since his sword isn't 100% accurate either.
You make a good point about the amount of detail on this weapon though, I'll have to be careful about adding too much.
...14th century swords were made of steel!
Haha, yeahhhh... I guess he really would be the only winner >_>