Turin Turambar

"Well, lads, lasses and enby pals, this is where I think my stop on the hype train comes. I wanted overly-emotional (Kin-strife! Kin-strife!) Silmarillion elves, not the arrogant and aloof LOTR elves! I am most likely hyperbolic right now, but this really feels like Eldar: AoS Edition with similar history, personality and both carry magic stones on them (albeit for different purposes, hahahah!). And nothing against Lumineth or Eldar - or anyone who wants more arrogant elves - but they aren't for me. The models are still cool and I'll gladly follow what kinds of Lumineth we'll still be teased with"-@Public Universal [my quoting they didn't want to quote his post] I wouldn't worry too much, to me it looks like their flaw is too much emotion and that the aetherquartz slowly ("eventually") drains their emotions. thus I think there is plenty of room for overly-emotional elves in the younger Lumineth and those that refuse to walk the standard path (like eldar outcasts in 40k). It also adds a potential for an interesting internal conflict within the faction. the younger elves will be overly-emotional battling with control, middle-aged elves are going to have normal levels of emotion and older elves will have little to no emotion. and then outcasts won't even try to drain their emotion. if you think generational frictions IRL and for humans is bad, imagine what it is like for Lumineth who have potentially massive differences in emotional experiences and thus behavior and perspectives. lol I get the impression that there are going to be multiple types of elves made by each god. Teclis has made (at the very least) the idoneth and lumineth. Morathi has made her snake ladies, her winged ladies and her slave class. Malerion is likely going to have multiple different creations aswell. the mistweaver and CoS shadow blades are already from the realm of shadow in the lore, so its also possible that Malerion's army will include non-slaaneshi digested elves (who will look like the mistweaver) aswell as his own twisted creations.

there was a forest a couple years back that fossilized in a few weeks (as a result of a natural disaster). fossilisation is a result of a chemical reaction, not heat and pressure. (Derek Briggs and Amanda Kear also preformed a laboratory experiement (which has been peer reviewed) that showed that fossilisation can take place in 2 weeks, and theoretically even more quickly.)

my 2 cents on predictions: Teclis is trying to recreate old high elves, so I would expect him to try and have units that fill the generic units within the high elves (so spearmen [check], silverhelms [check], archers [very likely check], bolt thrower, and chariot). Teclis was also heavily related to hoeth, and as they were in the reveal trailer for pointy elves, sword masters/2 handed swordsmen is quite likely, as are reavers for monsters/monstrous mounts dragons or very dragon like (in appearance or ability) is quite likely due to being something very intertwined with high elf armies, as are great eagles or something very similar to great eagles, so both of those are quite likely. I imagine one or both of the units we've seen will be duel kits. the cavalry being silverhelm and reaver equivalents and the infantry being either spearmen and archer equivalents or spearmen and swordmaster equivalents. I also imagine the mounted heroe will be a duel kit, and riding a dragon-like thing. being the equvilent to the dragon-lord/dragon-mage kit, and I imagine we'll get mage and non-mage generic foot heroes. I think 2 more non-behemoth, non-hero, non-artillery kits are a given. as well as atleast 1 behemoth. personally I would like... 2 infantry kits: spearmen/swordmasters (spearmen in this army being professionals rather then the citizen soldiers of uthuan) and archers/medium infantry [medium infantry is probably unrealistic to expect tho, think roman legionaries; shields, javelins and swords, shock troops. i just think the concept fits elves well), 1 horse cavalry kit: lance cav (as seen) and horse archers, 1 eagle cavalry/rider kit: lance and archer variants (able to use magic?), 1 dragon rider kit, being the mounted hero and behemoth combined: lord/general and mage versions. lastly 2 more foot heroes and eltharion, 1 being mage, 1 being leftenant hero the issue with my hopes is that the eagle riders might be too similar in role to the horse stuff, and having swordmasters being a grade above spearmen probably works better for game purposes (and medium infantry is an unlikely concept) I know this is a late reply, but it was not destroyed in the end times. chaos learns of it and the main characters loose contact with it and they assume it was destroyed but later in another book they reveal it was cut off due to chaos influence on the world that was. so chaos has likely tried to destroy it but it has not been confirmed either way.

i agree that these gies could have been a little more dynamic. imagine if they had the basic poses here mixed with 6th edition eternal guard poses (these wardens seem to be useing 2 handed spears). mixed with 1 handed poses (like those of the old high elf spearmen, aswell as over arm thrusts, and more non-fighting running poses). maybe they have limited dynamics in the poses due to being a dueltripple kitt. the more options a kitt has usually results in less variety of poses (as all the weapon options need to go well with the body positions) and less dynamic positions. if this is the case i can imagine the start collecting mono-pose kits will be more dynamic (if they choose to do mono-pose start collecting kitts) alternatively it could be done on purpose if there is a more skirmishy/moble infantry unit that they would want to contrast with. thus create a clearer visual range between a units in game ability?

I think that old rumour engine must be part of this release, because "wheat"... and the aelven swirls

I love the units so far (but not the biggest fan of their paint scheme, I will definitely use less white), but am hoping they get a more 'monstrous' cavalry unit in the near future as well (eagle cav, eagle cav) also really love The Light of Eltharion, It would be cool if they get an elite unit of similar liveing armor, but at the same time it would be cool to keep Eltharion unique. Eltharion's helmet and the dragon banner the cavalry have, give me hope for eagles/griffons/bird-thingies and dragons in the future tho. now i just need to create a new pic that combines the 2 units and Eltharion...

Tyrion had his own set of elf souls, so he will have his own breed of aelves made. but a Tyrion worshiping Idoneth subfaction would be cool

the Silmarillion is also my favourite of his. its a pitty he never really wrote about the war of wrath.

give me elven eagle and hawk cavalry and eagle chariots and eagle warwagons, glorious it would be.

I would argue that the Aelves of Hysh would include Tyrion's aelves. B and C are the most likely. possibly even starting as C and later turning into B when Tryion's aelves are made into models.

I think it is possible to have 2+ different types of light aelves in this faction. Aelven 'chambers' so to speak. this line: "Did any of his aelven races aside from the Idoneth survive?" from the article, implies that Teclis made more than 2 races of aelves with his batch of souls. I wouldn't be suprised if they end up doing multiple 'chambers' for this faction each with a different race of aelves made either by Teclis or Tyrion.

i find his oversized cheak plates a little funny, as in i am almost sure 1 of GW's designers is obsessed with limited head rotation/field of view. that said i really like where this is seemingly going

I would expect near perfect outer forms, with multiple harder to notice at first inner flaws.

what do you suppose the chances are that we will see units that are along the lines of these units as part of the first wave? also what do you gies think the chances are for more sisters of the thorn type units, as in mage units. being a big thing in atleast Teclis's army. speaking of which I am hoping both twins get similar but different styles, and are part of this army (with Tyrion being wave 2?)

you mean like snake women and bed sheet ghosts? and if you think GW has changed these concepts enough for DoK and Night Haunt then why wouldn't snake-like dragons be modified alittle to still be clearly a descendant of dragon rider concept but be more clearly 'GW' (if they even care for such things beyond names)

the mayflies (ex-mayflies?) and mon-keigh could never compete in the first place *arrogant elf noises*

fear not, for the old world cometh in 3(+) years, and the mighty warriors of the Lady will ride again. however, as for AoS, both Louen became a god, and the lady's daughter (unnamed) god are with the grail knights souls (amongst other bretonnians). i doubt those 2 gods would let them be reforged by Teclis without being for shadowed in the lore. as for Hysh aelves, super exited, can't wait! hopeing for eagles (or eagle-like birds) to be a big part of this faction, dragons are also cool tho.

I believe the last time the exodites had rules was 2nd (maybe 3rd?) edition. however they still exist. On that note, there is a faction with models and rules (although they can't work on their own in 8th edition 40k due to haveing lost the rules for HQs) space elf pirates, the Eldar Corsairs. plus they are playable in the battlefleet gothic PC games. that makes it, what 6 to 11 elven armies?

I don't see any reason why GW would not want at least partial crossover between AoS and the old world. if someone buys models for one game they are encouraged to buy the remaining models for the other game. I can easily see them have certain, less fantastical units only be used in the old world. and certain very fantastical units only be used in AoS. and then units that don't look out of place in both settings be usable in both games. essentially each army with crossover will have 3 styles, or 3 groups within a spectrum: old world, AoS and one that fits into both. Daemons of chaos already do this with AoS and 40k, so i don't see why GW wouldn't take the opportunity to do this with more armies.

don't forget space clown elves

"the Mistweaver Saih is a sinister figure hailing from the Realm of Shadow."-https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NL/mistweaver-saih I don't see how there can be people on the fence

I see those arguements in warhammer circles just as much as in historicals

now to apply by 7 reasons to AoS 1- many enemies are heavily armoured, but there are other fanatasy weapons that can penetrate armour 2-there are things scarier then load noises in AoS 3-while applies to many factions, super-humans (and super human level stuff) and undead are not necessarily affected. atleast not to the same extent 4-its probably the same or very similar in AoS, except for magical enchantments which can make storage easier 5-very useful, you can train your men to be more disaplined and thus more likely to stand and fight that Orruk/etc 6-free cities 7-endless war = lots of old soldiers (well compared to real life) guns should be (and are?) common in AoS to those that know how to make them and aren't hyper magical. so ordinary humans, duardin , skaven, etc. provided they don't have better tech or aren't limited by the guns makers.

this is a myth and/or exaggeration, we know English longbow men never fired in high arcs IRL. it is never described or depicted as such by eye witnesses or training manuscripts. most people likely wouldn't even know what who the longbowman are, let alone know they are supposed to be scared. and those that knew also knew their armour was good enough to stop the arrows (note how long bows only ever defeated mounted knights, or foot knights in mud, most evidence suggests the arrows do very little to most knights)

this is for those interested bows became fall out of use in the 16th century (in Europe), bows and guns co-existed for ages (since the 14th century, in Europe) before this there were legitimate positives to both weapons. note the 16th century is when European armies became professional armies full time armies (as pike formations require alot of training to be more then immobile blocks, amongst other reasons which i may get to), so the idea it requires less training is (probably) less of an important factor (historically) the reasons: 1-guns do have much greater armour penetration then both longbows, composite bows and crossbows, when good quality armour (relative) became widespread as a result of watermill 'powered' furnaces making it cheap to produce, so called munitions armor, mass produced hardened steel breastplates and helmets. armour strong enough to stop longbows and crossbows was now the cost of a weeks wages for the average infantry man. bows went from being able to kill 70-90% of then enemy to less then 40%, bullet proof armour would exist even as far as ww2 (see soviet steel vests) cheap enough to equip elite units with, but the majority of an army would always be vulnerable to guns. in this sense guns replaced bows in Europe due to armour, in asia the ability to produce such relatively high quality armour in large amounts never (really) happened, hence bows were still used intill the 1800s.(combined with the relative ease of producing high equality bows) one can indeed say guns replaced bows because they were better weapons, for their targets. 2-guns are scary, guns make loud noises that scare horses and men (who are not used to it), entire french heavy cavalry charges were broken through the sound of Spanish guns alone (according to some sources) before they were even in effective range. bows can never do this, metal-arm crossbows are also load and had similar effects when they were first used enmasse, but they are not as load as guns (especially artillery guns). guns also have 'quicker hits', the projectiles travel faster and thus the effect of a volley is more quickly felt which combined with the sound is very terrifying. not even the famed Swiss pike could handle it before training methods were devised. the use of guns forces your enemy to spend more time training their troops and make militia almost worthless (as a single volley can cause them to route) bows do not have this effect. 3-guns require less stamina then bows, a unit of bows may fire faster but they will tire out, guns and windlass crossbows do not take much effort to load at their maximum speed. thus the effect of a long march is less on hand-gunners then archers and a battle can be faught for longer (over a number of consecutive days) without significant negative effects on your army. this is extremely useful. 4-ammunition for guns is actually cheaper. while needing simple materials, arrows require highly skilled workers to make, and alot of time to make, and do not store well (they need to be stored in cool, dry conditions and with lots of room and are easily damaged by rough transportation) compared to musket balls (very easy to make and store) and gunpowder, you can make it very easily the only issue being sulphur, and stores easier then arrows (if only because it only requires dry, temperature, rough handleing and space isn't a big issue), bowstrings also do not work when wet, so the idea of wetting powder as the only downside for storage seems like a big break. minor reasons: 5-is the training, it takes less time to learn to use. so you can spend more time training your men to face up to gun volleys and cavalry charges. 6-Urbanization, Urban populations do not have the space for practicing archery (historically), this makes expecting an elite archer army to be unrealsitic (the position England found itself in the 1590s when longbows were discarded. 7-soldiers life time, an old soldier can load, aim and fire a gun just as quickly and accurately as a young one given the same drill time.