Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Jackal90 wrote:
I love when people cry about realism........ in age of sigmar.
How dare a bow have 3 separate strings!
No elf in their right mind could make that work.
That is of course, if elves were real too.

90% of the creations in warhammer aren’t actually close to realistic or functional and that’s just from a gear perspective.

It’s designed to look exaggerated and dynamic.
They can’t use normal bows as it’s a big part of their history, so they improvised to make them stand out.

If you want completely screwed dynamics, find a vehicle in 40k that could even function or do its job.

It’s a game though, much like a film, artistic license plays a big part in it.
It doesn’t need to have real work functionality or physics as it’s meant to be for show.

If you want pin point accuracy then try a historical game instead, you won’t get anything close to it here.

All of that is just lazy excuse.

You know don't you you can have fantasy and magic AND have it make sense? Just requires effort by professional writer. The momemt you have to resort "it's magic" or "it's fantasy" you admit text was writtem by poor lazy writer.

In gw case not even surprise when ability to shout enthustiatically waaaagh counts more than actual ability for hiring

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I can't believe someone is claiming shooting multiple arrows at once from a single bow isn't cool. That would make me actually like the archers.

No, it wouldn’t look cool. It would look ridiculous. Then again, looking ridiculous seems to be the look they’re going for with half the AoS range.

I can't find the multi-arrow scene so have a cool patriot arrow scene instead.




Also for all those arguing about reality why aren't you having a go at quivers?


It's nothing new, High Elves had multi-bolt throwers years ago; they had boats being pulled by eagles; wood elves surfing on eagles and dragons; Skaven doing - well just SKAVEN

tneva82 wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I love when people cry about realism........ in age of sigmar.
How dare a bow have 3 separate strings!
No elf in their right mind could make that work.
That is of course, if elves were real too.

90% of the creations in warhammer aren’t actually close to realistic or functional and that’s just from a gear perspective.

It’s designed to look exaggerated and dynamic.
They can’t use normal bows as it’s a big part of their history, so they improvised to make them stand out.

If you want completely screwed dynamics, find a vehicle in 40k that could even function or do its job.

It’s a game though, much like a film, artistic license plays a big part in it.
It doesn’t need to have real work functionality or physics as it’s meant to be for show.

If you want pin point accuracy then try a historical game instead, you won’t get anything close to it here.

All of that is just lazy excuse.

You know don't you you can have fantasy and magic AND have it make sense? Just requires effort by professional writer. The momemt you have to resort "it's magic" or "it's fantasy" you admit text was writtem by poor lazy writer.

Well no, that is not how writing works.

 Overread wrote:

Also for all those arguing about reality why aren't you having a go at quivers?


It's nothing new, High Elves had multi-bolt throwers years ago; they had boats being pulled by eagles; wood elves surfing on eagles and dragons; Skaven doing - well just SKAVEN

Because Rule of Cool only applies to things I like! My opinion of what is cool is the only one that matters! Also, something, something White Knighting!

 Overread wrote:
Also for all those arguing about reality why aren't you having a go at quivers?

I'm probably missing something obvious here - but what about quivers?

 Dysartes wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Also for all those arguing about reality why aren't you having a go at quivers?

I'm probably missing something obvious here - but what about quivers?

There's evidence that many ancient archers didn't use them. Or at the very least never drew their arrows from them. Instead often planting them in the ground at their feet or even holding them three at once to fire them. There's lots of variation and honestly quivers likely did exist in some form and role for arrow transportation. Of course much of this is looking at archers working in a fixed (or mostly fixed) firing position and aiming to fire volumes of shots. Whereas many fantasy depictions they are more bow and quiver and firing fewer, but very accurate shots.


But basically the quiver is not totally authentic for all situations and is perhaps actually far over-represented to what it was in the past.

 Overread wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Also for all those arguing about reality why aren't you having a go at quivers?

I'm probably missing something obvious here - but what about quivers?

There's evidence that many ancient archers didn't use them. Or at the very least never drew their arrows from them. Instead often planting them in the ground at their feet or even holding them three at once to fire them. There's lots of variation and honestly quivers likely did exist in some form and role for arrow transportation. Of course much of this is looking at archers working in a fixed (or mostly fixed) firing position and aiming to fire volumes of shots. Whereas many fantasy depictions they are more bow and quiver and firing fewer, but very accurate shots.


But basically the quiver is not totally authentic for all situations and is perhaps actually far over-represented to what it was in the past.

Does that mean that Kurnoth Hunters actually have the most historically appropriate quivers because their arrows are actually close to being stuck in the ground?

Come to think of it...

It always really annoyed me as a nine y/o kid that my archers didn't have bow strings.

JWBS wrote:
It always really annoyed me as a nine y/o kid that my archers didn't have bow strings.

You can fix it with some very careful superglue use and fine thread. I think there's even some tutorials out there for it.

 Overread wrote:

JWBS wrote:
It always really annoyed me as a nine y/o kid that my archers didn't have bow strings.

You can fix it with some very careful superglue use and fine thread. I think there's even some tutorials out there for it.

I'm not even sure you really need the glue. You could probably tie some low-test fishing line to a model if you have a steady hand.

Well, the bows with three strings sure look different than "normal" bows with just that.

Though I suspect that the fact three strings are more solid than one when you use plastic as material for your 32 mm miniatures also may be a good helping factor here, for showing the actual said strings on the miniature rather than "imagining they're here" while we used to do before.

I really like them- they look suitably "high civilisation" ,which was the High Elfthing and the floating mage is perfect- she makes me think of ceremonial Chinese culture and MonkeyMagic for some reason.. The hats are now as big as their egos!

Not my kind of elves but I like what they did. Personally more interested to see if the turn the Kurnothi into a full faction of wild elves..

I like the archers and the mage more than the first batch of the spearmen and knights. This second batch seems to be more Chinese inspired opposed to the Greek inspired of the first batch.

 Overread wrote:

Also for all those arguing about reality why aren't you having a go at quivers?


It's nothing new, High Elves had multi-bolt throwers years ago; they had boats being pulled by eagles; wood elves surfing on eagles and dragons; Skaven doing - well just SKAVEN

Because quivers did exist, ok they may not have been used in the way that a lot of fantasy models depict them, but they were a useful way to transport arrows. Also there is no need to suspend belief in reality from a model using a device designed to hold arrows, it doesn't need to be explained as being magical... unlike these 3 string bows, which just simple wouldn't work, unless 'magic' is involved.

The sky chariots being pulled by Eagles where and remain dumb, so do the Wood Elf Eagle riders. The repeater bolt throwers are fine, we know repeater crossbows existed... so it isn't too hard to imagine that an advanced race like Elves could figure a way to make a bolt thrower version.

Either way, these just confirm that Age of Sigmar isn't for me... far too much American styled fantasy (World of Warcraft, Magic the Gathering, etc). I'll stick to more European fantasy.

I'll stick to more European fantasy.

Anglo. You mean anglo fantasy. Because wargame-wise, continental companies in the last two decades put out thngs like Alkemy, Chronopia, Confrontation, Anima Tactics or Helldorado, which had nothing at all in common with Tolkienian ye olde timey depictions.

No, I mean European... fantasy doesn't have to be Tolkien inspired. I am a big fan of the old Rackham stuff... which is a far cry from Tolkien, yet isn't over the top like American fantasy.

You are referencing something that has constantly shifted, split, and changed over the course of history and continues to do so every decade as if it is a genetic heritage. American heritage comes mostly from European heritage anyways, so that means all of the things you listed are technically 'European fantasy'.

Everyone’s busy hating on the triple string bow but no one is complaining about that built in thigh plate armor...
If it were separate then great, alas it appears fixed to the model and thus ruins what would have been great let’s for conversions

 stonehorse wrote:
No, I mean European... fantasy doesn't have to be Tolkien inspired. I am a big fan of the old Rackham stuff... which is a far cry from Tolkien, yet isn't over the top like American fantasy.

...Rackham had a snake character with an umbrella. BDSM werewolves. I...WHAT?

Tolkien was heavily influenced by Nordic and Germanic mythology.

Anglo would be more Arthurian maybe? Robin Hood? Ivanhoe? Beowulf? (although that's set in Scandinavia)

Shrug, I like the triple-strung bow look. To each their own. Only things I don’t like are the floaty mags and the pose for the Teclis model. The animated armor, knights and infantry all look awesome.

Cronch wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
No, I mean European... fantasy doesn't have to be Tolkien inspired. I am a big fan of the old Rackham stuff... which is a far cry from Tolkien, yet isn't over the top like American fantasy.

...Rackham had a snake character with an umbrella. BDSM werewolves. I...WHAT?

Yes some of the Rackham stuff was a bit more bizarre... however the overall look of the range was by AoS standards quite reserved.

You will note that even the Devourers of Vile-Tis (or BDSM Werewolves to use your term), had weapons and armour that was inspired by real world equivalent, just very slightly exaggerated. Werewolves are something that is quite common in Eastern European folklore, so isn't too wild and out there.

Anyway, this is going off topic, and we'll never be able to change each other's mind... as we know debating on the internet is futile. So shall we just leave it there, and allow people to talk about the new Aelves?

Like the raw look of the bow. I acknowledge all the real world faults with it, buuuut it looks cool and I imagine the squad all lined up will be a awesome imposing wall and more than likely in game they'll be expensive but fire off a barrage of shooting.


Hate the infantry, those spears are finally something more frustrating than uruk-hai pikemen! cant wait to see them moonwalk into combat just so they can fit more dudes in

Cavalry actually looks... Good.. I normally hate anything not Asrai (Wild riders, sisters of the thorn and Wardancers are 10/10) but they look like quintessential elves. Shame it took the ending of the old world for a new Silverhelm kit :p now if they do chariots pulled by lions, that may have my attention.

The Daughters of Khaine have bows which are enchanted to seek the hearts of their intended targets.

Magic.

Cataphract wrote:
The Daughters of Khaine have bows which are enchanted to seek the hearts of their intended targets.

Magic.

And their khinari throw spears which they summon out of shadow magic (which sadly isn't really represented in the model); which makes for a really neat image of them holding their arms; summoning a spear and then sending it flying through the air to strike for the victims heart.

Those bows are awful, think they may have saved me money. Bit of a shame I like most of it other than teclis.

Anyone else kinda disapointed in no new models for the Seraphon besides a terrain piece of dubious use?

I think everyone is?

Jackal90 wrote:
90% of the creations in warhammer aren’t actually close to realistic or functional and that’s just from a gear perspective.

Had a friend over for the week-end recently and we somehow got to looking at AoS models, comparing how high-fantasy they were compared to WFB's low-fantasy.
We found a guy who's weapon is anvil.
On fire.
With a chain.

The guy just use an flaming anvil on a chain to hit his opponent.
Apparently it works great in the game rules.
lol