Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (
More info?)
> >> >>
http://uk.games-workshop.com/sneakpeeks/warhammer/image1.jpg
> >> >Do WE not get a new rare selection close combat unit?
> >> Depends what you mean by 'new', I suppose - Eternal Guard are basically
> >> the new, heavily-upgraded version of the old Glade Guard spearmen.
> >OK, I thought it would be a new unit.
> It sort of is - it's just a replacement for a similar old unit that's
> been removed from the army list.
From what we've seen so far only
> the Treekin are truly new, though there's still the chance that the
> heavy cav unit will be a separate entry rather than a GR upgrade.
>
A seperate army list entry, but I guess no seperate miniatures.
> >> They don't have
> >> two-handed weapons, but they do have staffswords, which also appear to
> >> be available to characters - the Bladesinger in GW's Wardancer sneak
> >> peak is armed with one.
> >So it probably is a magic weapon option for we-heros.
> I think it's a normal great weapon - the blurb accompanying this on the
> GW site specifies that WE Highborns can take great weapons now.
Which is a good thing.
> However, I imagine the design was chosen so that it can count as a
> Hunting Spear if the player wants it to (or even a normal if
> highly-elaborate spear). At least two of the new Wardancer models are
> armed with great weapons, though - make of that what you will.
>
Non uniquely armed units again? Other than city guard and those close
combat and ranged attack mixes the troll slayers were the last to loose
that option.
WHFB 7 will see chain mail wardancers again ;-) ...I'd prefer
beastmasters and perhaps a shapechanger character.
> >> In one of the first early 'spoilers' about the new WE, GW confirmed in
> >> White Dwarf that the Wood Elves would get some form of heavy cavalry -
> >> I haven't heard anything more about it, but at a guess they've given
> >> Glade Riders the option to take heavy armour (and presumably lose Fast
> >> Cavalry in the process) - the model looks more heavily-armoured than
> >> the current ones. It would be really stupid if the horse's leather
> >> armour counts as barding, though - a 3+ save is probably the best they
> >> get.
> >Another rumour says that GW never said we get heavy cavalry,
> Rumour from where? This was in WD, and I'm pretty sure it specified a
> heavy cav unit - I'll have to google it, since IIRC I copied that bit
> pretty much word for word in my WD review at the time.
>
It was a late interpretation of WD article and tree-kin. But well it is
only 2-3 more month then we will see.
> > just
> >something *like* heavy cavallry in effect -now we treekin.
> Which are nothing like heavy cav in effect... Save unlikely to be
> better than 4+, monster bases, no +2 on the charge (probably), M6 at
> most, multiple wounds. Treekin are Kroxigor/Troll/Rat Ogre equivalents
> - GW certainly wouldn't have described *them* as 'like' heavy cav. So
> either way there may be one new WE unit we have yet to encounter.
Heavy cavallry is m7 and one wound but with better armour save -they
are close enough in abilities for GW to get them mixed up.
> >> However, I was thinking more of an eagle-rider - his two-handed weapon
> >> pose is very similar to one I was planning for my eagle-riding Lord
> >> some time ago (I really hope the new Eagles are good - my High Elves
> >> could benefit as well if they are).
> >The best eagle released so far is the one on the back of the 4rth ed.
> >bestiary.
> Was that the HE eagle rider or the WE eagle rider conversion?
The high elf, the we conversion was the wardancer-like rider done by
Mike McVey? I think it is in WD 171.
>
> > After that we got some giant war-chickens
> It's a real shame about those eagles - one of them actually works (the
> one with wings spread and claws outstretched), but despite excellent
> details the others are abominably-proportioned and none of then looks
> right on a flying base.
As long as a *giant* war eagle has to be smaller than a griffon and
griffons have to be smaller than dragons and the dragon miniatures are
still designed to almost fit on a 40mm base there has to be a
proportion problem with the eagle.
> > and the lotr eagle
> >-which is nice but far too expensive in a boxed set with just another
> >two wizards.
> IMO it's as bad as the WE eagles.
At least it is a bit larger.
> >> The WE are also getting a new
> >> monster mount, the one described as an 'elk' - who knows if that will
> >> be worth using or not?
> >An elk?
> So I've heard. Hopefully it will have a more WElfy name, such as Hart
> (white harts being a feature of European forest folklore)
I'm more interested in the miniature and the rules than in the name GW
gives it. GW has aa tradition to keep and I have to ignore the terrible
names given to other units/characters so far.
> > This would have been a nice unit, mounts with lance attacks are
> >fine -even with movement 7 or 8. But as a mount for a hero? This makes
> >me think of uniconrs with movement 7 an additional point of toughness,
> >no magic resistance and still a large target -> slow, large and no use
> >at all. But let us wait and see.
> I'm hoping it will be more along the lines of a Daemonic Steed.
Which would not make a lot of a difference to what I wrote above.
> It
> seems highly unlikely they'd make it a cavalry mount
Agreed.
> - WE already have
> two different types of those, and I can't see them making plastic elk
> as well as plastic horses and (hopefully) Warhawks.
I would not really call warhawks cavallry.
The hawks look like metall to me, as far as I can tell from the
pictures you can still bend the wings upwards.
> >> >> Why are all these Wood Elves accompanied
> >> >> by suspiciously gnoblar-like fairies anyway?
> >> >These are strange. Wonder what they are -one more reason to buy the
> >> >army book.
> >> At a guess they are sprites, but why they look related to greenskins
> >> we'll have to read the book to find out (I still think the army should
> >> have sprite swarms). At least the gnoblat-like ones are better than the
> >> vaguely lizardy-ones the Treeman's covered in.
> >Perhaps we get some more stories about fairy folk in loren, these small
> >fellows might be Orions and Ariells eyes as well as less than helpful
> >spirits.
> I think there's been something alluding to that, maybe in the Ariel
> concept art shown in WD a little while ago.
Fine.
> >I'd like some more Puck than Oberon -oh sorry Orion fairíes
> GW's said it wants the WE to fit between the good HE and evil DE in the
> 'Elf spectrum' - not because they're neither good nor evil, but because
> they're both. My first thought on reading that was that GW's
> consciously trying to make them more faerie-like, which IMO is good
> (just a shame their 'daemonic' Treeman model isn't - I really hope
> Durthu's better).
Any kind of story to wood elf motivation and line of thinking would be
fine, there is not that much information given so far.
> >> >> On the 1-5 scale I've been
> >> >> using, 4 (I think it's the same model as one I previously gave a 5, but
> >> >> this is a better view of it).
> >> >The miniature is nice, but iirc almost same mini exists with a spear
> >> >instead
> >> >of the sword -that one is still better.
> >> That's the one I'm thinking of, but are you sure they aren't the same
> >> model? This great weapon looks like a thick-bladed spear, so it might
> >> have been the same from a different angle. The WE are being very
> >> well-served by hero models - so far I count three infantry heroes (this
> >> weapon, bow, and one with a spear in a one-handed pose) and two
> >> enchantresses on foot, and there will presumably be cavalry figures too
> >> as well as the monster riders, special characters, Bladesinger and
> >> Dryad character. I doubt they're getting a fourth Highborn/Glade
> >> Guardian variant (though they might package him with the option for
> >> either a great weapon or a staffsword, I suppose).
> >The weapon seems to be a seperate part,
> So's Etharion's, but he doesn't have any weapon options...
Eltarion otoh has no rules to be used with anything but a great weapon
-by the way this is another elf miniature I like very much, if it was
just a bit less expensive it might join my wardancers.
> > so two weapon options seem
> >reasonable -or easy to convert.
> I googled up the old Dakka shot - the model you're thinking of is the
> same, and armed with the same weapon. One of those shots is taken from
> a better angle, though.
OK.
> >And yes the woodelves get a complete
> >new line o miniatures,
> Even so, the HE had to wait three years or so to get their full hero
> range, and the Lizardmen about two. Most other races are still waiting.
> It's good to see the WE getting a good selection from the start.
It is a good year for wfb, the new skink heros and some of teh high elf
miniatures are quite nice as well - otoh the new high elf mage on this
ball might make a very nice fountain...
> > and not the badest released lately.
> These have rather come out of nowhere - even ignoring the dismal ogres,
> most of GW's releases (in both systems) have been rather lacklustre
> lately, and suddenly they come out with one of their best ranges all in
> one go - right up there with Empire and High Elves IMO. I just wish the
> army deal were available on advance order already.
I just stopped buying miniatures and started selling of some of my 40k
stuff as well as a few wfb miniatures. I decided against buying more
new miniatures...well some woodelves will have a new home on my
shelves, but I'm not buying a complete army deal.
Christof
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram