Am I really going to reply to the coomer slopfag?
>>96104829
>since it gives you massive firepower
Debatable, rate of fire for bows is higher and many armies in Asia have used bows next to guns. It's a very western European thing to ditch other types of missile weapons for rifles.
>as other races struggled to raise regiments of the same quality
My point is that these types of troops were of poor quality (for the most part), basically being carried by the weapon alone. An elf guy being taught for a weak how to reload a rifle while barely caring about shooting straight is not elfish, is not a good use of their skill and long lifespans. If elves embrace gunpowder weapons, then they would train themselves to hit and place good shots.
>Perhaps other types of elves would not be found in tight firing lines though
Agreed. The usual high elf type, if not just wood elves but more civilized, would probably field more cavalry. To me, cuirassiers and dragoons seem like a much more reasonable use of a population with (relatively) small numbers but high skill, and also of comparatively high wealth. Lots of assumptions here, but you get the idea.
Not to say that there aren't advantages of compact formations and volley fire, so they would absolutely have line formation troops to some degree. You also need someone to stop the opponent from catching your artillery.

Also, the argument about elves fighting in tight formations in some setting doesn't quite compare due to the nature of line infantry warfare. Casualties tend to be relatively low, even for infantry on the front. But I do believe having read that the new age warfare has led to really high casualties. Often, soldiers would just stand and get hit over and over. For an elfish individual with the prospect of a long life, this seems, from a psychological perspective, to be a net negative. Line infantry would only make sense for their most badass (and who get the best pay).