Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ...
4
5
6
7
8
... LastLast
  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Zharikov View Post
    whoa buddy whats with all this we talk here, you're not an npc in the game silly you aren't deciding whether genn decides to betray azeroth or not (which he is, tsk tsk.)
    I am relaying to you what Genn is saying as an NPC - he's very upfront about that, the Horde are not the ally, etc. Yes, it would have been better if our king wasn't a spineless baby and was saying the same things, then you'd understand quicker, but Genn would do. The only thing Genn "betrays" is allegiance to the said king, and while that's a serious issue, it's an internal issue of the Alliance. He doesn't betray Azeroth in the least, he can't defend Azeroth with a knife ready to go into his back, and while it might be better not to try and break that knife right now, it's up to him and up to the Alliance to decide.

    ---
    Returning to the point which started it, Sylvanas is saying that "The Alliance will retaliate." after what happened on Broken Shore not because Genn did something untrustworthy - he did no such thing, he was fighting the Legion giving his all to save Azeroth, side by side with what the Alliance thought was an ally - no, Sylvanas is saying that because she *knows* that the Horde fled saving their asses, betraying the Alliance and leaving them to die, she *knows* that this is dishonorable and awaits repercussions.

    She knows she and the Horde behaved like cowards. She just thinks it is fine and will absolutely behave like a coward again whenever she likes.

    That's your "Blood and Honor" and "Victory or Death". Deal with it.
    Last edited by rda; 2016-05-08 at 07:50 AM.

  2. #102
    Warchief Zenny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    Sum total, so far the Horde side of the landing is exactly like it was thought it was going to be - no real differences from what we could muster from the Alliance version. The Horde are cowards and flee to save their asses leaving the Alliance to die.

    Previous thread: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ents-of-Legion

    - - - Updated - - -

    Let's see what the ending is going to be, although I doubt it will contain any surprises.
    Oh this nonsense again? I raised the point before that if you think the Horde are cowards you must think the British at Dunkirk were cowards too, and if you believe that then you are a idiot and your opinion about anything can be discarded.

  3. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    Oh this nonsense again? I raised the point before that if you think the Horde are cowards you must think the British at Dunkirk were cowards too, and if you believe that then you are a idiot and your opinion about anything can be discarded.
    I can play this game too - if you are saying that, then you must believe that the Moon landing was a fake, and so you are just a dummy.

    Seriously, if you want to say something, go ahead and say it. These "if you bla bla then you must be bla bla" aren't interesting and aren't worth replying to.

  4. #104
    Warchief Zenny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I can play this game too - if you are saying that, then you must believe that the Moon landing was a fake, and so you are just a dummy.

    Seriously, if you want to say something, go ahead and say it. These "if you bla bla then you must be bla bla" aren't interesting and aren't worth replying to.
    So you believe the British were cowards at Dunkirk and should have stayed to fight for their Allies? Even if it would have meant hundreds of thousands of casualties with little impact on the German war machine? Just to prove they weren't cowards?

  5. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    So you believe the British were cowards at Dunkirk and should have stayed to fight for their Allies? Even if it would have meant hundreds of thousands of casualties with little impact on the German war machine? Just to prove they weren't cowards?
    that seems to be exactly what he said. how truly awful.

  6. #106
    Warchief Zenny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Zharikov View Post
    that seems to be exactly what he said. how truly awful.
    His entire argument is bizzare, we know they are massively outnumbered, and in a compromised position. Dialog tells us they were overwhelmed, ordering a retreat at that point isn't cowardice, it's what any smart general would do.

  7. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    His entire argument is bizzare, we know they are massively outnumbered, and in a compromised position. Dialog tells us they were overwhelmed, ordering a retreat at that point isn't cowardice, it's what any smart general would do.
    we all know tactics are a cheap trick used by weak armies to seem stronger. true mighty warriors charge in and fight to the death without any other thought or regard.

  8. #108
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    First, this is silly. The Alliance stayed and were "wiped out" to use your words. Is the Alliance no longer relevant as a military power, are there no more Alliance defenders? No, not at all, this all just started, all battles are yet to happen. This was a blow, but far from a crushing one.

    What you are saying above is just insane fearmongering. "Oh, we are all going to die and lose if we stay and there will be noone left bla bla bla", yeah, that's not at all true, the only reason this gets said at all is to justify the Horde being cowards and fleeing the battle.

    Second, what do you do is simple. You either fight together or you retreat together. If the odds are so stacked in favor of the Legion and the Horde sees that but the Alliance don't, great, tell the Alliance that the odds are so stacked against you both, show them what they don't see, then retreat together. Did the Horde do that? Nah, they just turned their backs and fled. Nobody is interested in the silly rationalizations, every idiot who runs with their pants full has the same story about how it was hopeless and how he'd just have died for nothing if he didn't flee and betray his brothers in arms. The end.

    - - - Updated - - -



    If in the process of "choosing to live to fight" you betray your brothers in arms, then yes, that's cowardice.

    - - - Updated - - -



    That's just your invention, it is completely and utterly unsubstantiated and is untrue (it'd be stupid if that was true, how would that even work???? that's just a huge exaggeration which only exists because someone wants to say that the Horde had no choice - they did have a choice, and they chose to be cowards despite their endless boasts of honor and dying in the name of a worthy cause).

    1. The Alliance didn't stay and get wiped out. Genn, Jaina, the player and a few soldiers make it out alive and bring back Varian (we don't even know when specificly he dies. He could die on the way back to Stormwind.
    2. "Show them what they don't see?" Are you for real?
    Sylvanas: Hey Varian!
    Varian: I'm busy, Sylvanas, can't it wait?
    Sylvanas: There is a huge demon army here so we gotta go now.
    Varian: Really? Show me!
    Sylvanas: I can't you are too far away. Come here!
    Varian: What? No. Guld'Dan is killing us I can't just go there. Also how am I even hearing you from that distance.
    Sylvanas: I'm a Banshee I can scream very loud.
    Nathanos: She really can. Trust me.

    3. Brothers in arms? Peace or no since when are Varian and Sylvanas brothers in arms? Did I miss something? They fought together on the Broken Shore for like five minutes.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoxyBlue View Post
    Seriously its stupid to throw your army into certain death, better to retreat and regroup to gain a better advantage than lose it all in some misplaced fantasy code of honor.
    What I find funny is the Alli side somewhere mentioning that Varian is like the best tactician ever. He doesn't do anything just try to zerg rush with a dozen warriors. How about some siege weapons or airstrike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Enthralled View Post
    A few of you guys are acting like the Horde just cut out and ran when the scenario clearly shows them fighting their asses off and likely taking heavy losses besides. I just -- I just can't even.
    Not to mention that if not for the Horde the Alliance would have had to flee sooner. The Horde spends the entire Gul'Dan fight covering the flank. And it wasn't coordinated. Sylvanas simply said that she will do it. And since we can't pinpoint when the Alliance left we don't know if the Horde staying would have made a big difference. And loosing Sylvanas, Baine, Vol'Jin, Thrall and Gallywix just to give them a bit more time is just not worth it.

    Quote Originally Posted by gcsmith View Post
    Based on what we know, we know the alliance think the hordes retreat cost them their King. We also know the horde loses no one major in the broken shore scenario, and it's pretty obvious at this point that vol'jin faked his death (cinematics can change this though). What I expect, vol'jin gets injured and Sylvanas orders retreat, this happens during the attack on gul'dan and the demons causing the alliances flank to be overwhelmed.

    We also know from the stills at blizzcon, that Gelbin came prepared. So good.
    Obvious? Really? Datamined files from the Alpha mean nothing. In WoD Yreal was the niece of Velen and the lover of Maraad. Also, Tess Greymane had a questline in Shadowmoon Valley. NOt to mention actual faction hubs. None of these made it to release. What is available in game is a huge funeral with tonns of guards, a burning pyre and very convincing tears.
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    You don't understand how lore works either. The player-controlled heroes are a tiny part of the Horde / Alliance.

    (I should start charging for these posts, half the time I am explaining obvious things to ignorant yet aggressive people.)
    A tiny part? Really? No, the players are freakin demigods who are sent to literally solve every problem. Just the stuff we do alone while questing is more than what Thrall did in his entire life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grosbill View Post
    I wonder if rda wants the Gilneans out of the alliance...

    Because they were definitely untrustworthy, cowardly and erratic.

    They also told the rest of the Alliance to get lost when the scourge attacked
    But....but....they are Alliance so they are good. And if not for the Horde attack in the Second War they wouldn't have become cowards. Or something

    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    Here's what Anduin's dialog should have been:

    Jaina: <tells that the Horde flew from the battlefield>
    Anduin: Tell me exactly what happened.
    <Anduin listens to Jaina, Genn, whoever else was on the Shore - they tell him what the Horde did>
    <Anduin thinks for some time>
    Anduin: This is difficult. We can't fight the Horde now with the Legion at our doors. But it is clear that we can't rely on them. At best, they might suddenly decide mid-way through a fight that they are better off retreating and go home even if that leaves us exposed. At worst, they might do this in order to harm us. From now on we stop treating the Horde as an ally, they aren't an ally, not even a temporary one. We are treating them as a passive threat. When we are making plans, we are making them in the way that even if the Horde want to harm us, their ability to do so is limited. And when and if the Legion is over, we are going against the Horde.

    Jaina and Genn nod, we have a king with an actual brain and willpower and not a spineless stupid pussy to be ashamed of.
    There isn't much Anduin could have said, being an inexperienced kid and all. And his only source of information is the two largest Horde haters on his side. Even Taran Zhu likes the Horde more than Genn and Jaina.

  9. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    His entire argument is bizzare, we know they are massively outnumbered, and in a compromised position. Dialog tells us they were overwhelmed, ordering a retreat at that point isn't cowardice, it's what any smart general would do.
    A retreat is coordinated, you retreat together with your brothers in arms, or at least you let them know that you are retreating. What the Horde did was not a retreat, they fled. That's cowardice.

    Sylvanas knows that it's cowardice, too, see above.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I am not going to reply to the first part of the post addressed to me, it is just repeats of what was in the thread before. I will reply to this, though, because you and several others genuinely seem not to understand how it works:

    Quote Originally Posted by Balager View Post
    A tiny part? Really? No, the players are freakin demigods who are sent to literally solve every problem. Just the stuff we do alone while questing is more than what Thrall did in his entire life.
    From the lore's point of view, the player's hero is a demigod who participated in slaying this and that, yes. But he is a tiny part of the faction forces. He's certainly not irreplaceable. If he falls someplace, it's no big deal, he will either get resurrected, or a new hero will arrive to take his place (the lore does not go into details regarding what exactly is going to happen because if it'd have to spell out everything, it would stop making sense very fast, we are dealing with numerous things which would be idiotic but are necessary for gameplay).

    Sum total, the hero is completely dispensable.

  10. #110
    Warchief Zenny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    A retreat is coordinated, you retreat together with your brothers in arms, or at least you let them know that you are retreating. What the Horde did was not a retreat, they fled. That's cowardice.

    Sylvanas knows that it's cowardice, too, see above.
    They did the exact same as the British did at Dunkirk, who fled France to leave it to the Germans. No one thinks they were cowards though, because it was the only tactically sound move to make. Maybe Sylvanas had ulterior motives, doesn't change the fact that it was a good move to make.

  11. #111
    Deleted
    Can someone call @Friendlyimmolation? He's good at arguing. I'm honestly surprised he isn't here yet.
    Last edited by mmoc38dc10fd5b; 2016-05-08 at 08:43 AM.

  12. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    They did the exact same as the British did at Dunkirk, who fled France to leave it to the Germans. No one thinks they were cowards though, because it was the only tactically sound move to make. Maybe Sylvanas had ulterior motives, doesn't change the fact that it was a good move to make.
    I am not going to discuss your analogy, because I am completely sure that "the exact same thing" has no business being there.

    I disagree it was a good move to make.

  13. #113
    Warchief Zenny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I am not going to discuss your analogy, because I am completely sure that "the exact same thing" has no business being there.

    I disagree it was a good move to make.
    Great, so you refuse to counter my argument. Face the facts, it's almost always a tactically sound decision to retreat in the face of overwhelming odds. The armies that historically didn't generally got wiped out. But hey, I guess all of the following were just stinking cowards:

    http://www.history.com/news/history-...itary-retreats

    Or Erwin Rommel was such a idiot for ignoring his orders from Hitler: "Stand and Die. To fight to the last bullet, the last man"

    But feel free to argue semantics on how the Horde fled and didn't retreat. Even though you have called it a retreat multiple times.

  14. #114
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    A retreat is coordinated, you retreat together with your brothers in arms, or at least you let them know that you are retreating. What the Horde did was not a retreat, they fled. That's cowardice.
    You really need to stop throwing the "cowardice" argument when you were already proved wrong several times by multiple posters.

    And do you really want to know what's cowardice? Build up a wall, abandon a third of your lands and leave war refugees to die at the wall. Hypocrisy, thy name is Genn.

  15. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    Great, so you refuse to counter my argument. Face the facts, it's almost always a tactically sound decision to retreat in the face of overwhelming odds. The armies that historically didn't generally got wiped out. But hey, I guess all of the following were just stinking cowards:

    http://www.history.com/news/history-...itary-retreats

    Or Erwin Rommel was such a idiot for ignoring his orders from Hitler: "Stand and Die. To fight to the last bullet, the last man"

    But feel free to argue semantics on how the Horde fled and didn't retreat. Even though you have called it a retreat multiple times.
    Legion want to kill all of them regardless of race or nationality.
    Hitler want to rule EU.

    See the different?

    Also, it's funny how people compare people who survive by fleeing just because the believe they will lose to people who was force to retreat because of heavy casualty they received because they refused to run away without a fight.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tauror View Post
    You really need to stop throwing the "cowardice" argument when you were already proved wrong several times by multiple posters.

    And do you really want to know what's cowardice? Build up a wall, abandon a third of your lands and leave war refugees to die at the wall. Hypocrisy, thy name is Genn.
    Technically, it was never being proved wrong.

    Just post with different point of view.
    Same as the people who chose Garrosh side in MoP.
    Last edited by greeeed; 2016-05-08 at 10:27 AM.

  16. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenny View Post
    Great, so you refuse to counter my argument. Face the facts, it's almost always a tactically sound decision to retreat in the face of overwhelming odds.
    I counter your argument by saying that your analogy is lacking. If you think it is not, fine, construct an argument for Dunkirk, then change Dunkirk to Broken Shore, change names to Varian / Sylvanas / Guldan, present it here, and we will talk. Go ahead. You aren't doing this because it is much simpler to say "hey, it's just like Dunkirk" and pretend that you covered it all. No, dear, if you want to talk, please spell what it is you want to say in detail, vague "it's similar to X" aren't going to cut it. Otherwise my answer to you is going to be "hey, it's clear that the Horde are cowards, because 2+2=4".

    Regarding what you are calling a retreat, you continue to be missing the key point. It would have been a retreat if the Horde and the Alliance retreated together, or if one of them decided to stay so that the other could retreat, etc. But the Horde did none of that, they just fled, without so much as saying to the Alliance "guys, we are leaving, you are on your own".

    And just in case, unless you simply assume that the Alliance are idiots, they stayed fighting because it wasn't looking so bleak from where they stood. So, great, let's accept that it was a sound decision to retreat, the Horde saw it, great, superb. So, the Alliance continue to fight, not seeing that they (Alliance + Horde) can't win, and the Horde see that they can't win. It falls on the Horde then to notify the Alliance that things are really, really bad and it is time to retreat. But what do they do instead? They notify nobody and just flee trying to save their own asses, not caring for the Alliance who continue to fight thinking it is winnable. The Horde are cowards. This is not a retreat, this is deserting a battlefield.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tauror View Post
    You really need to stop throwing the "cowardice" argument when you were already proved wrong several times by multiple posters.
    I was not proven wrong, if you think I was, link a post where you think that happened. To the contrary, I have explained from multiple angles why what the Horde did was cowardly.

    Just in case, I skipped your post on page 5, because it falls down from the beginning where you start talking big things about how it was a withdrawal and how the withdrawal is "the organized retreat of a field army" and bla bla bla, you then argue from there that it's all cool.

    But that definition describes exactly what didn't happen here - what the Horde did was *not* "the organized retreat of a field army", it was a *disorganized* and *uncoordinated* action of part of the army, undertaken in the spur of the moment with nobody but the part undertaking it knowing. What the Horde did is called fleeing or deserting.
    Last edited by rda; 2016-05-08 at 11:21 AM.

  17. #117
    So, I just watched the horde side, and they definetly aren't shown fleeing until the cinematic. We have to see whats their to really know for certain. The horde side gameplay shows them moving back step by step but staying to hold the flank while they can.
    For the Alliance, and for Azeroth!

  18. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by gcsmith View Post
    So, I just watched the horde side, and they definetly aren't shown fleeing until the cinematic. We have to see whats their to really know for certain. The horde side gameplay shows them moving back step by step but staying to hold the flank while they can.
    I think the cinematic will just show Sylvanas saying "there's too many of them, retreat", but maybe there will be something more interesting, so, sure, let's wait.

    Note by the way that the Horde are communicating with the Alliance alright and note Sylvanas text on 14:44.

  19. #119
    Warchief Zenny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I counter your argument by saying that your analogy is lacking. If you think it is not, fine, construct an argument for Dunkirk, then change Dunkirk to Broken Shore, change names to Varian / Sylvanas / Guldan, present it here, and we will talk. Go ahead. You aren't doing this because it is much simpler to say "hey, it's just like Dunkirk" and pretend that you covered it all. No, dear, if you want to talk, please spell what it is you want to say in detail, vague "it's similar to X" aren't going to cut it. Otherwise my answer to you is going to be "hey, it's clear that the Horde are cowards, because 2+2=4"..
    2+2=4 eh?

    1. Horde leadership is killed.
    2. Horde lines are broken.
    3. Horde is outnumbered and frankly outgunned.
    4. Horde ordered a retreat.

    I'm sorry if that is difficult for you to grasp. Maybe they should have stayed and died so the glorious Alliance (who they owe nothing to, as the two are not allies) could have survived.

    The situation is also just not like Dunkirk, but there are obvious similarities. Dunkirk was a retreat against a overwhelming army, a retreat that was an abandonment of the British allies in Europe. A retreat that was fully justified due to suicide being the only other option. The British forces fled to fight another day.

    The worst you can accuse the Horde of is being dicks, due to not notifying the Alliance of the retreat. (Or maybe they tried to, but we cannot see the full picture yet). But retreating in of itself is not the act of a coward.

  20. #120
    you guys are all stoopid, is clearly that Varian was a Dreadlord, thats why he didnt order a retreat, he wanted to murder every alliance at the shore, but the horde is too smart to fail for that kind of tactic so thats why the fled

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •