However, someone had mentioned what I thought would be a really good title for the alliance slaying Garrosh: Avenger of Theramore. As it references not only the opening event for this expansion but the conclusion as well.
My weekly podcast can be downloaded here this week we discuss the world wide shortage of clowns
I know that I would probably have never donned the title since it is meaningless except for the fact that it will piss off players like you.
There is no bad RNG only bad L2P
We went in and took it BY FORCE.
We could just as well stay there and control it, but we don't see the need to do so, because the threat (Garrosh) is removed.
The Alliance did conquer Orgrimmar. They just didn't want to keep it.
Personally, I'd prefer the Liberator title, because it sounds nicer.
Sigh. People will always find a way to complain.
I can understand why the OP is mad.
Everything has indeed been made to make Alliance players feel less bad about the story. Varian going superwise so suddenly, awesome titles for doing nothing, etc.
But I'm not exactly sure that's what the Alliance community is looking for.
I'll just headcanon it away as a title given out by alliance command to their troops to keep them from wondering "wtf were we doing there anyways?". Political propaganda is easier to stomach than developer incompetance :P
Last edited by bdew; 2013-08-06 at 10:46 AM.
Okay calm down and lets wipe away the rabies mouth foam yah?
Getting all aggro and emo about pixel titles is just laughable.
If you don't like it, don't use it, that's why you get choice in what title you use.
No? Hmm tough cookies...
Welp, it's your ulcer
"There are other sites on the internet designed for people to make friends or relationships. This isn't one" Darsithis Super Moderator
Proof that the mmochamp community can be a bitter and lonely place. What a shame.
Look, instead of going "no, you - no, you" and pointing fingers of who posted what - exploding in a nerdball of rage publicly over a title just seems overly negative and a little bit excessive - debating about semantics of liberation and conquest seems equally pointless.
Debating a larger issue of lore and the general quality of it (or lack of interesting storylines per faction) would be interesting (and there's actually already a thread for it *gasp*).
And overall - Blizzard had clearly stated they prefer gameplay > lore (and I'm thankful for their common sense in that matter) - so converting enemy capital to other faction city, is never, ever going to happen in-game. The best we're going to get is a cinematic and a title (which is quite ok, I think)
It might happen in some books/stories/comics/fanfiction outside the game, but it never will in-game. It would make no sense at all.
I didn't bother with this title until thread showed me how much horde is butthurt over it :P
I'll get my hordebreaker in about 30 minutes
However, the Horde isn't allowed on board because they will stink up the place and Velen got, like, JUST done with the interior decorating and carpeting.
A plan is devised. They build a large wooden raft (from Ashenvale lumber, of course), plant a big horde flag on it, and call it the "SS Doomhammer".
Then, with a sturdy rope, they attach it to the back of the Exodar, lifting along.
This while the alliance sips Martinis with all the hot Draenei chicks in the Exodar's swimming pool.
"Don't walk behind me; I may not lead. Don't walk in front of me; I may not follow. Just walk beside me and be my comrade." - Albert Camus
Honestly they could've went non-faction specific with "the Freer of Orgrimmar"
The title is a bit over the top. It seems to me that "Conqueror of XXX" should be awarded by killing the faction leader, as well as killing X number of defending players while in that city.
Conqueror of Org, Conqueror of SW, Conqueror of Undercity, Conqueror of Ironforge, etc.
Get all of the respective Conquerors, and then you get Conqueror of the Horde vs Conqueror of the Alliance.