Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
12
13
LastLast
  1. #201
    I also think the alliance should push the forsaken out of Lordaeron. Why? A kingdom with hundreds/thousands of years of history beats a bunch of living dead any day. There's also the fact that the Alliance's inability to retake Lordaeron makes it look weak.

    The Alliance should Lordaeron back and push the Undead to EPL. The Forsaken could then take Stratholme or settle somewhere else. Northrend, perhaps?

    But whatever Blizzard decide to do with Lordaeron, it's not practical to change things now, so nothing is going to happen until WoW comes to an end.
    Last edited by El_Diabl0; 2013-09-04 at 05:15 PM.

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    Lordaeron is already in the hands of it's rightful owners.
    Yes. YES. YES!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by El_Diabl0 View Post
    the Alliance's inability to retake Lordaeron makes it look weak.
    The Alliance is weak. It is taking them teamed up with all of the other Horde leaders just to take down our awesome Warchief lol come on, just give it up.

  3. #203
    Let the Foresaken have Lordaeron. I'd be happy with the Alliance taking Arathi Highlands, Gilneas and getting South Shore back. Screw you Blizz for taking South Shore away!

  4. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    With or without zombies? I say this because after seeing as Lordaeron fell at the hands of myriads of zombies, Queen Calia should not be very sympathetic towards the walking corpses ...

    But of course, the logic also says that Turalyon and Alleria should be heroes of the Alliance, and yet we all know will happen to them soon ...
    Who knows, maybe Calia was killed during the Scourge invasion of Lordaeron and was recently raised as an undead.

  5. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by Pwnzoar View Post
    Who knows, maybe Calia was killed during the Scourge invasion of Lordaeron and was recently raised as an undead.
    Exactly, in fact, that would be the more logical ,easiest and faster solution. But we must also recognize that it would be the more boring solution.

    If Calia had died and was revived, perhaps would make sense as the new Queen of the Forsaken after the fall of Sylvanas. However that would affect only the Forsaken and their relations with the Horde, but would leave out of the action to the Alliance (which would not recognize the legitimacy of a living corpse).

    Now if Calia had survived and was alive somewhere then that would involve the Alliance in history. I believe that this is the most interesting and best option for the game since a narrative point of view (although I'm not objective because I am a member of the Alliance).

    The question is: does the Forsaken player base would be satisfied if Calia replaces to the problematic Sylvanas as leader of the Forsaken?

  6. #206
    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    Exactly, in fact, that would be the more logical ,easiest and faster solution. But we must also recognize that it would be the more boring solution.

    If Calia had died and was revived, perhaps would make sense as the new Queen of the Forsaken after the fall of Sylvanas. However that would affect only the Forsaken and their relations with the Horde, but would leave out of the action to the Alliance (which would not recognize the legitimacy of a living co
    Now if Calia had survived and was alive somewhere then that would involve the Alliance in history. I believe that this is the most interesting and best option for the game since a narrative point of view (although I'm not objective because I am a member of the Alliance).

    The question is: does the Forsaken player base would be satisfied if Calia replaces to the problematic Sylvanas as leader of the Forsaken?
    No.
    Sylvanas is awesome.

  7. #207
    Quote Originally Posted by Icarris View Post
    No.
    Sylvanas is awesome.
    sylvanas is not just awesome. she's terrific!
    Warlorcs of Draenorc made me quit. You can't have my stuff.

  8. #208
    Quote Originally Posted by Icarris View Post
    No.
    Sylvanas is awesome.
    Assuming that's the majoritarian decision... the Forsaken would have some respect for Calia? or they only owe allegiance to the Dark Lady?

  9. #209
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Diabl0 View Post
    I also think the alliance should push the forsaken out of Lordaeron. Why? A kingdom with hundreds/thousands of years of history beats a bunch of living dead any day. There's also the fact that the Alliance's inability to retake Lordaeron makes it look weak.

    The Alliance should Lordaeron back and push the Undead to EPL. The Forsaken could then take Stratholme or settle somewhere else. Northrend, perhaps?

    But whatever Blizzard decide to do with Lordaeron, it's not practical to change things now, so nothing is going to happen until WoW comes to an end.
    if I remember Stratholme was captured by the Argent Crusade and Northrend is territorial lich king

  10. #210
    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    Assuming that's the majoritarian decision... the Forsaken would have some respect for Calia? or they only owe allegiance to the Dark Lady?
    Sylvanas freed them and protected them. WTF did Calia do?
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    I'm determined to someday make Med'an awesome. (MickyNeilson)

    ´So.. sorry to bring this up but..you know that .."thing" (Med'an).. is that "thing" cannon still?
    ...as much have some have wished otherwise, yes. (Loreology)

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    Assuming that's the majoritarian decision... the Forsaken would have some respect for Calia? or they only owe allegiance to the Dark Lady?
    the forsaken are not one single hive mind. they are a bunch of different people. you have some crazy ones like stillwater and putress, some decent ones like the guy that decided to leave the ghosts in hillsbrad alone because they are similar to the forsaken and deserve to keep their land (I forgot his name and I don't have time to look it up, I gotta go out in a few moments).

    anyway: it's likely that part of the forsaken would reject calia because of her being arthas' sister, while another part of them would accept calia because she's the heir to the throne and terenas' daughter. terenas is still venered by the forsaken. on top of the undercity there's a memorial to him:

    Here lies King Terenas Menethil II -- Last True King of Lordaeron.

    Great were his deeds -- long was his reign -- unthinkable was his death.

    "May the Father lie blameless for the deeds of the son.
    May the bloodied crown stay lost and forgotten."
    Warlorcs of Draenorc made me quit. You can't have my stuff.

  12. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by checking facts View Post
    the forsaken are not one single hive mind. they are a bunch of different people. you have some crazy ones like stillwater and putress, some decent ones like the guy that decided to leave the ghosts in hillsbrad alone because they are similar to the forsaken and deserve to keep their land (I forgot his name and I don't have time to look it up, I gotta go out in a few moments).
    Silence of the Dwarves: "They fight for their land even after death - much like the Forsaken. I will report back to high command that Dun Garok is uninhabitable. Let them keep what they hold so dear."
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    I'm determined to someday make Med'an awesome. (MickyNeilson)

    ´So.. sorry to bring this up but..you know that .."thing" (Med'an).. is that "thing" cannon still?
    ...as much have some have wished otherwise, yes. (Loreology)

  13. #213
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquamonkey View Post
    Sylvanas freed them and protected them. WTF did Calia do?
    But she is the heir of the Kingdom of Lordaeron, in life and death

    Quote Originally Posted by checking facts View Post
    anyway: it's likely that part of the forsaken would reject calia because of her being arthas' sister, while another part of them would accept calia because she's the heir to the throne and terenas' daughter. terenas is still venered by the forsaken. on top of the undercity there's a memorial to him:
    That I meant, the Forsaken will be divided into two groups: those loyal to Sylvanas and those faithful to Calia, as the orcs have been divided now because Garrosh.

    At the end Sylvanas will become an insurmountable danger and therefore the rest of the Horde along with the Alliance will destroy her. So Calia remain as the legitimate Queen of the Forsaken survivors.

  14. #214
    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    But she is the heir of the Kingdom of Lordaeron, in life and death
    So was Arthas, that didn't stop them from turning on him. It's not like Calia did all that much before Lordaeron's fall to garner strong loyalty anyway. And since its fall, Calia has done nothing for the Forsaken during the past 8+ years. If she is still alive, the Forsaken have no reason to abandon Sylvanas who freed them and protected them during that time.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    I'm determined to someday make Med'an awesome. (MickyNeilson)

    ´So.. sorry to bring this up but..you know that .."thing" (Med'an).. is that "thing" cannon still?
    ...as much have some have wished otherwise, yes. (Loreology)

  15. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquamonkey View Post
    So was Arthas, that didn't stop them from turning on him. It's not like Calia did all that much before Lordaeron's fall to garner strong loyalty anyway. And since its fall, Calia has done nothing for the Forsaken during the past 8+ years. If she is still alive, the Forsaken have no reason to abandon Sylvanas who freed them and protected them during that time.
    We are supposing that she is dead, concretely undead.

    Although she has not done anything for them (yet) she is the legitimate heir to the throne, I guess some Forsaken will remain loyal to the crown ...

  16. #216
    Banned The Fiend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Merry ol' England.
    Posts
    5,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon2K View Post
    Why? Push the Forsaken out; re-establish the fortifications that were there of old, bring Quel'thalas back into the fold and Alliance banners could once again wave over all the lands from Silvermoon to the tip of Stranglethorn!

    Besides, all the lands of Eastern Kingdoms belonged to man, dwarf and elf (all right, all right, and gnome) before that whole business with the Dark Portal.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I forgot to mention that the Forsaken have hell to pay for what they did to Southshore, Gilneas and Andorhal.
    By this Logic, everything belongs to the Trolls.

  17. #217
    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    We are supposing that she is dead, concretely undead.

    Although she has not done anything for them (yet) she is the legitimate heir to the throne, I guess some Forsaken will remain loyal to the crown ...
    After lifetime of slavery, I highly doubt it.
    The common man is like a worm in the gut of a corpse, trapped inside a prison of cold flesh, helpless and uncaring, unaware even of the inevitability of its own doom.

  18. #218
    Banned The Fiend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Merry ol' England.
    Posts
    5,492
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Diabl0 View Post
    I also think the alliance should push the forsaken out of Lordaeron. Why? A kingdom with hundreds/thousands of years of history beats a bunch of living dead any day. There's also the fact that the Alliance's inability to retake Lordaeron makes it look weak.

    The Alliance should Lordaeron back and push the Undead to EPL. The Forsaken could then take Stratholme or settle somewhere else. Northrend, perhaps?

    But whatever Blizzard decide to do with Lordaeron, it's not practical to change things now, so nothing is going to happen until WoW comes to an end.
    So basically, you're an Alliance fanboy with no real concept of how Militarily impossible that would be right?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Northem View Post
    We are supposing that she is dead, concretely undead.

    Although she has not done anything for them (yet) she is the legitimate heir to the throne, I guess some Forsaken will remain loyal to the crown ...
    Let us weigh them against each other yes?

    Sylvanas - Save them from the scourge, freed them and formed them into a nation and found a way for them to not die out as a people.

    Calia - she's the stupid daughter of the king, who might be a forsaken now I guess.

  19. #219
    Scarab Lord Grubjuice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Spook central
    Posts
    4,159
    Quote Originally Posted by The Fiend View Post
    By this Logic, everything belongs to the Trolls.
    and rightfully it does

    every one knows there is no statute of limitations on ancestral homelands, and ancient history always takes precedent over recent history.

  20. #220
    Herald of the Titans MrHappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    2,551
    there is no reason to try to take it unless there is something beneath tirisfal that has a ginormous benefit to the alliance and it is a matter of "get it all costs or die trying" . Aside from that from a military perspective, throwing soldiers to the undead = more undead armies to fight back at them. it is like trying to fight fire by throwing paper at it.
    www.cherishyourit.ca MCTS - Win 7, MCTS - AD, A+, Security+

Posting Permissions

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