[SPOILERS] Another Major Horde Death after Vol'Jin revealed + Major Exodar Event

[Venziir]

Sigh.... He, nor Trollbane, dies.

[lightofdawn]

yes cause coming back as a toy is the same as being one of the four horsemen.

it's something, which is more than the horde characters got in draenor to remember nazgrim by.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

it's something, which is more than the horde characters got in draenor to remember nazgrim by.

the horde also didn't lose any one in draenor where the alliance lost 2.

[MORGATH99]

highlord varok saurfang does not die he doesnt know how to

and i read that at least for horde arms warriors you need to find him on the broken isles and fight him to get an artifact weapon skin
so im pretty sure hes is alive and well cleaving everything that comes before him , with his brother broxigar watching over him from above

[lightofdawn]

the horde also didn't lose any one in draenor where the alliance lost 2.

maraad, the poster child for not being known until 3 expansions after he's added, and admiral "no story" taylor. you lost nothing of value

[Lorgar Aurelian]

maraad, the poster child for not being known until 3 expansions after he's added, and admiral "no story" taylor. you lost nothing of value

just cause your ignorant of who maraad is doesn't mean every one was and taylor was as important as nazgrim ya we did lose some thing of value even if your blind to its value.

[Koreche]

who says i'm an alliance buff? i don't like that the alliance loses heroes over and over every expan but i play horde just as much. and thrall has been putting the safety of the world over his faction but thrall didn't show up in my alliance garrison and work with the humans all the way though wod.

- - - Updated - - -



bolvar is only more around then nazgrim cause hes in the firemage class quest but thats only by a bit
taylor dieing cause nzgrim did is stupid and unnecessary and nazgrim comes back as a dk while taylor is stuck on dranor as a ghost
khadgar is far more neutral then thrall ever was he shows up in the horde garrison lets the horde into the kirin'tor after they were locked our helped the horde with there shipyard helped the horde make there legendary ring, what did thrall do in cata? shoot a dragon? let you come to his wedding?

- - - Updated - - -



yet nazgrim is one of the four horsemen and taylor is a useless ghost on dranor.

Right taylor dying IS stupid and unnecessary. But it is the fault of people like you who whine about horde not losing enough characters to be equal with the alliance. That is my point...
You think it wasnt stupid of you to say

good its time the horde lose some people the alliance lost maarad and taylor in wod and the horde lost nothing.

and you keep bringing up nazgrim as a four horseman being unfair to taylor. But you also keep ignoring Bolvar is THE LICH KING while saurfang became a random blood deathknight.

Neutral is neutral. Thrall does nothing for the horde and he does not do shit in the garrison he isnt working with the horde the entire expansion hes not doing anything at all and in legion he is powerless anyways. The horde lost more warchiefs than the alliance have leaders period...

Also you make it very obvious you are an alliance buff.
Yes the alliance loses character over and over and the horde never does except the horde has lost more leaders of the horde than the alliance has racial leaders and then the horde also lost cairne and alliance just gained the only racial leader they lost.

- - - Updated - - -

......rip Velen second time. That ability is a major loss, as his entire character and lore is built upon that.
Feels like Blizzard is trying to move away from mary sue overpowered characters.

Going with loses, be aware that the Broken Shore was a bigger loss for alliance. Varian was just a bigger deal and Tirion with the argent crusade is more alliance tied

Also note their might be a major alliance character dying in another class questline. Perhaps the rogue one it's about SI:7.

About loses:
When talking about the most key characters (faction leader or second in command). It's fairly close with alliance having slightly higher output.
Aside from that, the alliance also lost several key character to neutrality and than insult alliance by claiming their the same as horde or something in that sense. Dalaran does this again and we get forsaken of all factions being gaurds......really they slaughtered everyone in Hillsbrad, that town just south must have been part of Dalaran with lots of familymembers present.

The death that I really found pathetic was Admiral Taylor, he was a mirror to Nazgrim and thats why he had to die......it was really shallow since they don't mirror any other losses from alliance like Theramore. Aside from that WoD also had more major character loses in WoD even if they mirrored development time in WoD with a horde newly made character.

Alliance has lost many villages and fortresses. Not only at the start of vanilla which is ignorable but after. Many of those are at the horde hands even. And this is where we go to each factions current issue.

Horde major issue:
- The loss of Vol'jin (and saurfang?) was minor loss as warchief, but still major as a nation character. The issue is that they were irrelevant as warchief.
- No build-up for replacement character. Horde always had a one dimensional side and felt lacking in background development outside of the game. While saurfang did have a good background to be a replacement for Garrosh it missed just some pressence where you see him replacing Garrosh. Trolls are even worse I don't now of any.

Alliance:
- It's always about losses never about gains. It does allow for big background story but this element gets demotivating, they do get some gains but that is just mirrored by horde while the Horde gets unmirrored gains. WoD is a excelent example of each factions identity and resulting to this. Draenei are a large 'kingdom'being attacked on all sides loosing stuff but in the end able to defend. Horde is the underdog starting out small and making strides forward (a 2e clan became allies)
The alliance did gain a Naaru at a great cost but it's immidiatly used and than never used again making it an irrelevant gain.
Another example is from throne of thunder. Blood Elves get blood golems and Jaina gets pantheon imbued staff. In WoD we see the blood golems being used and fighting several demons alone. I was very excited for the Blood Elves, but we never see jaina's gain and going by Velens ability loss we might not see it at all.
- The largest amount of losses are at the hands of the Horde. This is a huge issue that is hurting alliance story. We always have to work with the horde and characters who object are put as the bad guys. Neutral organisations with alliance affiliation just say both factions are the same and ignore any agression horde has done to them. This ignoring has happened too often: Jaina did it, Argent Crusade did it, Cenarion Circle, Anduin, Dalaran now twice. I do like having a morality and doubt in alliance but not with this in such a stupid way. Legion is handling it better, i liked the the method used in preevent Daaran, just oppose they did it.
- Horde got away with their succesfull agressions against alliance. Often hordes agressions are ignored as if they didn't do it. But when the alliance does respond it results in nothing because their being blocked or we did it to help horde. Only thing was camp taurajo and purge of Dalaran that the developers did in a very pyrithic way.
- High king excisting and Anduin being it We shouldnt'have a high king, a supreme commander of army. Alliance is more about politics where each faction has a say. Anduin is also too young to be the leader of the main alliance army. Muradin would make the most sense, he seems the most consistant character being involved in warfare and right now the Dwarves are one of the strongest nations.

(sorry for bad grammar, if i get replies i might go back and improve it)

- - - Updated - - -


Even than it would be the horde helping the alliance regain their city and than leave with a fancy title that the other faction will be buthurt about eventhough the title doesnt make any sense and meanwhile Azshara goblin assets are still destroyed and undercity is abandoned.

See you cant say tirion is a loss for the alliance because hes neutral and ive never seen an alliance player say wotlk was more alliance focused because tirion was never with the current alliance and that it was equal and thrall was not neutral and cata was horde.
and you can list a possible death either...
Even then i will agree varian was a bigger loss than voljin not that it should matter.

How does the alliance lose more faction leaders? They dont the horde has lost 4 actual major lore characters that are the racial leaders.
Yes Losing key alliance characters to neutrality is so bad. Much worse than losing one to hostility and just death. And the alliance has more neutral characters because if the horde had as many neutral characters as the alliance the horde would have 0 horde lore characters that were not neutral... The alliance has more characters as a whole ...
No mirror to theramore? We had out racial leader turn into hitler and lost cairne? The alliance thought they lost magni but lol nvm hes more important than ever. Oh but hes prob neutral so i guess thats a loss even though alliance never count neutral thrall is a loss...
The alliance lost a lot of villages because they had more villages and zones to quest in from vanilla - wotlk and since ppl like to complain about factions not being equal blizzard had to fix it. The horde destroying some of those villages is to make our faction leader less likable because they knew they were going to let him be killed off.
Lol horde only gets unmirrored gains yeah rofl... Like ...? losing garrosh a faction leader and making him the worst character ever out of nowhere. Losing cairne which was supposed to be mirrored with magni I GUESS THE ALLIANCE ONLY GETS GAINSRIGHT. Thrall? the grimtotem?

And yes it would be the horde helping the alliance regain their city and then leave but the butthurt ones would still be the alliance because they are always the butthurt ones.

[lightofdawn]

just cause your ignorant of who maraad is doesn't mean every one was and taylor was as important as nazgrim ya we did lose some thing of value even if your blind to its value.

i know who maraad was, and what he'd done. that doesn't make up for the fact that he was awol for years before draenor, and ill agree to the loss of taylor for arguments sake, but having a fourth human horseman would be quite boring

[Shakou]

I warned about spoilers. So i am not really sure what Blizzard is doing but as you see now that Vol'Jin died they replaced him with Saurfang in Orgrimmar..... well however it looks like Saurfang dies aswell while fighting a lot of demons with you (the player) in the Warrior Order Hall campaign and before his death he tells you ''i wish i could kill a few more demons with you etc''. The only thing that comes to my mind now is that they'll bring Thrall in Orgrimmar throne again, otherwise i can't think of anything else..

WTF are you even going on about? Sylvannas is the new Warchief. Pay attention.

[Deleted]

@ Koreche,
you make several fair points. And i have taken those in to account. I'll elaborate a few things. Because im not saying Tirion loss is equal to Vol'jin or Varian.

See you cant say tirion is a loss for the alliance because hes neutral and ive never seen an alliance player say wotlk was more alliance focused because tirion was never with the current alliance and that it was equal and thrall was not neutral and cata was horde.
and you can list a possible death either...
Even then i will agree varian was a bigger loss than voljin not that it should matter.

Here is the thing even when their not part of your faction but are allies or a historic ties and they stayed friends friends you still care about them.
It's harder to give an example for horde since they have fewer going neutral. But take Hamuul runetotem he's a druid, neutral i think?
Well lets asume he's always been neutral but originated from the tauren race. If he dies horde players will care more about it than alliance.

However take for example Defias thieves or blackrock orcs you don't really care about them. They've been introduced as enemies into the game.

How does the alliance lose more faction leaders? They dont the horde has lost 4 actual major lore characters that are the racial leaders.
Yes Losing key alliance characters to neutrality is so bad. Much worse than losing one to hostility and just death.

In another post i was a bit more diplomatic because it's equal with possible higher amount towards alliance depending on interpretation, which is harder to do other way around. But its farily equal i only mention a difference in this as counterposting, which i try to be carefull about. I do agree that loosing one due to hostility is worse than neutrality.

Here is the overview:

Alliance loss:
Bolvar Fordragon
Fandral Staghelm
Varian Wryn

Horde loss:
Cairne
Garrosh
Vol'jin

Grey area:
Magni Bronzebeard (came back into neutrality, have to see if it's thrall like or Tirion like or Bolvar like)
Thrall (Horde leader who stepped down, does neutral stuff but is still very horde)
Malfurion (similiar to thrall, but more neutral don't care about alliance)

Sketchy ones: Velen AU
Funny one: The goblin player....you were a goblin boss aswell and defeated the highest in charge.....you should have taken over but reasons let the bad guy keep his position.

Also we lost Dalaran again, which was supposedly alliance fist bump moment and to replace theramore -.-

And the alliance has more neutral characters because if the horde had as many neutral characters as the alliance the horde would have 0 horde lore characters that were not neutral... The alliance has more characters as a whole ...

True, it does have it's advantages having established neutrals. But it has it's problems and loosin character that was introduced as alliance going neutral is something different than a character introduced neutral with an alliance background.
A huge problem is how unrealistic they act to protect horde players narrative. Thrall was the only neutral I found acting realisticly, he's a hypocrit for it but realistic. It also helps that alliance didnt really start agressions toward horde and also get away with it. Thanks to this element a horde neutral can act accepting to both sides because their peacefull family members havn't been killed by alliance.

No mirror to theramore? We had out racial leader turn into hitler and lost cairne? The alliance thought they lost magni but lol nvm hes more important than ever. Oh but hes prob neutral so i guess thats a loss even though alliance never count neutral thrall is a loss...

Here is where your becoming unreasonable in your equasition. Nation leaders loss is equal, so cairne isn't a factor.
Garrosh however wasn't a problem for horde players untill they stabbed vol'jin. Blizzard had to go quite extreme so horde didn't like Garrosh. And i was supporting in notion that it was too extremely done.

But i always felt sorry for horde players who liked thrall horde from warcraft 3. Because they've been shafted since vanilla. And weird thing i never saw any complain about this in cataclysm. Having said that garrosh thing wasn't fun for horde that's true, but it's little to what alliance had to face as collection incataclysm and theramore. Be aware though when something is especially hurtfull for your faction more so than the otherside it does need a lot of extra lore development. This is what also happened with 5.3+, with alliance being shafted. The problem for alliance is they got shafted the entire faction war.

The alliance lost a lot of villages because they had more villages and zones to quest in from vanilla - wotlk and since ppl like to complain about factions not being equal blizzard had to fix it. The horde destroying some of those villages is to make our faction leader less likable because they knew they were going to let him be killed off.

Sylvannas still alive, the blame went all to garrosh. Horde players didnt directly experience being evil..........it's only if you could make that conclusion outside of the narrative, with a rare exception to what Garrosh said towards Sylvannas.
A story isn't like class balance. In class balance you should nerf or buff specs for balance regardless of the past. In lore it does matter because it's the accumulation of events that make the story. This is why it's so bullshit to nerf alliance (destroying villages and land) and buff horde to make them equal. I never really saw anyone complain about how alliance was so much larger kingdoms in vanilla content. Their was some legitimate gameplay complaints like flightpaths and questing flow / amount.
Even now were comparing about nation leader losses.

Their were better ways for horde to come closer to alliance, like having troll factions join or the yaungol. Some outland orcs also joined. What was also better was if the factions were just different each having their strenght. Alliance mostly being a well organised big empire so it has bigger armies and suplies. While horde have stronger combatants (especially since WotlK where they got a huge equipment upgrade) and are more quickly deployed.

Lol horde only gets unmirrored gains yeah rofl... Like ...? losing garrosh a faction leader and making him the worst character ever out of nowhere. Losing cairne which was supposed to be mirrored with magni I GUESS THE ALLIANCE ONLY GETS GAINSRIGHT. Thrall? the grimtotem?

Your being unreasonable, you using nation leaders losses which alliance had atleast equal amount of as a argument towards a different loss.

I'd like to add more about about nuance....but not in this context your giving.

And yes it would be the horde helping the alliance regain their city and then leave but the butthurt ones would still be the alliance because they are always the butthurt ones.

Now your acting buthurt :P. alliance started being butthurt with Cataclysm.....theirs a good reason for that.
Horde buthurt is because alliance is being buthurt (forum problem :P) and because of garrosh. The reason behind garrosh is different than alliance but both are linked to their faction identity in a different way.

For the horde a unmirrored loss or being humiliated feels much worse than for alliance. The problem with alliance is it accumulated so much without decent resolution that their bucket is completly filled. It was even at a point where for alliance the experience was much worse......i think this has died down however (it's why i don't want faction war /tension as it opens old wounds that blizzard wont adress.)

For alliance the experience of having an alliance character turn evil feels much worse than horde for example.

This is why for the alliance it would be a bigger deal that we had something so big as stormwind turn evil like orgrimmar did. But our capitol being assaulted would in normal circumstances be less of a problem compared to horde players. It's all based on how the questing is done on both sides.

Ironicly despite hating cataclysm, Gilneas is one of my favourite questing experiences and its all about losses.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

i know who maraad was, and what he'd done. that doesn't make up for the fact that he was awol for years before draenor, and ill agree to the loss of taylor for arguments sake, but having a fourth human horseman would be quite boring

to back frank i think garrosh should have been the 4th horse men hes a far better warrior then nazgrim and was a far better character.