Well, the problem is that Blizzard doesn't want either side to feel weak in the game as it is a MMO, which is why they go out of their way to lowkey ignore certain characters' powers to push the narrative. I'm not saying this isn't wrong from the perspective of lore and story overall; they are simply tending to half the playerbase.
- - - Updated - - -
That's why they should've written him out of action for this. They wouldn't ruin his characterization.
Ähm..Nightelves? They feel themselve..very weak..Well, the problem is that Blizzard doesn't want either side to feel weak in the game as it is a MMO, which is why they go out of their way to lowkey ignore certain characters' powers to push the narrative. I'm not saying this isn't wrong from the perspective of lore and story overall; they are simply tending to half the playerbase.
Everyone knows that since Warcraft III, if said player actually listens to her dialogue in the Forsaken missions. She didn't became the leader of the Forsaken by looking pretty. The Lady can hold her own.
I'm interested now to know more of her "tactical retreat" from the Siege of Undercity 2.0.
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...trife/advanced
WoW: Winterstrife, Level 120 Human Paladin | ESO: Strife Valor, CP 610 Dunmer Magblade | GW2: Inquisitor Strife, Level 80 Human Renegede.
How logical is what? That your claim the Night Elves could keep up with the entire Horde is based on nothing because they have never really competed to base such claims on? Never mind that in the meantime the Forsaken and Blood Elves have joined the Horde, with Forsaken numbers being huge.
Alliance won in Taurajo and Stonard. And given how the story was a coat of paint to fixing zone imbalance, why exactly did the Alliance have to win anything when the point was giving equal amount of zones to the Horde? And the story given presented Alliance as spreading their forces too thin, when they attacked even two Horde capital zones right off the bat, while the Horde focused on border areas. An army being overconfident and overextending happens. It's not reality or Blizzard or god conspiring against Alliance.
Except the previous faction was didn't even start in Cata. It started in WotLK and was only resumed in Cata. By Varian. And do give a source on the official start of this war.
And Teldrassil was a reaction to the Alliance aggression in Silithus. Or Stormheim. Take your pick. As for your claim about me being a "pure Hordler", it is nothing more than an inane projection. I played both sides in Cata. Oh noes, one side was losing in a war. But ultimately won it. Ze horror, I am traumatized by it to this very day. It's particularly hard now in winter, because every time there's a blizzard outside I get PTSD flashbacks and fear for my life, because I know one day a wild Kossak will kill me in a dark alley only to plant a Horde flag on my corpse for ever playing Alliance.
And the Horde doesn't conquer Teldrassil either. They just destroy it. They are pushed out of Tirisfal as well. Both sides lose a control of a zone. Wooo, my HORDE BIAS sense is tingling. And Teldrassil is destroyed by a super-weapon, not overpowering the Alliance through superior manpower. It makes sense for the operation to be done by a small elite force trying to avoid Alliance's attention. Meanwhile in UC the entire Horde is already gathered and ready for the Alliance and they still lose, even though the Alliance shouldn't even reach the shore since they historically had an inferior navy.
Neither of them actually say that. Unless you can provide a quote. To which I wish you good luck, because the last time someone tried to prove it, they ended with a quote of Alliance rolling into Barrens in response to rumors that Garrosh is preparing to invade Ashenvale, not because he did invade Ashenvale. Which is further corroborated by the game, given how Barrens was attacked before Cataclysm, yet invasion of Ashenvalde happened only in reaction to the Cataclysm. And War Crimes doesn't mention the word Barrens even once.
Well, it confirms once and for all that the hooded orc showed in the Teldrassil art is indeed Saurfang.
Pretty sure he does, then he'll escape to Mount Hyjal hunted down by the Horde.
No, he's not. People get this weird idea that characters joining neutral organizations forsake their allegiances altogether. That's not the case and never was.
About Malfurion, he may be powerful but remains a single mortal individual. There are countless ways for a prepared army to either neutralize him or force him to hide, especially if they got all the necessary info regarding his abilities and potential weaknesses.
Well, I remember The Shattering novel mentioning 50k losses on the Alliance side alone during the Northrend campaign of WotLK. Other times, other war but I always found that figure ridiculously bloated.
Actually, there's still no direct correlation yet. Yes, it's very probable at this point. Most importantly, however, is knowing the ultimate motivations for whatever is going to transpire. People are there waiting with a pointed gun ready to say "SEE? I TOLD YOU !!! SYLVANAS IS EVIL" and actually forgetting that Saurfang, the orc who opposed Garrosh and threatened Sylvanas in a similar way, not only is not condemning this but actively participates in the war effort, effectively proving that the hooded orc of the Teldrassil art is indeed him.
That means the things are two: he has gone mad (which doesn't seem the case, considered how he's still himself enough to dislike the Blight as an option for war) or there is some very good reason for what is going to happen (or, alternatively, is not going to happen exactly as we expect).
There's need to be a reason to do that now?
Maybe we should call things with their name. I mean, it's pretty obvious that Night Elf fans are seeing "Horde bias" everywhere because, of all the Alliance races, they have become the Horde's most fluffy punching bag. Can't say I wouldn't be upset if I was them. Fortunately I'm not and I love to kill Night Elves.
The major difference is that Garrosh's politics and war campaigns received questioning from almost day 1 (Cairne's challenge aside, there was Vol'jin who did that openly and Sylvanas who pretty much thought the same shit but kept her mouth shut) and Baine spoke out his opinions right on Garrosh's face in the Tides of War novel. Last but not least, Garrosh's campaign in that novel was relatively smaller in scale compared to what seems to transpire now.
So no, the situations aren't really comparable. Something is "wrong" about the way things play out, we just don't know what and how exactly.
It's not even a matter of trust, he was granted a vision by them. And Loa's visions tend to be dreadfully reliable (since it's not the first time Vol'jin gets one of those and may not be the last). Who treats them as mere "delusions" have genuinely no idea what they're talking about.
Unless we see something drastic happen to the Horde by the Alliance's hand, I doubt Thrall would be convinced to go fully Horde once more. It's not like Thrall was a warmongering character while being Warchief. He was pacifistic, like Jaina used to be. Besides all this, Thrall has lost his power due to being conflicted from killing Garrosh. Looks like Thrall will take the expansion to regain his power back.
Even if they find a way to neutralize Malfurion, it would take tons of resources just to take down a single enemy. Meanwhile, the Alliance still has other heroes to call on. Anduin, Velen (this one is a bit iffier than the others), Alleria, Turalyon. All of these characters are very strong. Meanwhile, the Horde only has one overly powerful leader, being Sylvanas. Saurfang and Bane aren't that powerful. Gallywix is a slob. I'm not sure how powerful Lor'themar is in comparison, but he hasn't been shown fighting in anything so far which is odd.
Different elements are keeping both sides in check, but Malfurion going full attack mode would tip the scale easily.
1. The alliance of the second war is not he alliance of today, completely different people are in charge right now. The only leader left over from the second war is Greymane, and guess what, he didn't agree with the internment camps.
2. It wasn't done for self gain, there were 2 options, imprison or execution, what would you have done? Can't just let them go, they'll just start a war with you again.
Sylvanas did it because she wanted to be immortal.
A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.
Guess what, he disagreed with the internment camps because he considered them a financial drain and wanted to exterminate the Orcs instead. Also, the Alliance enslaved Pandaren in Pandaria.
Sylvanad did it for all Forsaken.
Since when?
Like I said, there were only 2 options, kill them all or imprison them, you can't just let them go.
I don't recall this, but I'll take your word for it. Who did it? Was it the whole of the alliance or one commander going off the deep end?Also, the Alliance enslaved Pandaren in Pandaria.
No she didn't... She will claim it but she didn't, she will do anything to avoid the oblivion she saw after the committed suicide by jumping off icecrown. She needs more Valkyr to have more lives. She never trades the valkyr's lives for the lives of any other forsaken who (re)die, she does it for herself and herself only.Sylvanad did it for all Forsaken.
She is directly responsible for their transformation, her blessing, her will, is what makes them valkyr... Do you really think the curse Sylvanas puts on Eyir wouldn't extend through her to the others?Since when?
- - - Updated - - -
Eyir is not Odyn.
Valkyra actively compete with each other to be seen as worthy to be Valkyr, they do this willingly, if they don't want to be chosen, they can simply not compete.
A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.