How can Sylvanas be redeemed?

[Ielenia]

That isn't what i said, i said i'll stand with Garrosh against alliance like Nazgrim, then after all alliance fiasco is over, if horde win, THEN u can challenge Garrosh, prefer by Mak'gora

Then, I'm sorry to say, but you'd just be condemning the Horde to failure. First off, I'm pretty sure the Mak'gora was out of the picture, one reason being it's a purely physical strength duel, otherwise the entire premise of 'Siege of Orgrimmar' would have been avoided. Other than Saurfang, there were no other Horde figurehead to challenge Garrosh in the Mak'gora and stand a chance of winning. (Because the player surely wouldn't become the Warchief of the Horde)

Siding with the Alliance was the only way for the rebels to win. Garrosh and his Horde clearly had the more powerful weapons, armor, soldiers and technology. The rebels, alone, would not win. And assuming the two sides do join forces to fight the Alliance, and win... guess what? Now you have Garrosh's entire attention and war machines now aimed at you, instead of having him divided, fighting the Alliance as well.

I did and this shows how ignorant u are, Arthas evil actions were not done by name of alliance,

And again you move goalposts. First you just speak of figureheads, and now you speak about actions being done in the name of the Alliance. Also, regardless of what you think, at the end of the WC3 human campaign cinematic, this happens: Terenas: "What are you doing, my son?" Arthas: "Succeeding you, father." So we can assume he took the throne of Lordaeron and, as the figurehead of Lordaeron, he began killing his people and scorching the land.

Onyxia does have 'weight' in game, but a hated weight, no one like what blizz did with Onyxia story and turn it to king chin credit, and for sure that isn't counted as done by horde player, which is the point of this entire argument,

No, it's not. It's just you moving the goalposts, as you first speak of "Horde losses", and when it was pointed out that the Alliance loss a lot as well, you move the goalposts by saying "well it wasn't done by the players."

[Deleted]

She needs to die. Hopefully horrible and painfull as possible.

Shes worse then lichking and we killed that.

Als she seek is to kill everyone and maken them into mindless slaves. At least lichking did to combat the legion in a way. She just want everyone to be as missrible as she is.

Exactly, but w/e. This post is literally Sylvanus Fanfest, so...

[ausoin]

And how do you explain this wonderful line of thinking?

Well a worldwide genocide is a good start, Id say they are almost equal in terms of evil, Arthas wanted to transform everybody into the undead because he thought that the living races were too weak to fight the Burning Legion and the old gods, Sylvanas goals are even worse than his, she wants to kill every single human just because of her fucked up perspective that being an undead is a gift.

She also doesn't care if somebody is her enemy or neutral as seen in Gilneas.

"garrosh was not the only member of the horde who desired Gilneas, sylvanas was eager to bring the kingdom under her domain. she convinced garrosh to give her control of the invasion force"

As well as complete genocide against the NE, like in Astranaar.

Then theres is also the murder of loyal citizens.

All the traits of a good leader.

[sam86]

Siding with the Alliance was the only way for the rebels to win.The rebels, alone, would not win.

and why exactly would that matter ? horde warcry was victory or death, not only fight if u can win, and run away when u can't (which blizz adopted to current horde it seems), horde don't aim for 'victory' by any means, horde aim for honorable fight, victory is 2nd after honor
or at least they should be, but right now not sure what blizz actually consider horde is, and their 'moral grey' regarding sylvanas makes me question either their mentality, or how they think our brain are, i'm 33 years old and i'm pretty sure half of wow community can see clearly that Sylvanas is no 'moral grey' character, she is flat out villain (who has reasons, but still villain)

And again you move goalposts. First you just speak of figureheads, and now you speak about actions being done in the name of the Alliance. Also, regardless of what you think, at the end of the WC3 human campaign cinematic, this happens: Terenas: "What are you doing, my son?" Arthas: "Succeeding you, father." So we can assume he took the throne of Lordaeron and, as the figurehead of Lordaeron, he began killing his people and scorching the land.

both wc3 and chronicles and Arthas story and every single lore source state that Arthas was considering himself an agent of Lich King since he killed Mal'ganis, so i want ur source where exactly did anyone at all in warcraft universe consider Arthas actions after Frostmourne alliance action, even horde don't see that (also horde were never blind biased as alliance, hence why they accepted Forsaken in first place while alliance killed them on sight, again as shown in chronicles)

No, it's not. It's just you moving the goalposts, as you first speak of "Horde losses", and when it was pointed out that the Alliance loss a lot as well, you move the goalposts by saying "well it wasn't done by the players."

Nope, my entire post was about losses/gains done by players in-game, also if u count out of game still alliance triumph by miles even with Theramore, i was mocking how sh8t was Theramore attack represented in game, and even then I still didn't give it weight because Theramore wasn't really important in game due to blizz poor implementation of the zone in early days
If not clear, again the post is about players and what they do in-game, that is the main focus, using outside points (namely, probably only? Theramore attack) isn't really counted since the in-game represent of entire Theramore attack was horrible for both sides, and if u only play-game as horde player u won't really care much about attack an outpost that lost its importance until patch 3.2 when Onyxia raid was remade for fun then died again
Compare alliance assault on both Orgrimmar and Undercity vs horde assault on Theramore, Undercity is horde main capital in Eastern Kingdom, Orgrimmar is the capital, both as alliance player u get chance to sack them as ur heart content, and on weekly basis too, turning a horde warchief to loot piniata for as long game exist, while horde get the chance to a piss-poor scenario event that was horribly implemented in game to attack a city that was ignored for most of its time existence, and I ask vanilla wow players if it even had alchemy master training, i only know tailor trainer was there ( i played alliance entire vanilla wow, not horde)

Exactly, but w/e. This post is literally Sylvanus Fanfest, so...

I'm horde to death fan and I'm not defending Sylvanas actions anymore, so not all were Sylvanas fans
I liked - a lot - Sylvanas after cataclysm rework and her own words in silverpine forest, words that seems she herself forgot

[Ielenia]

and why exactly would that matter ? horde warcry was victory or death, not only fight if u can win, and run away when u can't (which blizz adopted to current horde it seems), horde don't aim for 'victory' by any means, horde aim for honorable fight, victory is 2nd after honor
or at least they should be

Actually, the whole "Lok'tar ogar!" thing is mostly (if not solely) an orc thing. The other races of the Horde don't necessarily subscribe to that line of thinking. Also, where's the "honor" in siding with someone who does dishonorable things (in the eyes of the rest of the Horde)?

both wc3 and chronicles and Arthas story and every single lore source state that Arthas was considering himself an agent of Lich King since he killed Mal'ganis, so i want ur source where exactly did anyone at all in warcraft universe consider Arthas actions after Frostmourne alliance action, even horde don't see that (also horde were never blind biased as alliance, hence why they accepted Forsaken in first place while alliance killed them on sight, again as shown in chronicles)

He still became a "figurehead" of the Alliance when he took the throne of Lordaeron. And others from the Alliance likely still considered him "part of the Alliance" until they found out about his crimes.

Nope, my entire post was about losses/gains done by players in-game,

Nope. "Done by players" was added after the fact.

[TheEaterofSouls]

She gives her life to save us from a greater threat like the void? Blizz will probably use a loophole to bring her back. Then she'll leave the Horde, realizing how much harm she's done, appearing in future expansion as a mercenary hero.

[Biske]

She gives her life to save us from a greater threat like the void? Blizz will probably use a loophole to bring her back. Then she'll leave the Horde, realizing how much harm she's done, appearing in future expansion as a mercenary hero.

A mercenary hero that we can use in our war table thing for generic missions lol

[Logwyn]

She gets to be a raid boss.....locked away in prison/tomb......then in a later expansion she is freed/resurrected to help save the world......Light being tries to turn her to light hero......She kills it....and Screams my scars are my own or ummm The Sunwell was merely a setback?......

Something like that?

[RangerDaz]

I think that Sylvanas' redemption will ultimately occur when she becomes one of the most powerful weapons against the Void Lords.
This is probably what Vol'jin predicted when he handed the warchief title in Legion.

I also wrote some ideas related to Void vs. Death on the first page of the "starving of the Void" thread, where i believe the reason the Void fears Death so much is not because Void fears the necromantic energy source, but because of what the necromatic users can do against the goals of the Void, being Sylvanas clearly the strongest agent right now (Helya is dead, I believe?). Sylvanas clearly would fight to defend Azeroth from the Void's main intentions (aka world soul corruption).

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...rving-the-Void