Whats good & bad about the Horde and the Alliance?

[Tripzzz]

They could, I'd say they're wrong and whining about a time in the Horde that was there for two editions of an RTS that's 16 years old at this point, but whichever one of us is right, it doesn't matter. All I'm saying is that the Horde is conflicted whereas the Alliance is not.

And that is the Horde most players grew fond of. Constantly having your faction bicker and argue may be "fun and interesting" to you, but just ask Garrosh fans how it feels when your side is the "wrong" one. By the end of BFA either Slyavnus or Saurfang will end up "right", leaving fans of the other one pissed off.

[Super Dickmann]

And that is the Horde most players grew fond of. Constantly having your faction bicker and argue may be "fun and interesting" to you, but just ask Garrosh fans how it feels when your side is the "wrong" one. By the end of BFA either Slyavnus or Saurfang will end up "right", leaving fans of the other one pissed off.

Given how we have no metrics to go on except whiners on the forums, I'd say the support for Sylvanas is about an even split at worst, which is what our only poll on the forums said. I was a Garrosh fan and still am, hence why I shit on Baine so much, because the Garrosh-era Horde was the most interesting permutation of it, where all the races were clearly defined in opposition to each other. The Vol'jin Horde was a non-entity, and the Thrall Horde of everyone singing in a circle going kumbaya was not only boring, it barely existed, since Vanilla already had the Forsaken, TBC had the belves enslaving a god and being junkies and Wrath already had Garrosh, the Wrathgate and the Shattered Front.

[Tripzzz]

Given how we have no metrics to go on except whiners on the forums, I'd say the support for Sylvanas is about an even split at worst, which is what our only poll on the forums said. I was a Garrosh fan and still am, hence why I shit on Baine so much, because the Garrosh-era Horde was the most interesting permutation of it, where all the races were clearly defined in opposition to each other. The Vol'jin Horde was a non-entity, and the Thrall Horde of everyone singing in a circle going kumbaya was not only boring, it barely existed, since Vanilla already had the Forsaken, TBC had the belves enslaving a god and being junkies and Wrath already had Garrosh, the Wrathgate and the Shattered Front.

It seems alot of horde fans loved Garrosh era. But that still didn't stop blizzard from throwing him under the bus. Pretty much the only way blizz knows how to write internal faction conflict is to have one side right and the other side wrong. No real middle ground. Which is why i don't find it very interesting.

[Super Dickmann]

It seems alot of horde fans loved Garrosh era. But that still didn't stop blizzard from thowing him under the bus. Pretty much the only way blizz knows how to write internal faction conflict is to have one side right and the other side wrong. No real middle ground. Which is why i don't find it very interesting.

I remember the ridiculous number of posts whining about how Garrosh was a worse Warchief than a basic campfire, how Theramore was worse than 9/11 and the like. He's the MoP of Warchiefs - they didn't appreciate him until he was gone. Yes, he was a dick, and Sylvanas is a bitch, but they spur actual interaction. Conflict means that the races have more chances to show why they're different and also what they have in common. It's why except maybe Darkspear you don't have the kind of pissed off fanbase that say, night elves have Alliance-side, or even worgen and draenei before Genn and Velen came up again in Legion. The price for being a more united faction is that the individual races get hung out to dry.

[Tripzzz]

I remember the ridiculous number of posts whining about how Garrosh was a worse Warchief than a basic campfire, how Theramore was worse than 9/11 and the like. He's the MoP of Warchiefs - they didn't appreciate him until he was gone. Yes, he was a dick, and Sylvanas is a bitch, but they spur actual interaction. Conflict means that the races have more chances to show why they're different and also what they have in common. It's why except maybe Darkspear you don't have the kind of pissed off fanbase that say, night elves have Alliance-side, or even worgen and draenei before Genn and Velen came up again in Legion. The price for being a more united faction is that the individual races get hung out to dry.

Tauren have been hung out to dry too. It's not exclusive to one side. And tell me what you find interesting about the Saurfang and Slyvanus conflict. Seems to me Saurfang just got hit with a retard stick. He was once a favorite among horde fans. Now most horde hate him. His reasoning is pretty dumb aswell.

[Super Dickmann]

Tauren have been hung out to dry too. It's not exclusive to one side. And tell me what you find interesting about the Saurfang and Slyvanus conflict. Seems to me Saurfang just got hit with a retard stick. He was once a favorite among horde fans. Now most horde hate him. His reasoning is pretty dumb aswell.

I like the potential of the conflict more than the conflict itself. People like Saurfang should oppose Sylvanas. Similarly, Saurfang himself has every reason to leave the Horde. Look at it from this perspective:

This is a guy who's son, basically the one thing he had for the future in a life spent killing people and regretting it, got killed by a Forsaken biological weapon and then raised as an undead slave. He's sworn to the Horde and now not only does his oath compel him to serve a Forsaken, but that Forsaken essentially does the same thing that killed his son, attacking her own troops and raising them as soldiers and doesn't even consider it a big deal.

Saurfang has every reason to be livid and to confront her. I'm also fine with him not promoting an alternative, both because Sylvanas' decision does make tactical sense, but also because this isn't a form of warfare he'd be used to or want to employ. They're both two visions of the Horde, and both are also opposed to the Alliance. Remember that they both went to war in Northern Kalimdor, Saurfang never had a problem with that, only with things like killing Malfurion.

And that's where the issue comes in. Because while the above are things I like, a lot is just inferred and his personality isn't consistent. In the novella snippet, he's perfectly ready to hold Malf off and invoke mak'gora, just to save lives and gets bailed out by Sylv. In the game, he's the one bailing Sylv and him sparing malf is a caricature of what honor is. Same with the plague and necromancy not being the straw that breaks the camel's back, but the concept of Sylvanas blowing up an abandoned city.

I like what their conflict could be, even if it's not delivered great and I like them both as characters. I think Saurfang has about as much of a fanbase as Sylvanas and I agree with you that unless there's a reconciliation, whoever wins, people will be pissed. I'd be fine with either coming out on top, only Thrall coming back would really infuriate me.

[Tripzzz]

I like the potential of the conflict more than the conflict itself. People like Saurfang should oppose Sylvanas. Similarly, Saurfang himself has every reason to leave the Horde. Look at it from this perspective:

This is a guy who's son, basically the one thing he had for the future in a life spent killing people and regretting it, got killed by a Forsaken biological weapon and then raised as an undead slave. He's sworn to the Horde and now not only does his oath compel him to serve a Forsaken, but that Forsaken essentially does the same thing that killed his son, attacking her own troops and raising them as soldiers and doesn't even consider it a big deal.

Saurfang has every reason to be livid and to confront her. I'm also fine with him not promoting an alternative, both because Sylvanas' decision does make tactical sense, but also because this isn't a form of warfare he'd be used to or want to employ. They're both two visions of the Horde, and both are also opposed to the Alliance. Remember that they both went to war in Northern Kalimdor, Saurfang never had a problem with that, only with things like killing Malfurion.

And that's where the issue comes in. Because while the above are things I like, a lot is just inferred and his personality isn't consistent. In the novella snippet, he's perfectly ready to hold Malf off and invoke mak'gora, just to save lives and gets bailed out by Sylv. In the game, he's the one bailing Sylv and him sparing malf is a caricature of what honor is. Same with the plague and necromancy not being the straw that breaks the camel's back, but the concept of Sylvanas blowing up an abandoned city.

I like what their conflict could be, even if it's not delivered great and I like them both as characters. I think Saurfang has about as much of a fanbase as Sylvanas and I agree with you that unless there's a reconciliation, whoever wins, people will be pissed. I'd be fine with either coming out on top, only Thrall coming back would really infuriate me.

Well said. Internal conflict is interesting when done correctly. I think Saurfang should have been switched with Baine or simply have Baine side with Saurfang aswell. It would give Baine more of a spine and it would make more sense than Saurfang choosing to leave the Horde instead of challenging the Warchief to a duel. As it is currently, it's too inconsistent to take seriously.

[Super Dickmann]

Well said. Internal conflict is interesting when done correctly. I think Saurfang should have been switched with Baine or simply have Baine side with Saurfang aswell. It would give Baine more of a spine and it would make more sense than Saurfang choosing to leave the Horde instead of challenging the Warchief to a duel. As it is currently, it's too inconsistent to take seriously.

I think Saurfang, like Nazgrim is a bit stuck to his oath to actively confront her in battle, same as why he didn't confront Garrosh and only went against him at the very end. That and he recognizes that fighting her would be handing the Alliance the win. Notice that he basically calls Anduin a pussy and when he confronts him and holds them off on his own. He's still committed to the Horde, which I can't say about Baine. I think it's not a great foundation, but this is still just the start, so I'm not going to give any final judgment until I see where the story goes. I'd be partial if the expansion has Sylvanas chill out rather than be replaced, because no matter what they do, her overthrow would just be a weak retread of Garrosh's.

[Noomz]

This sure got toxic. Come on, it's just a game.

[Alex86el]

i will not talk about whos right or wrong.
that would be a very one-dimentional conversation.


but from a story perspective Sylvanas and Anduin were the worst choices for leaders. And Baine with Velen obviously.
because they are black/white type characters. and that makes for a boring story.

both are very unrelatable.
to relate with anduin you have to be an extremelly sheltered teenager,
while to relate with sylvanas you have to be an edgy preteen or a psychopath.
both very unlikely.

the emotional unpredictability of varian, the cunning of voljin, those would be perfect for an interesting story.
pluz, they love their faction, and are no pushovers or supervillains.


also, while i generally dont play them, i dislike how they have completely crapped on the nightelves.
and how they generally try to make everything about humans.


i also dislike how many races are pretty much comic relief.
like gnomes, goblins, trolls, dwarves, pandaren.


also, the whole gimiccky approach.
the light guy, the void lady, the diamond dude... next thing they'll summon "captain planet" or something.

[NED funded]

Horde:

+ Zandalari have best druid forms
+ Well uhmmmmm there is.......they were important in every expansions beside Legion I guess?

- Sylvanas gone evil
- Lor'Themar stoped being a character after MoP
- everyone else is a smelly retard

The horde is also getting a lot of the good mounts this expansion. The alliance only gets horses and gryphons.

[Dagoth Ur]

I like the potential of the conflict more than the conflict itself. People like Saurfang should oppose Sylvanas. Similarly, Saurfang himself has every reason to leave the Horde. Look at it from this perspective:

This is a guy who's son, basically the one thing he had for the future in a life spent killing people and regretting it, got killed by a Forsaken biological weapon and then raised as an undead slave. He's sworn to the Horde and now not only does his oath compel him to serve a Forsaken, but that Forsaken essentially does the same thing that killed his son, attacking her own troops and raising them as soldiers and doesn't even consider it a big deal.

Saurfang has every reason to be livid and to confront her. I'm also fine with him not promoting an alternative, both because Sylvanas' decision does make tactical sense, but also because this isn't a form of warfare he'd be used to or want to employ. They're both two visions of the Horde, and both are also opposed to the Alliance. Remember that they both went to war in Northern Kalimdor, Saurfang never had a problem with that, only with things like killing Malfurion.

And that's where the issue comes in. Because while the above are things I like, a lot is just inferred and his personality isn't consistent. In the novella snippet, he's perfectly ready to hold Malf off and invoke mak'gora, just to save lives and gets bailed out by Sylv. In the game, he's the one bailing Sylv and him sparing malf is a caricature of what honor is. Same with the plague and necromancy not being the straw that breaks the camel's back, but the concept of Sylvanas blowing up an abandoned city.

I like what their conflict could be, even if it's not delivered great and I like them both as characters. I think Saurfang has about as much of a fanbase as Sylvanas and I agree with you that unless there's a reconciliation, whoever wins, people will be pissed. I'd be fine with either coming out on top, only Thrall coming back would really infuriate me.

This is pretty much it. Having issue with current portrayal of Saurfang has nothing to do with him opposing Sylvanas, as much as some people like to make it out so. It's perfectly in character for him to oppose her and it would be ridiculous if he didn't. Problem is when they try to force contrast between them in a poorly thought out situation like the whole Malfruion deal which only managed to make him look really short sighted and ridiculous. With just slight corrections whole situation could've been much more natural and believable with same end result.

Other thing I have major issue with is him deciding to stay in Alliance's prison, mostly because I fail to see how that could resolve anything which he takes issue with. I still think it would be better if he escaped with rest of the gang but just went his separate way. They could've connected it with Hillsbrad story from Cata, where Drek'thar had similar issues with Forsaken. Could also be that this was meant to show us that Saurfang finally gave up, which is a possibility I guess but I somehow doubt it. Anyway, as much as I dislike it atm, we've yet to see how this whole thing will be resolved, so I guess it's unfair to criticize it just yet.

I feel like we really need a Saurfang PoV short story or harbinger styled video. I'd be much more inclined to sympathize with him if instead of repeating honor like a broken record, they fleshed his struggle and worries a bit by also mentioning everything he went through too and how he's still haunted by death of his son, like you mentioned in your comment.

[Friendlyimmolation]

I like the potential of the conflict more than the conflict itself. People like Saurfang should oppose Sylvanas. Similarly, Saurfang himself has every reason to leave the Horde. Look at it from this perspective:

This is a guy who's son, basically the one thing he had for the future in a life spent killing people and regretting it, got killed by a Forsaken biological weapon and then raised as an undead slave. He's sworn to the Horde and now not only does his oath compel him to serve a Forsaken, but that Forsaken essentially does the same thing that killed his son, attacking her own troops and raising them as soldiers and doesn't even consider it a big deal.

Saurfang has every reason to be livid and to confront her. I'm also fine with him not promoting an alternative, both because Sylvanas' decision does make tactical sense, but also because this isn't a form of warfare he'd be used to or want to employ. They're both two visions of the Horde, and both are also opposed to the Alliance. Remember that they both went to war in Northern Kalimdor, Saurfang never had a problem with that, only with things like killing Malfurion.

And that's where the issue comes in. Because while the above are things I like, a lot is just inferred and his personality isn't consistent. In the novella snippet, he's perfectly ready to hold Malf off and invoke mak'gora, just to save lives and gets bailed out by Sylv. In the game, he's the one bailing Sylv and him sparing malf is a caricature of what honor is. Same with the plague and necromancy not being the straw that breaks the camel's back, but the concept of Sylvanas blowing up an abandoned city.

I like what their conflict could be, even if it's not delivered great and I like them both as characters. I think Saurfang has about as much of a fanbase as Sylvanas and I agree with you that unless there's a reconciliation, whoever wins, people will be pissed. I'd be fine with either coming out on top, only Thrall coming back would really infuriate me.

Saurfang the younger wasn’t killed by the Forsaken....

[Super Dickmann]

Saurfang the younger wasn’t killed by the Forsaken....

He got gassed and the whole thing allowed the LK to take his corpse and ress it. But I'm mostly illustrating how Saurfang could see it, not necessarily what the truth is.

[Friendlyimmolation]

He got gassed and the whole thing allowed the LK to take his corpse and ress it. But I'm mostly illustrating how Saurfang could see it, not necessarily what the truth is.

The lich king killed him and took his soul in front of everyone before the blight was used.

[Super Dickmann]

The lich king killed him and took his soul in front of everyone before the blight was used.

Then the Horde army got gassed and his body got snapped up in the aftermath to be raised as an undead slave.

[Captain Douchebag]

Then the Horde army got gassed and his body got snapped up in the aftermath to be raised as an undead slave.

Yes, but you said:

This is a guy who's son, basically the one thing he had for the future in a life spent killing people and regretting it, got killed by a Forsaken biological weapon and then raised as an undead slave. He's sworn to the Horde and now not only does his oath compel him to serve a Forsaken, but that Forsaken essentially does the same thing that killed his son

Which is simply not true. Saurfang the younger charged the Lich King and was killed before Putress appeared with the blight.

[Friendlyimmolation]

Then the Horde army got gassed and his body got snapped up in the aftermath to be raised as an undead slave.

As opposed to the lich king killing everyone and then raising the body. The point being Saurfang Jr.'s death and Resurrection was not on Putress.

[Super Dickmann]

@Friendlyimmolation @Captain Douchebag

Point when it comes to how he died. That said, the Horde forces got gassed by plague and as a result, the LK had the chance to take away Saurfang Jr.'s body and make him a zombie. That tends to leave a bad impression on a guy.

[Friendlyimmolation]

@Friendlyimmolation @Captain Douchebag

Point when it comes to how he died. That said, the Horde forces got gassed by plague and as a result, the LK had the chance to take away Saurfang Jr.'s body and make him a zombie. That tends to leave a bad impression on a guy.

The point being you said the Forsaken killed him, that was outright false. The second point being Arthas didn't need to take him away to raise him, he could have lifted his sword and did it there, the blight didn't stop him, if anything it just delayed it. Even if they retrieved the body, the son wouldn't have been at rest till Arthas died eitherway.

So I don't think Saurfang is having flashbacks about his son when he sees the blight.