Warbringers: Sylvanas - War of Thorns Cinematic

[Sin Cara]

I really like Sylvanas and this changes nothing for me. However, I see this as a means to bring the Alliance players together and for them to really *hate* the Horde.

[xskarma]

Let's not drag real world politics into this. This is a gaming thing.

[WoWGoneBad]

Man..............................

That scenimatic......................

So beautiful.................

So Poetic.............

So Tragic......................

So sad.............................

FOR SAURFANG!!!!!!!!!

FOR THE HORDE. my waifu is truly dead to me now

[Laylriana]

I have no idea why would attacking enemy on the battlefield would be morally grey.

Sylvanas losing against Malfurion and Saurfang coming to help - dishonorable and morally grey.

Anduin losing against Saurfang during cinematic and Genn coming to help - noble and morally white?

I hope we get a long ass cutscene about Genn apologising to Saurfang for dealing DISHONORABU~ strike.

Saurfang regretted it and said it was done without honor. That is why it would be morally grey. Saurfang's own words. Go play that quest again and read his words.

[Yukazi]

Lol, really dude?

Well yeah, while a bit over the top they do have a right to call it quits if they don't enjoy the story anymore.

[Torto]

Have to admit, this really surprised me. Well done Blizzard in presenting me something unexpected. So, clearly Sylvanas cannot remain warchief, so it will either be Saurfang or they will bring in AU Hellscream.

[wushootaki]

It was a gamble that failed. Her plan was to swiftly subjugate the Alliance, because perhaps she feared they'd lose a symmetric war (a war that they might've thought was inevitable). Think of it as a blixtkreig, only that it succeeded for the Germans.

Yes. The game does a poor job of portraying the following:


The Horde is the weaker faction of the two since MoP's end. With Greymane openly attacking the Horde during the largest Legion invasion in recent years, the Horde have no reason to trust the Alliance.

Nuclear bombs just appeared on Azeroth, and if the Horde doesn't act first and gain control of them, they will be at the Alliance's mercy once they get azerite because they are the more powerful faction.

Horde need to attack first to gain the upperhand. It doesn't work out exactly how intended, but they are forced to attack first if they want to maintain a position of power.

The game does a shit job of portraying any of this.

[Rhaide]

If you want to play evil, totally fine. Just don't ever pretend to be the ***king good guys again.

I always was and always will be proud to be one of Thrall's horde. F*$& Sylvanas now.

[Neetz]

Let's not drag real world politics into this. This is a gaming thing.

For the Blue Text!

- - - Updated - - -

I'm quite saddened by this cinematic, she seems to be a true villain now, and I'd hoped she wouldn't have.

[Deleted]

I am the only one who thinks this style of "animation" is bad compared to cinematics blizzard has done before?

[Aeriel]

Why am I getting the feeling that this has something to do with the deal with Helya?

The memory of dying to Arthas is distorted, and her actions are more about death and chaos. Almost like something happened as part of her failure to enslave Eyir and fulfill her bargain. Not a defense, but a hypothetical.

- - - Updated - - -

I am the only one who thinks this style of "animation" is bad compared to cinematics blizzard has done before?

And yet when it was used for Legion people were praising it. Personally I like the style for shorts.

[Progenitor Aquarius]

I dont know but legion cinematics were much better, more 3D, this one feels like a painted one.

[Arrowset]

Cheer up horde, just pay Blizzard 30 bucks and you can be a good guy too!

[WolfRider]

Am I the only one who is wondering how few catapults launching inflamed projectiles can burn a World Tree?
And how Sylvanas, who had a tactical plan to push the Alliance back from Kalimdor without killing civilians, changed her mind just because a random night elf told her that she was nice a long time ago?

Something is missing in the questline to make it a good story.

- - - Updated - - -

By the way I play a Blood Elf DK so I won't disagree with the Banshee Queen's actions
DEATH DEATH DEATH!

[Deleted]

I don't really want to defend Blizzard because I agree this Warbringers is very underwhelming. Perhaps those more knowledgeable could clue me in:

1. I've seen it said that she wants to destroy Teldrassil anyway so the alliance can't use it as a way to get Azerite from Kalimdor or something. Is that an accurate defense of burning Teldrassil?

2. Didn't she just lose The Undercity? Destroying one of the Alliances Capitals seems like a fair retaliation.

3. Ion said there's more to her motivations that are yet to be revealed, didn't he?

[DesFolk]

[Th3Scourge]

These forums came up with at least 10 better ways to burn the tree that fit into the story. Instead we got "you can't kill hope" "Oh can't I? Watch me"

Really struck a nerve with Sylvy

[Silverforgerer]

I don't really want to defend Blizzard because I agree this Warbringers is very underwhelming. Perhaps those more knowledgeable could clue me in:

1. I've seen it said that she wants to destroy Teldrassil anyway so the alliance can't use it as a way to get Azerite from Kalimdor or something. Is that an accurate defense of burning Teldrassil?

2. Didn't she just lose The Undercity? Destroying one of the Alliances Capitals seems like a fair retaliation.

3. Ion said there's more to her motivations that are yet to be revealed, didn't he?

1. That is headcannon. It does make sense but hasn't been portrayed that way nor has blizz hinted that this could be the reason. Watch the vid again, she just did it out of spite in spur of the moment.

2. Attack on Undercity is retaliation FOR the burning of the tree. She hit first.

3. Highly possible. But right now it's just pure evil. She set fire to home of hundreds of thousands civilians.

[ELYPOP]

I don't really want to defend Blizzard because I agree this Warbringers is very underwhelming. Perhaps those more knowledgeable could clue me in:

1. I've seen it said that she wants to destroy Teldrassil anyway so the alliance can't use it as a way to get Azerite from Kalimdor or something. Is that an accurate defense of burning Teldrassil?

2. Didn't she just lose The Undercity? Destroying one of the Alliances Capitals seems like a fair retaliation.

3. Ion said there's more to her motivations that are yet to be revealed, didn't he?

1. She wanted to capture it and effectively hold the tree/civilians hostage to stop the Alliance ferrying azerite via it.

2. The Battle for Lordaeron happens after this. That was the Alliance's retaliation.

3. Yep but this is also super cut and dry so I don't see how you can get redemption out of this.

[Aeriel]

1. That is headcannon. It does make sense but hasn't been portrayed that way nor has blizz hinted that this could be the reason. Watch the vid again, she just did it out of spite in spur of the moment.

2. Attack on Undercity is retaliation FOR the burning of the tree. She hit first.

3. Highly possible. But right now it's just pure evil. She set fire to home of hundreds of thousands civilians.

The original goal was to blockade the Alliance from Kalimdor (the first week’s quests say this), which has been a long term Horde goal (see how quickly Saurfang got on board). The plan was destroy the NE fleet and main port near Darnassus. Strategically sound option by sequestering the main Alliance forces to EK, the NE on the tree, and who cares about the Draenei?