Saurfang's sense of honor is dumb

[shise]

Honor is the key to victory.

Everyone fighting by your side will know that they are doing the righteous fighting, they will feel empowered by the feeling of right what is right, rather than being dirty little cheaters.

[Jester Joe]

Lets use your example.
Imagine you wanted to win a fight against someone because he is tormenting you.
If you kicked him in the balls...you would bring victory home. You would bring prosperety and health to you.
The victory was yours.
People would laugh about the other guy. You came out victorious. Thats all that matters.

Now lets imagine you wanted to do it with "honor".
Your target is with his friends. 5 dudes.
You face them and say "i want to fight with you, i challenge you to a duel"
The alarm would go off and suddenly you have 6 people to fight against.

Like i said, honor is only good if you are "overpowered" and can fight against 6 dudes and win.

Except you ignore in the process of your "example" that the Alliance wasn't looking for a war.

They weren't tormenting the Horde that was worth all of this, nor are they going to fight in a dishonorable way now that there is a war.

THAT is part of why Saurfang is frustrated. He may not like the Alliance, and he may be fine with killing and fighting them, but he also knows they're not going to stoop to dishonorable tactics.

[Jonnusthegreat]

Honor in a all out War is dumb.
It only makes you weak compared to your opponent.
Its literally gimping yourself on the battlefield.

It may seem like a cool concept and it trully makes for great stories and "cool factor" but in reality...its not smart to bring honor to the battlefield.
It only make you weak! (weaker than your opponent who uses all tactics to win)

Remember the movie "saving private ryan" when a dumb character spared the life of an enemy and he proceeded to kill his friends in a ruthless and savegery way?

Honor is cool and all. I respect it.
BUT IN WAR!?!?
No way, is just something that is gonna get you killed.

The absolute and ONLY way to win a War with honor is if you already overpower your opponent.
If you are in equal strenght with your enemy and you fight with honor....guess what, you will lose if your enemy uses all tactics at his disposal.

So what im trying to say is Saurfang is not a fitting faction leader because his strong sense of honor only makes him weak.

Also, it would be funny if Malfurion killed his friends next. It would be "saving private ryan" all over again.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you guys think about Honor an a Battlefield?

I mean yeah you're right but the entire idea of honor is dumb if that's your argument.

[Kelathos]

Saurfang's Honor is the heart and soul of the Horde. Not the demon blood crazed Horde of the original two wars. No, we are Thrall's new Horde from Warcraft 3. The family of outcasts that he gathered and fought for. That we fought for. Horde is our family. Our Horde fights with honor. We deposed Garrosh for it. If Sylvanas can live with her crimes, then what the bloody hell was the point of Siege of Orgrimar? Why build up Sylvanas as a character if she is to be whittled down into a simple cartoon villain that hates the living? She heroically fought side by side with Varian against the Legion. She could have grown into a worthy leader.

That Warbringer scene is neither the character nor the Horde that I recognize. Blizzard has ruined three Warchiefs in a row. One was enough. Two was insult to injury. Three now.... when does the butchering of the Horde stop?

[Demeia]

I certainly don't think restricting war to combatants is weakness. Nor does the US military--and most other militaries--who recognize the idea of war crimes.

It's certainly a very gray area.

But, seriously, the OP is suggesting that genocide is the strongest form of warfare. That really is very Hitler-like and this is one of those times where the comparison with Hitler does not lose the argument on the internet. Because you really are talking about genocide. "This way, the children cannot grow up and become avengers," to roughly quote Himmler.

Regardless, honor has meant things historically to warriors--see Japan and Seppuku--and arguing against it in a fantasy game is ludicrous.

[Deleted]

Except you ignore in the process of your "example" that the Alliance wasn't looking for a war.

They weren't tormenting the Horde that was worth all of this, nor are they going to fight in a dishonorable way now that there is a war.

THAT is part of why Saurfang is frustrated. He may not like the Alliance, and he may be fine with killing and fighting them, but he also knows they're not going to stoop to dishonorable tactics.

My intention with the thread wasn't to defend Sylvanas actions.
i hate the killing of innocents.

But the Malfurion scene made me mad.
he regreted hitting malfurion from behind and spared his life.

this has no place in war.
is kill or be killed

[Jester Joe]

My intention with the thread wasn't to defend Sylvanas actions.
i hate the killing of innocents.

But the Malfurion scene made me mad.
he regreted hitting malfurion from behind and spared his life.

this has no place in war.
is kill or be killed

Because Malfurion wouldn't have hit him from behind either.

If Malfurion was like that, Saurfang would have been dead a long time ago, like when Malfurion first intercepts their army and destroys the hut Saurfang was in.

Could have easily sneaked up, but instead Malfurion lands literally right in the middle of everything.

[yetgdhfgh]

Honour is a concept made up by politicians and romanticists to con young people into wars.

Now war is a means to a end and we will always have war but dont think for a second there is anything honourable about it.

We see pictures and paintings of the charge of the light brigade and the union defense of Gettysburg and we dream about being there when in reality all that was there was just death, blood, pain and people screaming out in agony.

[Rexosaurus]

War isn't a good thing. But there are still plenty of real-life examples of enemies showing restraint, respect, and compassion to each other during, and after wars. There are even some cases of outright cooperation. Things like that make it easier for people to foster a sense of understanding for the other side, and to move on from their conflicts afterwards.

While those things are certainly less visible than strategic/tactical advantages, I'd personally have a hard time calling it "dumb" or a "weakness".

[Azerate]

Idiotic thread.

if you're only honorable in circumstances that it's easy to be honorable in, that's not being honorable. It's when it's hard that it counts.

[Beerbill Society]

Let's just hope Jaina remembers that when she is about to wreck Orgrimmar under a tsunami again.

Or the high king when he has the opportunity to dismantle the horde in SoG 2.0.

[Kantoro]

How sad the lack of integrity is in today's society.

[Soon-TM]

If Saurfang had an actual sense of military honour, he'd be rebelling against Sylvanas as we speak, given how many civilians have perished after the burning of Teldrassil. But first he didn't have the balls to kill a high value military and political enemy (Malfy isn't exactly a "civilian") when explicitely ordered so by his superior, and later didn't have the balls to rebel against Sylvanas, or at least step aside.

So, if he thinks Sylvanas' actions are dishonorable, he's her accomplice, given his lack of action.

EDIT: and now, we will be stuck for the Loa knows how long with Malfy and his over-the-top cringeworthy voiceovers... Ty Saurfang

[Uncle]

Saurfang's sense of honor can't be dumb, because Orcs have no honor, they never had, they never will.
The Orcs are by far the most evil race in the whole universe, beating even the Eredars by a large margin; they talk about honor, yet they act vile and coward and a permanent basis.

You can't use the word honor and Orc in the same sentence.

[Progenitor Aquarius]

"Honor in a all out War is dumb.
It only makes you weak compared to your opponent.
Its literally gimping yourself on the battlefield."


That weakness you are describing can be also strength. True strength is about knowing not when to kill, but when to spare life.

[Granyala]

Have you ever heard about Ethics? Just wondering.

It is a cruel question to ask but I'll do it anyway: why are there to be ethics, honor or human rights in war?
Technically it would be a lot more efficient to exterminate any resistance w/o any sort of mercy or hesitation by utilizing the most effective means possible.

Our "ethics" make us tiptoe around civvies trying to damage an enemy w/o inflicting too much collateral. Imagine the ease of war if there were no rules of engagement.

I like the quote of Garak from DS9:
Chiel O'Brien: Even in War there are rules, Garak.
Elim Garak: Correction: HUMANS have rules in war, which makes it a little more difficult for them to win.

[Deleted]

alls fair in love and war

edit: if anyone notices in the astranaar the quest is to specifically kill town guards. Not civilians, just defenders. The rest are captured no? Or at least killed by forsaken. What I'm getting at is we're missing a lot of the picture, and "honor" is the gimmick being used as a moral device

What I recall is that the book has more detail into what happened.

I wasn't in the alpha/beta, but I recall reports that what made Live was a somewhat sanitised version of what was originally planned.

All the way through the questlines, Sylvannas is all about snuffing out life, "These wisps are little more than insects to be crushed. Snuff out each light one by one, and soon the sky will fill with darkness," and using Azerite for the war campaign.

Alliance is all about preserving life and putting Azerite beyond use.

Sylvannas "#DeathToLifeAndHope" Windrunner

[sopeonaroap]

alls fair in love and war

edit: if anyone notices in the astranaar the quest is to specifically kill town guards. Not civilians, just defenders. The rest are captured no? Or at least killed by forsaken. What I'm getting at is we're missing a lot of the picture, and "honor" is the gimmick being used as a moral device

they're intentionally telling a different story to both factions. alliance don't see saurfang run up and axe malfurion in the back to save sylvanas, they see something else.

it's probably supposed to be about faction perspective, but it's just dumb since they've wanted everyone to play everything for 10 years. back before you could have both factions on the same server this idea wouldn't have come across so half-assed

- - - Updated - - -

"Honor in a all out War is dumb.
It only makes you weak compared to your opponent.
Its literally gimping yourself on the battlefield."


That weakness you are describing can be also strength. True strength is about knowing not when to kill, but when to spare life.

no it can't. the US won the revolutionary war because they took honor and shoved it up the red coat's asses. they used "dishonorable guerilla tactics" and refused to fight the war the way wars were fought at the time.

honor is a weakness, it means you will ignore advantages. if you win something with honor, you'd have won it without honor easier. if all things are equal and one side has honor while the other doesn't, there is 100% no way the honorable side can win.

[Bathory]

He should have killed Malfurion
But the horde didn't need to kill a bunch of civilians in order to "secure the future of the horde"

[Sanguinerd]

You don't understand how Orcs function and you talk asif you have any idea what it means to be in a war.

Not to mention your examples are ridiculous and childish.