Can the Alliance plz get one big victory in BfA?

[Syegfryed]

Sure let's just compare how many available quest are for the horde and the alliance, and measure each square foot of zones they have to claim who have more content...

remind me of how the alliance had more quests, more content and more territory since vanila, until cataclysm change things, strange sin't

I already stated here many times, as long as the whole 'Azshara' zone looks like a planet-wide symbol of the Horde, any argument that there is (or was at any point) a Horde Favoritism (or bias for this matter) from the part of Blizzard's devs is futile and should be disregarded.

and it stated many times, when your faction is the only one to have the option to raid and sack the enemy main city, put down their leader who get hit by the villain bat, and get the tittle of " City-name Conqueror", you have no argument at all about favoritism

'Old Soldier' is just another example of a long list of this favoritism.

Its a cinematic not present ingame, done at the time of the BfA cinematic, its just something for advertisement, nothing compared to the anduin one who come with a chainquest who is actual game content

[jackofwind]

Please? Just one? Because both Teldrassil and Lordaeron were bullshit. It wasn’t “The Horde takes one of our cities and we take one of theirs”, it was “Sylvanas destroys two cities”. Both battles made us look like complete morons. Battle for Lordaeron was supposed to be our comeback, yet once again we’re left scratching our heads while Sylvanas and gang fly off with an evil smile.

So, in BfA, can the Alliance please have one big, unconditional victory where the Horde doesn’t get off easy? I know most of the devs are Horde fanbois, but we would like to have some faction pride as well.

You need to stop looking at shit like it needs to be even. It's just a story.

[Clone]

Can the Alliance stop whining? Please? Just once?

[jackofwind]

Sure let's just compare how many available quest are for the horde and the alliance, and measure each square foot of zones they have to claim who have more content...

Srsly you are missing the whole point of the thread.

I already stated here many times, as long as the whole 'Azshara' zone looks like a planet-wide symbol of the Horde, any argument that there is (or was at any point) a Horde Favoritism (or bias for this matter) from the part of Blizzard's devs is futile and should be disregarded.

'Old Soldier' is just another example of a long list of this favoritism.

That's nonsense, it makes sense within the context of the lore that the goblins would make it look like that to ingratiate themselves to the Horde. None of the races on the Alliance side would do something like that. Also, it's just the shape of terrain - it's not favoritism, it's just story.

People that play Horde don't crow about Azshara, you're holding it up as a strawman because you don't actually have a good argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Can the Alliance stop whining? Please? Just once?

It's JustRob, all he does is whine.

- - - Updated - - -

Alliance is the underdog. Jaina is the one getting character development. Anduin is the fallible king. Genn has the right to see justice for his son and people. The night elves will have their reckoning. The Alliance is going to win. A costly win, but it will. Just wait one and a half year, and you'll see it.

"Winning" is meaningless, it's only a story - and in WoW that means no faction conflict is ever really resolved or concluded. We're all just along for the ride.

[Toho]

"Winning" is meaningless, it's only a story - and in WoW that means no faction conflict is ever really resolved or concluded. We're all just along for the ride.

unfortunately the winning/losing results in alliance losing location after location in the game.

[Khirok]

Uhh did you play legion? It was 100% all about the alliance. horde has been in the spotlight for like 3 weeks now calm down

Half of Legion was about the Nightborne.

[jackofwind]

unfortunately the winning/losing results in alliance losing location after location in the game.

Which directly reflects the ongoing story. The number of locations that the Alliance has lost is still quite small, and they're toggle-able anyways in case you still want to visit their old versions.

The thing is, a story where everything is perfectly equal is boring and predictable as fuck. You can't just trade blows while keeping a balance because that sucks all the urgency out of any in-game events. The idea that a perfect balance has to be maintained is a key component of the stagnant world and storylines that we see in-game.

[Aeula]

Yeah well your High King isn’t on the chopping block like our Warchief is.

[Enosh]

The thing is, a story where everything is perfectly equal is boring and predictable as fuck. You can't just trade blows while keeping a balance because that sucks all the urgency out of any in-game events. The idea that a perfect balance has to be maintained is a key component of the stagnant world and storylines that we see in-game.

"everything being equal is boring!"
"proceeds to whine about Nazgrim until they kill Taylor offscren by a random mob*

[Toho]

Which directly reflects the ongoing story. The number of locations that the Alliance has lost is still quite small, and they're toggle-able anyways in case you still want to visit their old versions.

The thing is, a story where everything is perfectly equal is boring and predictable as fuck. You can't just trade blows while keeping a balance because that sucks all the urgency out of any in-game events. The idea that a perfect balance has to be maintained is a key component of the stagnant world and storylines that we see in-game.

the thing is after years of losses and literally zero "wins" it is getting quite old. Hence the title of the thread.
Are you saying alliance must never win a single battle otherwise it would be "predictable"?

[Necroxis]

Its not a victory (yet) but the "Pride of Kul Tiras" made me go "FUCK YES ALLIANCE!" for the first time since MoP.

We're getting closer.

[Thetruth1400]

You helped because if you did not the horde would have lost to garrosh and then the alliance would have also lost to him.

So let me get this straight; you actually believe that if the Alliance stood back and did nothing that the combined forces of the Tauren, the Trolls, the Blood Elves, the Orcs loyal to Thrall, and the Pandaren that followed Chen (Vol'jin's dialog confirms that the entirely of the non-Orc Horde supports the rebellion) would have lost to Garrosh, the Kor'kron, and that's pretty much it.

Not only that, but you think that once that small group won, they'd have been able to stand up against the full brunt of the Alliance with all its might.

Sorry, but you're literally grasping at the thinnest straws imaginable.

[Deleted]

I'm very curious about what happens next in the story in general.

But I would like to see some more Alliance highlights for sure, I would have loved to see something along the lines of an Old Soldier cinematic but on the Alliance side.

[Enosh]

So let me get this straight; you actually believe that if the Alliance stood back and did nothing that the combined forces of the Tauren, the Trolls, the Blood Elves, the Orcs loyal to Thrall, and the Pandaren that followed Chen (Vol'jin's dialog confirms that the entirely of the non-Orc Horde supports the rebellion) would have lost to Garrosh, the Kor'kron, and that's pretty much it.

Not only that, but you think that once that small group won, they'd have been able to stand up against the full brunt of the Alliance with all its might.

Sorry, but you're literally grasping at the thinnest straws imaginable.

the justification for alliance doing SoO has always been paper thin, robo cat didn't help

[Deleted]

I'm very curious about what happens next in the story in general.

But I would like to see some more Alliance highlights for sure, I would have loved to see something along the lines of an Old Soldier cinematic but on the Alliance side.

What I think too. Would love to see something like that but Alliance characters!

[Deleted]

What I think too. Would love to see something like that but Alliance characters!

I think it’s all about 50\50 in terms of content on PvP based expansions.


Sent from my iPhone X using Tapatalk

[Evilfish]

They GAVE us SoO where we did nothing then talking about ending the Horde and nothing else.

And it wasn´t a Alliance raid it was a fucking Horde raid we just had to help you because the Horde was to incompetent to do it themselfs.

So, you were expecting to what? End the Horde? You are so delusional if you even thought that was an option. You don't seem to get it. SoO was the extent the devs were willing to go. Nothing past that. If you don't like it, too bad for you, but you won't be killing the Horde or making it your sidekick.

- - - Updated - - -

Where did I whine in this thread?

My whole contribution to this thread was just me saying I know Alleria will do something big.

But I do see a lot of whining bellow:



Wow. Cry me a river.

Alliance is the underdog. Jaina is the one getting character development. Anduin is the fallible king. Genn has the right to see justice for his son and people. The night elves will have their reckoning. The Alliance is going to win. A costly win, but it will. Just wait one and a half year, and you'll see it.

And here is the typical "NO U!" response you fellas seem to be so fond of when you are called out for whining. But perhaps you are right, the Alliance may win, but it won't be another SoO I think. So if you know you are going to win, then why cry? You are crying.

[Beerbill Society]

That's nonsense, it makes sense within the context of the lore that the goblins would make it look like that to ingratiate themselves to the Horde. None of the races on the Alliance side would do something like that. Also, it's just the shape of terrain - it's not favoritism, it's just story.

People that play Horde don't crow about Azshara, you're holding it up as a strawman because you don't actually have a good argument.

- - - Updated - - -



It's JustRob, all he does is whine.

- - - Updated - - -



"Winning" is meaningless, it's only a story - and in WoW that means no faction conflict is ever really resolved or concluded. We're all just along for the ride.

Lol, I did point out a fact that there is, in-game, a huge symbol of a faction, lorewise why the fuck would Kezan Goblins be so passionate for the horde to make something like that? Terraforming? In World of Warcraft? please tell me how many times it was done before, besides the obvious fucking huge dragon that was the earthwarden and broke half of the world.

I'm still waiting for Gilneas be available, just like they did a capital for Goblins with Bilgewater port.

Me, Toho and many others provided facts about the favoritism, you guys are in denial.

[Deleted]

I think a lot has already been said. Nonetheless I'm going to repeat some of it. But first I'd like to mention something which I think a lot of people kind of miss. A bias doesn't have to exist in one way only. For Warcraft there are various parts where a bias might exist. The obvious one and the one that is most often discussed is the lore perspective. But other aspects include the level on detail that flesh out a story, the actual screen time, the amount of stuff that exists outside of the game. Certainly a lot of them influence each other. Writing a book without somehow telling a story and in turn do something to the lore would be a pretty futile thing. Anyway I think it's important to kind of make clear what you're talking about. I'm not always clear on it either but I think it would often help.

My personal perspective is that we won't get a relevant alliance win with BfA. I also don't have a clear picture yet where the faction conflict and the old gods are heading. So it's hard to picture what we might eventually encounter. Personally I'm content with just learning more about Jaina and Kul Tiras. I don't actually really need the faction conflict. With the story so far I'd expect the alliance to loose while still being stronger on paper. The pre-event/opening stuff gives me a vibe that more attention was given to the horde. While I do share the feeling that UC wasn't a win for the alliance the implication of loosing it could be quite vast. At the same time I don't expect them to be reflected in the game and think that the Arathi Warfront is a good indicator for that.

I do think that the horde suffers some great losses and really could use a good story at the same time I think that the alliance is getting the short end because a lot of the stuff that's relevant just isn't shown in the game. Some BA is probably doing the numbers and sees that the horde players are more vocal and visible (at least for me it feels like it) and it's good publicity move to cater to them. As a result while the alliance doesn't suffer (as much) from the writing directly they suffer because their stuff isn't shown in the game. As a player this can be frustrating but it might also be a case of "the grass is always greener on the other side".

A very recent example for this would be the "old solider" cinematic as well as the secondary cinematic after the death of Vol'jin. It's not that I wouldn't want the horde to have either but rather that I'd like to have something equal on the alliance side. For out of game stuff and stories that are being told I'd rather not take something from someone and give it the other but rather have them be equally awesome. With limited time and budget this might be kind of hard but ideally that would be the case.

Another thing I don't understand is why a win for the alliance always has to be the ultimate doom for the horde. The common example is SoO. There are many stupid things about it. One of the simplest way to make it feel better for the alliance without ending the horde would've been to simply give some of the territories back. But phasing it wouldn't even be a problem to do so after you finished SoO. Alternatively they could've added some minor quests to the zone to show that the horde pulls back.

With that out of the way lets start quoting a lot of people. Wouldn't be fun to have such a bland position, would it?

No bad-ass moments? Tomb of Sargeras and Antorus were all Alliance heroes. The whole expansion was basically Alliance lore, hell even the Nightborne's choice to join the Horde was mostly about Tyrande. So what if you don't get a cool faction war moment, the Alliance destroyed the Legion lore-wise. What more do you actually need?!

Retroactively two whole zones are about horde races. So what more do you want?

You have gotten a greater win than you think. Tyrande and Malfurion still alive. You now have more control over the whole of Lordaeron. You destroyed a city which was atleast as important as Theramore.

I agree that from a more distant perspective it's looking pretty good. But if you go for a closer looks it kind of comes apart. What was the alliance there to do? Apprehend Sylvanas. Was that goal accomplished? No. Was it the alliance that destroyed the city? No. Is UC in a usable state for the alliance? No. Is it reflected that the alliance now owns that Territory? No. On paper it is a win but if you actually look at how it played out it's pretty shallow and in addition part of the current alliance leadership were shown to be pretty ... dumb.

Chris Metzen (you know the voice of like a hundred characters in WoW & former Senior Vice President of Story and Franchise Development for Blizzard) plays a HUMAN paladin. Can't get more "Horde fanboi" than playing a human ret pally....

Also pretty funny how all of the dev team since the game came out are ALLIANCE PLAYERS on their personal toons.....oh but the Horde favoritism.....

Does one mean you can't be the other? He even mentions that he has a lot of love of the horde. If you want to hyperbole it you could even argue that of course he would be playing an alliance toon to get away from work. If you spend all the time writing horde stories you'd want to see something fresh if you decide to play in your free time. Also he mentioned he didn't like to hear his own voice, didn't he?

He is a king right?

High King doesn't have anything to do with being a king. Just like wearing plate armor, bashing things with a melee weapon and using the light doesn't make you a paladin (according to Blizzard).

I know more Horde players than Alliance, but I see a lot more enthusiasm for BfA from Alliance players. I wonder why?

Did you ask them why they're excited about BfA? My guess would be because there is actually new alliance lore that's interesting and likely development for Jaina. At least that's what I'm looking forward (as I said above).

Lordaeron isn't necessarily lost. Fire can cleanse it. Much like after Wrathgate when the red dragons burn everything. Time will go on and things will change. It's good that the game does change zones and the like. It would be much more stale otherwise. It would be very interesting to see what the Alliance could do with Lordaeron, should they actually get it back.

If we extrapolate from the park in SW we will likely have UC for the alliance, assuming they get it, by lets 2035 the earliest? It's not that I don't agree but it's ridiculous how long it took them to even fix the damn paths near the park ...

Alliance has Anduin, Jaina, Alleria and Turalyon, Greymane, Malfurion, Tyrande and Velen. We're also coming off the back of Legion where EVERY major actor was either a human, draenei or elf.

Really not sure what the Alliance want, horde are running out of major characters for you to kill, give us a break so we can find some more.

So by generalizing just to elf you think Blood Elves are alliance? Also it's not even the alliance killing your heroes. It's the horde doing damage to itself.

Sylvanas losing her home turf, Gilneas being retaken and Horde second-in-command captured is not a victory?

You hear it before but he voluntarily gave up just like Sylvanas strategically pulled back. Also where did you get the idea that Gilneas was retaken when we still have a warfront in Arathi?

You're moving your goal posts. However you do have a point.

Since Thrall's horde was formed at the end of warcraft 3 the alliance has always had the upper hand over the horde. Even more so after the death of Garrosh where the alliance occupied Orgrimmar. The horde is and has always been the underdog and the alliance is comfortable in it's position of power.

This is exactly why the horde acts and the alliance doesn't. The alliance doesn't need things to change, they are content with staying on top.

It seems like you want it all. To both be the dominant faction and the proactive faction. If they wrote that story the horde would just flat out lose. So yeah, story wise it's boring being part of the greater established power.

The problem with your argument is that if we look at what's happening in the game we would still hear that when the horde erects a fort in Elwynn Forest. It might be that the alliance is the stronger faction but it's rarely presented in the game. Why would the alliance not push to build stronger defenses or on certain fronts try to go for a push to establish some kind of no-man's-land? It doesn't have to be the case that you steamroll all the way into an enemy capital but you could try to secure a front at some places. As it is it feels like the alliance is basically the Monty Python black knight.

Why ppl dont understand that war is not pretty, it's not about honor, it's about survival and winning.
Sylvannas went to war to ensure the Horde survival and a peace that would last generations.
But Saurfang did not followed the plan by not ending Malfurion and that was why Sylvannas had to burn down Darnassus.

Many people don't seem to understand it's a fantasy game made to entertain. Also the peace wouldn't have lasted multiple generations. A (human) generation usually around 25 years. It would mean the peace would have to last longer than Anduin is currently alive.

The good guys always gotta lose a few times in the early parts of the story so that their eventual victory is more satisfying towards the end.

As a hyperbole, because I'm still waiting for the fist pumping moment which likely should've been SoO, lets count starting with the release of SoO. So we've been losing since 2010. Shouldn't 8 years be enough?

Splitting the Horde's unity once again is still a huge victory for this unified Alliance. Especially considering it will end with another Warchief being killed/removed.

You're likely referring to SoO, right? I'm still wondering why the alliance stepped in at all. There was no incentive for them to do so. Especially after Vol'jin was disrespecting the envoy that showed up to offer help. From an alliance probably there shouldn't have been much of a problem to wait for the civil war to end and mop up anything that's left. As an alliance player I don't know why I'd care about who is the current warchief and whenever there's some internal struggle. In the worst case it wouldn't change anything and in the best case they will kill their own so the alliance would have less to do.

Besides, what does it matter if your faction wins or loses certain battles. Im a Horde main because I find the Horde races and story more interesting. I thought the SoO, while being a poor raid, was still a decent story revolving around that. A bad time for the Horde, but still a really interesting plot line for Hordes throughout the entire expansion.
The Horde started as underdogs, and I wouln't really care too much if we returned to that state as long as our story continues to rock!

I don't think people would care as much if both sides stories equally rocked but your example of SoO had robo cat which kind of shows the disparity.

Right, she didn't know. So she just imprissoned and killed everyone just in case. Not to mention that Jaina was the one who broke neutrality in the first place.

He laid siege to it obviously. Like I said, he had no way to just demand or punish those Alliance soldiers, and since Theramore was protecting them he had to take the fight to the entire city. Theramore was aligned with the Alliance and helped them get into Horde territory and kill their members.
Garrosh was a bad guy, but there was nothing wrong in destroying a city that was part of the attacks on Horde races.

Please check some of the story for the purge again. It's not like she just started walking around and killing everyone. Though people tend to frame it in that way.

Was he also right to just kill the civilians like it's indicated in the game?

It's mind boggling to see how much the players go at each others throats over video game lore and scenario developments.
I mean, I know this is the Internet we're speaking of. But seriously... This is a case that could be studied in psychology classes.

Aside from that, the second laughable point is how much people spit on Blizzard's writers team. Like you could do any better, and whatever comes out from your posts should be the absolute stonecold unchangeable truth because "you know better". Sickening.

Just wait and play the expac, you'll see for yourselves, don't stop at the first chapter of a book to extend judgements and whatnots.

People have been invested in this for more than a decade. It's not all rational (anymore) and if you spend considerable time doing something it's likely that you're kind of passionate about it. It's not that people would be able to write better stories but Blizzard has the resources to hire talented writers and write stories that are interesting while catering to both factions.

As for the book cover comparison ... "Wait and see who actually burns Teldrassil!"

You know, you like a character, then he suddenly become evil, and you go kill him. Do you think that it feels enjoyable in some way?Also you invaded our cities three times, we didn't even put a foot in Teldrassil.

No. Also in two cases out of three you were also invading your own cities and one of them has been removed from the game.

Archbishop Benedictus which was the priest leader and boss in Stormwind Cathedral, which we had to kill in Cataclysm dungeon as the last boss.

Don't forget how well that story was told in the game - Oh right it wasn't, my bad.

Dude, stop talking out of your ass. The Alliance had the ultimate unconditional victory in Mists when they conquered Orgrimmar and toppled the Warchief. When was the last time the Horde had an unconditional victory? Warcraft 1 with the sacking of Stormwind?

Gilneas, Southshore, Ashenvale, Theramore. If you mean unconditional in the sense that they didn't gain anything by it, you're certainly right. The horde would never been foolish enough to capture something and just go home.

SoO was an Alliance win. Just because you helped the horde get their capital back does not mean it was somehow a loss for you as you still ended up doing away with a major enemy to the alliance that wanted you all dead and would have achieved it had you not allied with the horde and sieged orgrimmar. Comparing a bunch of dumb quest towns (that the alliance had more of) To a fucking capital is so unbelieably stupid but im not in the slightest suprised that alliance players still use this comparison because they disreguard any logic for the sake of complaining.

The Horde has almost no lore characters left. Saurfang wants to die and is in alliance custody, Sylvanas is the next villain, Baine has done jack shit, Gallywix has done jack shit, Lor'themar has done jack shit, nathanos has done jack shit, the new troll leader has done jack shit, Thrall had cata and MoP but since the alliance cant handle a neutral orc character blizzard had to make him useless on top of being neutral.

Meanwhile Anduin the god kid who can do no wrong is probably the second strongest priest in the world has mass ress is the main protagonist of WoW now, Jaina is now a main alliance character who can do amazing things because she is the one of the strongest mages in the world, Genn is an old school character with actual lore, Velen is the strongest priest in the world and just orchistrated an attack with alleria/turalyon/illidan that defeated the legion, Malfurion is the strongest druid in the world who has done more for the planet than anyone, Alleria and turalyon just rejoined both as old school lore characters and they still have the shitter dwarves and gnome that don't really do much.

...

The horde has had to work with Khadgar multiple times (butbutbut hes neutral so it doesnt count even though we always bitch about WoD) Malfurion, magni, Velen, Alleria, Turalyon, Tirion and darian mograin. horde ALWAYS work with characters that only have ties with the alliance and almost never complain yet the alliance still bitches about thrall to this day.

What did the alliance win by aiding the horde in SoO which couldn't have been achieved after the civil war of the horde would've ended? Why does it end with Thrall taking the spot light in the final fight and not an alliance protagonist? How is Genn and old school character with actual lore? Velen, as I can tell you as the High Priest and leader of all priest () is mainly good to stand around and help other priest finally making their choice to class change to a paladin.

How many of the alliance characters did kill steal?

You seriously call horde players sensitive but are actually bitching that goblins got slums in orgrimmar and a lvl 10 zone while genn has become one of the most important lore characters. Fucking hilarious

Did you know where Worgens used to have their home after Gilneas?

Horde doesn't get extra content. Horde gets different content based on the context of the story so does the alliance.

So where's the comparable cinematic for old solider? Where is the cinematic for the memorial ceremony for Varian? Where is the Twilight Highland intro for the alliance? Where is the horde equivalent for the robo cat?

You don't know what bias is then lol. Having a horde symbol as a horde zone is not bias. Its not like they made Eastern kingdoms, kalimdor, northrend and the maelstrom into the shape of the horde symbol. Holy shit... but the Horde players are the sensitive ones right? "Boohoo horde has a symbol as a zone why dont we QQ"

It's one possible way to show bias. putting, even temporarily, a horde crest beneath the monument in Stromwind park is also a sign of bias. As I said at the beginning of my post there are various kinds of bias.

No the horde were not the only ones that wanted to remove garrosh, the alliance had just as much of a reason and it is seen in the final phase of garrosh's fight. Jaina, varian, anduin, rodgers, tyrande, genn all of these people had reasons to hate garrosh and want him dethroned. You helped because if you did not the horde would have lost to garrosh and then the alliance would have also lost to him.

No what you guys are asking for is to initiate something and win. You won in org but it wasn't enough because the horde didnt get dismantled. You just want to roflstomp the horde and win the game. Horde dont initiate and win the horde gets forced to initiate and splinters and loses while the alliance has initial loss and ends up stronger.

If, as people say, the alliance is stronger than the horde why would they have lost to Garrosh after he killed his own troops?

Some people are probably asking for that but some, like me, would be content if it actually felt like a win. There was little reason for the alliance to be there. Insults from Vol'jin and robo cat didn't help.

Theres a reason Southshore was nuked.

The Kingdom of Lordaeron is the Forsakens land.

Because the horde won more PVP engagements. How is a human empire land of the forsaken?

The Alliance entitlement is over the top in this thread. You are aware Blizzard is not your "special" buddy? You are buying their product. If it makes you this miserable, stop buying it. You don't get to make special requests and Blizzard is not obligated to "make it up to you", where the fuck does that come from? A guess - your over-developed sense of entitlement.

Besides what good would it do to give you a "win"? They gave you SoO and still you whined cause it wasn't done right or because you didn't get to "end" the Horde. Some of you are so high on your own spunk that actually thought ending the other player faction was even plausible. You are aware that many of the inconsistencies in the story come from the clusterfuck that was MoP?

You are aware that the Horde spent half of MoP fighting for Garrosh and the other half, turning 180 degrees and fighting against him. Now you want another twist that comes at the expense of the whole game story, not just the Horde, cause you aren't feeling Alliance enough.

Honestly if you resort to your first response please just stop posting here. It looks like that attitude is upsetting you and nobody is forcing you to read these posts. Regardless, for some reason, you chose too. They are also no obligated to do anything. Would you be happy if something positive would happen to your favorite kind of mount? Would you talk about it or just harbor that secret to be glad if it happens?

As mentioned before it wasn't necessary to end the horde but actually make it feel like a win. Your right that the horde had quite a twist there but from an alliance perspective does it matter? Did the alliance get to experience that twist?

--

I kind of like these posts and would give them a thumbs up:

Saurfang was expanded by Blizzard in order for him to resurface as someone who shares the same values as Anduin. He will be probably be established as Warchief in the end of the expansion, and the Alliance will forgive the Horde for all their crimes once again and pin it all on Sylvanas.

That however doesn't mean we're killing Sylvanas, she will have her own save-the-world redemption arc and will be neutral. Nathanos will become the new forsaken leader. Don't forget that Blizzard prepares expansion stories in advance, so they had already made their plans for those characters long now. There's a reason Saurfang and Nathanos are constantly thrown in our faces these days.

Either way, the Alliance won't get any big victory, I came to terms with that. It actually seems that they're gonna make the Alliance do something "grey" that will put them on par with Horde's cruelty, but not quite. In the end, it will be a compromise between the factions but the Alliance will be the losing side again because they'd have lost the most.

The game has been Horde-favored for a while now, from most of the vocal community being Horde, from MoP era switching to Horde for racials (which btw still has effects today, as many alliance guilds go Horde for better recruitment), and of course the heads behind the game are manly Horde fanboys. Despite most alive warcraft 3 characters being Alliance, they'd still focus on creating a story that is favoring the Horde. The Alliance may get more hero portrayal, but that's it. The price for not being an immoral savage warmongering barbarian is to be a punching bag.

I do however see the Siege of Lordaeron as an Alliance victory, but not on the same scale as the burning of Teldrassil was for the Horde. We will never, EVER reach that kind of justice. Only compromises.

As we all know, the dominant factions never make a show out of something after poked. In fact, they'd rather do it the "honorable" way, without using half of their arsenal just to give the other side a fighting chance and to make sure they don't feel overwhelmed. A long war of attrition is a much better sport after all.
Even a halfwit would choose the logical course of action when it comes to Teldrassil retribution. That is blowing Undercity the fuck out with everything you have and sending communiques to other Horde leaders that their cities are safe as long as they stand aside when Alliance comes for Sylvanas.
Unfortunately, whenever it is required Alliance leadership brain tumors flare up and they choose not to commit or to do something spectacularly idiotic.

[Knslyr]

I don't think people would care as much if both sides stories equally rocked but your example of SoO had robo cat which kind of shows the disparity.

Don't really get the robo cat reference.
But yea, I don't think the alliance story rocks either. I've always found it lame. But that is why Im Horde. Because they have the interesting stories, and characters.
Yet there are many alliance that argue that the alliance is better etc etc, so I always imagined they were happy about that even if I didn't understand them.

Please check some of the story for the purge again. It's not like she just started walking around and killing everyone. Though people tend to frame it in that way.

Was he also right to just kill the civilians like it's indicated in the game?

"Arriving in the Violet Citadel, Jaina slew Aethas's High Sunreaver Magi and called him out directly." Literally the first sentence from your link to The Purge.
Kill first ask later. Just what I said.

But we already know Garrosh was a monster, and that was obviously yet another evil thing to put on his list. But most people are trying to argue Jaina was better, but they did the same thing here it seems.
And my argument was that Garrosh had no choice but to involve innocents since he had to lay siege to a castle. Which made it impossible to avoid civilian casualities.
While Jaina could have imprisoned Aethas only or any other suspects while they were investigating them.

Im certainly not trying to defend Garrosh for strapping up civilians after the battle. Those he should have let go.
But Jaina had a choice to not involve any in the first place. And as a leader of Dalaran, the power to imprisson anyone she sees fit.