So Anduin says in the battle for Lordaeron that Saurfang spared his life ?
If i look at the cinematic it looks that Greymane punches Saurfang while he was trying to kill Anduin.
So.....what gives ?
So Anduin says in the battle for Lordaeron that Saurfang spared his life ?
If i look at the cinematic it looks that Greymane punches Saurfang while he was trying to kill Anduin.
So.....what gives ?
Shit, once they kill that shitty Corpse Bride for good I can go back to Horde again.
Stains on the carpet and stains on the memory
Songs about happiness murmured in dreams
When we both of us knew how the end always is...
The problem isn't the in-universe reasoning of getting along with the Alliance in terms of diplomacy. It's the fact this whole story arc hinges on the war being over, once Sylvanas is dethroned, which is Saurfang making the supremely naive assumption that the Alliance would let the rest of the Horde (who were either complicit or 100% on board) get away with genocide, again.
It's a part of the inherent premise-related problem of how the story even got here in the first place (i.e nobody in the Horde but Saurfang making the slightest act of resistance against Sylvanas' plans from the War of Thorns to 8.1, which is still ridiculous), making the Horde cast aside from the Zandalari look like a cavalcade of idiots.
Yes they can. Are you seriously coming in here and saying that if a Warchief started killing all their own subjects for no reason, that's just something everyone should roll over and take? A leader is there to lead their subjects, regardless of what they title themselves.
Elisande, Kael'thas, we went through the list already. Plenty of leaders betrayed their subjects by working against their best interests. The nightborne would have all been thrown into the soul furnaces, one by one, with Elisande being the last one in, if their people hadn't stepped up and stopped her.
The Horde would not exist if its people had not ensured their leaders did just that, lead them to a prosperous future. Instead there'd be some demon-corrupted slaves, mindless zombies, withered elves, conquered trolls...
The goblins would be about the same though, actually. :P
Saurfang wants a Horde worth fighting for. And dangit I do too. As much fun as I've had on my pandaren reveling in the insane brutality, taking SELFIE screenshots in Brennadam and the like, it's not the Horde I signed up for. The Horde is basically the villain faction right now except for a few standout characters during the war campaign. (Zelling, Garona, Rexxar, and Voss)
Last edited by Powerogue; 2018-11-02 at 09:23 PM.
Yes. At least Saurfang cares about the Horde.
Its been made abundantly clear that Sylvanas wasn't even appointed by legitimate means (Vol'jin was "influnced" into choosing her) and doesn't care for the Horde.
How anyone defends her leadership of the Horde as benefiting and aiding the Horde is beyond me.
Even the most fascist of dictators can be seen to be betraying his or her subjects by those subjects. That's all that matters when they're the ones deciding to go against that leader. Whether the leader thinks they betrayed anyone is completely inconsequential. The Horde isn't a bunch of brainwashed zombies - even the Forsaken don't blindly follow. What you're describing is just another step towards the Scourge 2.0 or Fel Orcs where they just follow their supposedly omniscient leadership.
Saurfang sees Sylvanas as the enemy, and his point of view is what dictates his actions. It's not hard to understand, it's just a basic storytelling device. The enemy of my enemy is my friend is a saying that exists for a reason.
Mak'gora is an orc/ogre tradition. Sylvanas likely wouldn't even be interested in having one, and certainly wouldn't fight fairly if she did. She would absolutely have a contingency plan in case she was overpowered, like flooding the arena with Blight or something similar. Plus she's already dead. So what now, how does she lose in a fight where her opponent is only allowed a single weapon while she possesses all the powers of a banshee?
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
Being a traitor is absolutely relative based on who is in power. Stalin came into power and many people who were ardent supporters of the former regime were traitors to him, though they all were loyal to Russia.
You are looking at things from a totally unrealistic black and white point of view.
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment