A defense of Sylvanas and Nathanos's storyline going foward.

[Tortuga234]

For the first part of this I will be making a case in defense of Sylvanas Windrunner and her actions.

So lets start with what makes Sylvanas....well...Sylvanas
-Former Ranger-General of Silvermoon
-Famous among the Blood Elves and High Elves
-Took a Human man(Nathanos Marris) into the High elf military.
-Promoted Nathanos to be a ranger lord and second in command over Lorthermar, and even her own sister Alleria(Alleria was a captain).
-Probably had a relationship with Nathanos....(Kind of creepy Student-Teacher thing.....)
-Sacrificed herself defending Silvermoon from Arthas and the Scourge
-Turned into a Banshee. Force to watch her people die, feels guilt over it, hatred for Arthas.
-Freed of his control she finds a group of Undead like and frees them from Arthas's control(Forms the Forsaken)
-Faced rejection from former allies and actively hunted down by the Alliance.
-Welcomed into the Horde by Thrall based on a suggestion By the Tauren who saw potential of redemption in Sylvanas and the Forsaken.
-Sylvanas ever since the death of Arthas has never been the same with a focus on keeping herself alive along with the Forsaken.
-Sylvanas fears dying and going to hell.
-The Horde seems to have a divide on the Forsaken(Orcs mostly hate the forsaken)
-Sylvanas has fought many battles and supported the overthrowing of Garrosh.
-Chosen by Voljin based on whispers from a being we know little about.



Okay so lets start with the Burning of Teldrassil:
This is perhaps one of the most difficult actions to defend, however their are at least 3-4 reasons why it was justified.
1. The Horde needed to complete its objective. The Horde's Objective was to kill the Night Elves hope and Saurfang fucked up that now did he? Since Saurfang failed at one of the easiest jobs in the World Sylvanas needed to really kill the Night Elves hope.
2. The Horde was never going acutally be able to take Teldrassil: Between the powers of the Druids, to the Worgan Sylvanas and the Horde would had to have siege the city for months, giving the Alliance enough time to have reinforced the city and the Horde would have taken mass casualties.
3. Honor means nothing in war. War is inherently a dishonorable action. The fact we have people arguing this has no honor fail to see that their is no honor in war.
4. Morality=Nothing: Let me point out that the Night Elves are not the type of people you want on your continent. It makes sense to burn their main city to make sure they do not hold a easily defendable position if the Horde was to continued there war. Morality has been thrown out the window as soon as you engage in war. Also the Alliance clearly doesnt care either because of:
A. they attempted to align with the Blood Trolls
B. Gen launched a Holy crusade in Legion which almost led to death for us all and he is not tried for treason.
C. Spymaster Shaw donated some weapons to the blood trolls(Again showing they have zero moral).
D. Using the void to raise creatures on Zandalar to fight for them.
E. Do I need to link the Terror of DarkShore?
Okay so lets talk about the Use of Blight at undercity:
1. The Horde needed to push back the Alliance and prevent them from overtaking their position. While killing their own troops was wrong they did not do it intentionally. More over it was simply collateral damage. Collateral damage is a common thing in war. If the Horde had not blighted, their evacuation may not have fully worked and the Horde army could have been crippled.
2. The Alliance clearly does not care about using dangerous weapons themselves(the void, the various special tide weapons they get from the Kultrians, and Light, along with Azerite).
3. It was very much clear that Sylvanas was saving the Blight as a last resort to save the city. She is a master general after all.

Now lets talk about Saurfang and why I think HE is the real problem:
1. Saurfang clearly care not much about honor. Treason is dishonorable, abandoning your allies and deserting is clearly dishonorable, attempting to start a revolution with the aid of your enemy is dishonorable. In a real military Saurfang would be executed for treason. Why people defend him about honor when his honor is a personal selfish honor.
2. He Sounds like Garrosh: Bare with me Horde fans and Alliance fans. The language Saurfang uses in Lost Honor and dialogue in game parallels very much with Garrosh. The most prime example is this:
"WHAT I WANT!....is my Horde back."
Tell me is that not Garrosh sounding? Like Garrosh Varok feels guilt over sins of the past and uses that as a excuse to justify their actions. Another thing is Saurfang talking about what His Horde is. This is similar to Garrosh's speech over the Mists Siege of Orgimmar Trailer.
3. Saurfang should know better. Saurfang should be someone who knows that the Horde and its people have various views but are united by the persecution they suffer and the fact the value teamwork. Not everyone in the Horde has honor like Saurfang. The Blood Elves, Nightborne, Goblins, the Maghar, the Forsaken all dont have the same honor like the Orcs. Saurfang has this narrow minded view of honor.

Now lets talk about the Derek Proudmoore thing:
1. Machiavelli principals: "The ends justified the means" this is a argument that is apply to the Alliance when they do wrong but not the Horde.
2. Baine fails to understand their current situation: The Horde has lost and take heavy casualties, their outposts are being leveled, the fucking King of Zandalar was murdered by a invasion by the Alliance. They Zandalri have been crippled and the Horde needs to respond and using Derek Proudmoore while Morally wrong is a excellent tactical choice and Garona and Lillian seem to think its fine.
3. Baine fails to understand the stakes of failure.
4. No other Horde leader has offered up a logical and reasonable option. You cant negotiate since Anduin will not negotiate with Sylvanas since he thinks she must go.


Now let me briefly disscuss Nathanos:
I think Nathanos might finally move away from Sylvanas for a few reasons.
1. its been shown in the warbringers: Sylvanas, Before the Storm and in the Dark Mirror that Nathanos is upset with the things Sylvanas has done.
2. The Terror of Darkshore cinematic and Nathanos's choice of wording. "We will hold this ground...For the Horde." Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to have said "For the Banshee Queen" or "For the Dark Lady"?
3. He seems to not just be bound to the Horde by loyalty to Sylvanas. He seems to want to be the hand of justice for the Forsaken against the persecution based on the conversation between him and Garona.
4. Nathanos is not blindly loyal to Sylvanas. Their does seem to be somewhat of the old self in himself he is trying to hide.
5. Were going to need a new Forsaken leader and Calia will not be it simply because she is a traitor and tried to usurper the Throne of Lorderon from someone who took the throne through right of conquest in a civil war.




Leave your thoughts down below.

OP, your arguments fall apart when you think about just one simple thing.
The war was not needed.
Legion defeated, universal-level threat gone. Make peace and rebuild.
But the writers are just this bad, yes.

[Claitraith]

Regardless of opinion or favorites, there was no tactical or logical reason to burn it. Capture, yes. Burn, no.
The burning happened out of spite and rage and caused a bigger negative impact across the board.

Most of your points go against the ideology of the horde and further back up how selfish sylvannas has been acting.
She has been acting mostly out of her need to live and spite of the living. It's blatantly obvious.

The very foundation of the forsaken joining the horde was out of nothing more than personal gain and survival. Their joining changed the ideology of the horde away from the shamanistic races of the trolls, orcs and Taurens. This is nothing new and their personal motives have always been present. The idea of winning a war has many methods and the burning of teldrassil has a great motive. Now everyone talks of maniac actions which is much harder to deal with than standard tactics, plus it demoralises enemy's something brilliant.

[Raelbo]

You wrote that attack on Gilneans was hardly unprovoked, i asked what faction that wasn't with alliance did to Sylvanas that she was provoked, and u tell "But Alliance provoked them!" so make ur choice.

As you have just acknowledged, I wrote that "The attack on Gilneas was hardly unprovoked". And that is all I wrote. Nothing in that dictates that it was Gilneas themselves that did the provoking.

I don't want to end it like with Garrosh, he is deposed and all is forgiven, everyone is innocent, I'm pretty sure Sylvanas didn't burn Teldrassil on her own.

Oh grow up already. WoW is game and half the players are Horde and half are Alliance. Whatever story they come up with has to offer some form of "victory" to both sides. Expecting one side to dominate the other is just puerile.

But using mental gymnastics of Horde it will be like that: She probably used mind controll on every solder in her faction, and after Teldrassil she freed them of it, so they had no way out but play along with her.

Stop using that phrase please. It's extremely disrespectful. Honestly I have made an effort here to present an objective analysis of what has happened and, more importantly, why, but it seems that all you want to do is push a one-sided narrative, and then when anyone points out how immature that narrative is you resort to the old "mental gymnastics" ad hominem.

[Archmage Alodi]

Are Sylvanas fans capable of posting anything else?
A clone of this thread is posted daily. At least.

And alliance fans keep playing victim.

[Tortuga234]

And alliance fans keep playing victim.

We're very sorry to cause you inconvenience by being genocided, betrayed and losing every major battle. Where can we send reparations for our misdeeds?

[Lelkowski]

As you have just acknowledged, I wrote that "The attack on Gilneas was hardly unprovoked". And that is all I wrote. Nothing in that dictates that it was Gilneas themselves that did the provoking.

SO Alliance provoked Sylvanas, and she attacks faction that we can say betrayed old Alliance in hour of need. How can u even connect those things?

Oh grow up already. WoW is game and half the players are Horde and half are Alliance. Whatever story they come up with has to offer some form of "victory" to both sides. Expecting one side to dominate the other is just puerile.

We will talk about it when Horde loses something in war against Alliance, idk maybe city. And if you say Lordaeron: Sylvanas blew it up, not Alliance, and she made fools out of Anduin and his puppy in doing so.

Stop using that phrase please. It's extremely disrespectful. Honestly I have made an effort here to present an objective analysis of what has happened and, more importantly, why, but it seems that all you want to do is push a one-sided narrative, and then when anyone points out how immature that narrative is you resort to the old "mental gymnastics" ad hominem.

Sylvanas have deathcamps(or had, who knows how it is right now on PTR) in Darkshore, but please tell me more how great person she is, and all her decisions are justifiable. But ok. maybe i will try to find replacement for that phrase.

[Tortuga234]

Oh grow up already. WoW is game and half the players are Horde and half are Alliance. Whatever story they come up with has to offer some form of "victory" to both sides. Expecting one side to dominate the other is just puerile.

It is not though. It is about 75% Horde 25% Alliance. The side that brings the most money will always get the special treatment.

[Raelbo]

SO Alliance provoked Sylvanas, and she attacks faction that we can say betrayed old Alliance in hour of need. How can u even connect those things?

Firstly, the Alliance provoked the Horde, the leader of which was Garrosh, who ordered Sylvanas to take out Gilneas.

I can fully acknowledge how unfair it is on Gilneas that they get the short end of the stick for something the alliance did. But the fact remains that said attack was provoked. That is all that is necessary for what I said to hold true.

We will talk about it when Horde loses something in war against Alliance, idk maybe city. And if you say Lordaeron: Sylvanas blew it up, not Alliance, and she made fools out of Anduin and his puppy in doing so.

And you talk about the Horde doing mental gymnastics

The fact is that both factions lost a capital city. You'd be correct in saying that at this point though, the war seems to be going better for horde than alliance, but crikey, we're only in the first act. The way you're going on, it's like you're not going to be satisfied until all the horde players are forced to accept being executed and then have to reroll alliance.

Sylvanas have deathcamps(or had, who knows how it is right now on PTR) in Darkshore, but please tell me more how great person she is, and all her decisions are justifiable. But ok. maybe i will try to find replacement for that phrase.

From the Alliance PoV of course she's a monster. From the Horde PoV, and specifically the Forsaken PoV, she's a symbol of hope and victory. Let's not kid ourselves here, if the Alliance and Genn had had their way, the Forsaken would have been annihilated long ago.

I am sorry, but I do see Sylvanas's actions as pragmatic. The way she sees it there is simply no way that the Forsaken can peacefully coexist with the Alliance. So her solution is to destroy the Alliance before it destroys her. And given Genn's actions in Stormheim, can you really blame her? Do you really think that if she hadn't struck first that Genn would simply have let the Forsaken be?

[Furadds]

And alliance fans keep playing victim.

Didn't you start the war, almost wiped out an entire race and have fun mass revive corpses when the Alliance was trying to calm things down ? (read BtS)

#MakeTheHordeLoseAgain

I am sorry, but I do see Sylvanas's actions as pragmatic. The way she sees it there is simply no way that the Forsaken can peacefully coexist with the Alliance.

Isn't what Anduin tried to do ? Coexist ? Desolate Council says hi

[Raelbo]

Didn't you start the war, almost wiped out an entire race and have fun mass revive corpses when the Alliance was trying to calm things down ? (read BtS)

Genn Greymane started the war when he attacked Sylvanas in Stormheim

[Furadds]

Genn Greymane started the war when he attacked Sylvanas in Stormheim

You ask Greymane to let what happened to his people, kingdom and son go, but you couldn't imagine one second Sylvanas letting go of that ? Again, people bend facts when it suits them.

[Raelbo]

Isn't what Anduin tried to do ? Coexist ? Desolate Council says hi

Meanwhile sending his dog to assassinate her and block her interests in Stormheim, even during the extreme global threat posed by the Legion?

(yes I do realise that Anduin is genuine, simply illustrating how it looks from Sylvanas' perspective given the facts)

[RobertMugabe]

For the first part of this I will be making a case in defense of Sylvanas Windrunner and her actions.

So lets start with what makes Sylvanas....well...Sylvanas
-Former Ranger-General of Silvermoon
-Famous among the Blood Elves and High Elves
-Took a Human man(Nathanos Marris) into the High elf military.
-Promoted Nathanos to be a ranger lord and second in command over Lorthermar, and even her own sister Alleria(Alleria was a captain).
-Probably had a relationship with Nathanos....(Kind of creepy Student-Teacher thing.....)
-Sacrificed herself defending Silvermoon from Arthas and the Scourge
-Turned into a Banshee. Force to watch her people die, feels guilt over it, hatred for Arthas.
-Freed of his control she finds a group of Undead like and frees them from Arthas's control(Forms the Forsaken)
-Faced rejection from former allies and actively hunted down by the Alliance.
-Welcomed into the Horde by Thrall based on a suggestion By the Tauren who saw potential of redemption in Sylvanas and the Forsaken.
-Sylvanas ever since the death of Arthas has never been the same with a focus on keeping herself alive along with the Forsaken.
-Sylvanas fears dying and going to hell.
-The Horde seems to have a divide on the Forsaken(Orcs mostly hate the forsaken)
-Sylvanas has fought many battles and supported the overthrowing of Garrosh.
-Chosen by Voljin based on whispers from a being we know little about.



Okay so lets start with the Burning of Teldrassil:
This is perhaps one of the most difficult actions to defend, however their are at least 3-4 reasons why it was justified.
1. The Horde needed to complete its objective. The Horde's Objective was to kill the Night Elves hope and Saurfang fucked up that now did he? Since Saurfang failed at one of the easiest jobs in the World Sylvanas needed to really kill the Night Elves hope.
2. The Horde was never going acutally be able to take Teldrassil: Between the powers of the Druids, to the Worgan Sylvanas and the Horde would had to have siege the city for months, giving the Alliance enough time to have reinforced the city and the Horde would have taken mass casualties.
3. Honor means nothing in war. War is inherently a dishonorable action. The fact we have people arguing this has no honor fail to see that their is no honor in war.
4. Morality=Nothing: Let me point out that the Night Elves are not the type of people you want on your continent. It makes sense to burn their main city to make sure they do not hold a easily defendable position if the Horde was to continued there war. Morality has been thrown out the window as soon as you engage in war. Also the Alliance clearly doesnt care either because of:
A. they attempted to align with the Blood Trolls
B. Gen launched a Holy crusade in Legion which almost led to death for us all and he is not tried for treason.
C. Spymaster Shaw donated some weapons to the blood trolls(Again showing they have zero moral).
D. Using the void to raise creatures on Zandalar to fight for them.
E. Do I need to link the Terror of DarkShore?
Okay so lets talk about the Use of Blight at undercity:
1. The Horde needed to push back the Alliance and prevent them from overtaking their position. While killing their own troops was wrong they did not do it intentionally. More over it was simply collateral damage. Collateral damage is a common thing in war. If the Horde had not blighted, their evacuation may not have fully worked and the Horde army could have been crippled.
2. The Alliance clearly does not care about using dangerous weapons themselves(the void, the various special tide weapons they get from the Kultrians, and Light, along with Azerite).
3. It was very much clear that Sylvanas was saving the Blight as a last resort to save the city. She is a master general after all.

Now lets talk about Saurfang and why I think HE is the real problem:
1. Saurfang clearly care not much about honor. Treason is dishonorable, abandoning your allies and deserting is clearly dishonorable, attempting to start a revolution with the aid of your enemy is dishonorable. In a real military Saurfang would be executed for treason. Why people defend him about honor when his honor is a personal selfish honor.
2. He Sounds like Garrosh: Bare with me Horde fans and Alliance fans. The language Saurfang uses in Lost Honor and dialogue in game parallels very much with Garrosh. The most prime example is this:
"WHAT I WANT!....is my Horde back."
Tell me is that not Garrosh sounding? Like Garrosh Varok feels guilt over sins of the past and uses that as a excuse to justify their actions. Another thing is Saurfang talking about what His Horde is. This is similar to Garrosh's speech over the Mists Siege of Orgimmar Trailer.
3. Saurfang should know better. Saurfang should be someone who knows that the Horde and its people have various views but are united by the persecution they suffer and the fact the value teamwork. Not everyone in the Horde has honor like Saurfang. The Blood Elves, Nightborne, Goblins, the Maghar, the Forsaken all dont have the same honor like the Orcs. Saurfang has this narrow minded view of honor.

Now lets talk about the Derek Proudmoore thing:
1. Machiavelli principals: "The ends justified the means" this is a argument that is apply to the Alliance when they do wrong but not the Horde.
2. Baine fails to understand their current situation: The Horde has lost and take heavy casualties, their outposts are being leveled, the fucking King of Zandalar was murdered by a invasion by the Alliance. They Zandalri have been crippled and the Horde needs to respond and using Derek Proudmoore while Morally wrong is a excellent tactical choice and Garona and Lillian seem to think its fine.
3. Baine fails to understand the stakes of failure.
4. No other Horde leader has offered up a logical and reasonable option. You cant negotiate since Anduin will not negotiate with Sylvanas since he thinks she must go.


Now let me briefly disscuss Nathanos:
I think Nathanos might finally move away from Sylvanas for a few reasons.
1. its been shown in the warbringers: Sylvanas, Before the Storm and in the Dark Mirror that Nathanos is upset with the things Sylvanas has done.
2. The Terror of Darkshore cinematic and Nathanos's choice of wording. "We will hold this ground...For the Horde." Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to have said "For the Banshee Queen" or "For the Dark Lady"?
3. He seems to not just be bound to the Horde by loyalty to Sylvanas. He seems to want to be the hand of justice for the Forsaken against the persecution based on the conversation between him and Garona.
4. Nathanos is not blindly loyal to Sylvanas. Their does seem to be somewhat of the old self in himself he is trying to hide.
5. Were going to need a new Forsaken leader and Calia will not be it simply because she is a traitor and tried to usurper the Throne of Lorderon from someone who took the throne through right of conquest in a civil war.




Leave your thoughts down below.

My thoughts? Your post sounds incredibly apologist and hypocritical, but it's also extremely disturbing for me to think that someone takes this lore so personally that they have to write a wall of text like this

[Raelbo]

You ask Greymane to let what happened to his people, kingdom and son go, but you couldn't imagine one second Sylvanas letting go of that ? Again, people bend facts when it suits them.

So you're quite happy to condone the attempted genocide of the Forsaken race by Genn because he has a motive to hate them, but at the same time you'll condemn it when Sylvanas wants to do the same to the Alliance?

That's called a double standard, and you think it's ok because the Alliance are full of pretty races like humans and night elves, but the forsaken are just stinky abominations that need to be returned to the grave.

Besides, why tread over the same tired argument of who started what? We've already been over this in this thread (and a hundred before) and the simple fact is that every single attack by one faction on the other is backed by some kind of justification from the other. So yes, Greymane should have let it go. He chose not to, and this is the consequence.

[Reinaerd]

My thoughts? Your post sounds incredibly apologist and hypocritical, but it's also extremely disturbing for me to think that someone takes this lore so personally that they have to write a wall of text like this

Shit so cringy it gave me whiplash.

[Lelkowski]

Firstly, the Alliance provoked the Horde, the leader of which was Garrosh, who ordered Sylvanas to take out Gilneas.

I can fully acknowledge how unfair it is on Gilneas that they get the short end of the stick for something the alliance did. But the fact remains that said attack was provoked. That is all that is necessary for what I said to hold true.

War is ragin on, Sylvanas declared war, so Alliance can just genocide Vulpera, enslave Tortollans etc. after all they had connections to Zandalari, and they helped Horde.(I don't want it, i just ask if that is correct with your way of thought.)

And you talk about the Horde doing mental gymnastics

The fact is that both factions lost a capital city. You'd be correct in saying that at this point though, the war seems to be going better for horde than alliance, but crikey, we're only in the first act. The way you're going on, it's like you're not going to be satisfied until all the horde players are forced to accept being executed and then have to reroll alliance.

Theramore-crater, Teldrassil-barbecue, Azshara-given to Horde so they would leave Ashenvale to Elfs, they get both, Night Elves-much of population gone, and being ressed for Sylvanas, Gilneas-blighted.
Lordaeron-lost for Horde BUT civilians evacuated, Alliance leaders nearly killed(Jaina ex machina helps), Alliance profits? Blighted soldiers.
Looking how it goes i would say Blizzard wants to get Alliance players to reroll to horde, but who would be punching bags then?

From the Alliance PoV of course she's a monster. From the Horde PoV, and specifically the Forsaken PoV, she's a symbol of hope and victory. Let's not kid ourselves here, if the Alliance and Genn had had their way, the Forsaken would have been annihilated long ago.

I am sorry, but I do see Sylvanas's actions as pragmatic. The way she sees it there is simply no way that the Forsaken can peacefully coexist with the Alliance. So her solution is to destroy the Alliance before it destroys her. And given Genn's actions in Stormheim, can you really blame her? Do you really think that if she hadn't struck first that Genn would simply have let the Forsaken be?

Except much of the Horde is disgusted by her ways too, u can see that with resurrecting Derek Proudmoore.

[Tortuga234]

Genn Greymane started the war when he attacked Sylvanas in Stormheim

Sylvanas started the war when she ran with her tail between her legs when facing a world-ending threat on the Broken Shore leaving Varian and the Alliance to die. Stormheim was a justified retaliation.

[Deleted]

We're very sorry to cause you inconvenience by being genocided, betrayed and losing every major battle. Where can we send reparations for our misdeeds?

Start with executing all SI:7 agents responsible for the Broken Shore. This would be a sign.

- - - Updated - - -

Sylvanas started the war when she betrayed the Alliance when facing a world-ending threat on the Broken Shore. Stormheim was a justified retaliation.

Sylvanas was not the one betraying anyone. Her orders for her troops have been securing the Aegis. The other things was her own, private project, which had NOTHING to do with the Alliance at all. While Genn's private project of revenge was instead blown up to a full-scale attack on all the Forsaken on the Broken Shore. After the SI:7 fueled disaster on the Broken Shore, which led to the death of Varian and Vol'jin. Go play the Rogue OH campaign. If I could, I would have executed Shaw right after getting my hands on him.

[Tortuga234]

Meanwhile sending his dog to assassinate her and block her interests in Stormheim, even during the extreme global threat posed by the Legion?

(yes I do realise that Anduin is genuine, simply illustrating how it looks from Sylvanas' perspective given the facts)

So fucking incredibly hypocritical. Attacking a double crossing bitch while world ending threat in stormheim is bad.
Being a double-crossing bitch on the Broken Shore dooming the Alliance while world ending threat is fine.

- - - Updated - - -

Start with executing all SI:7 agents responsible for the Broken Shore. This would be a sign.

- - - Updated - - -



Sylvanas was not the one betraying anyone. Her orders for her troops have been securing the Aegis. The other things was her own, private project, which had NOTHING to do with the Alliance at all. While Genn's private project of revenge was instead blown up to a full-scale attack on all the Forsaken on the Broken Shore. After the SI:7 fueled disaster on the Broken Shore, which led to the death of Varian and Vol'jin. Go play the Rogue OH campaign. If I could, I would have executed Shaw right after getting my hands on him.

Are you even?
Sly-anus abandons the Alliance on Broken shore, Varian dies. And you expect the Alliance not to avenge him? Aegis my ass, she started the war when she decided to flee in the face of a Legion invasion. Its a wonder Genn didn't prepare better for that assasination so she could actually die already.

[Furadds]

Meanwhile sending his dog to assassinate her and block her interests in Stormheim, even during the extreme global threat posed by the Legion?

(yes I do realise that Anduin is genuine, simply illustrating how it looks from Sylvanas' perspective given the facts)

Her interest was to submit and control the Goddess Queen of the Valkyr thanks to a pact with Helya, I'd say we avoided some nasty stuff here, but I do agree that from the Horde and especially the Forsaken perspective it makes sense, I could def agree with you on that. As I usually say it's all about context and perspective. The same way the Alliance felt betrayed (again) by the Horde on the Broken Shore and lost Varian in the process even though the Horde had no other option.

I'm not trying to insult nor blame people for what they believe in, I'm just trying to genuinely understand everyone's motives. And to me, trying to justify everything Sylvanas does when it clearly crossed many lines, I don't call that pragmatic, I call it insane.

But hey, it's just the beginning of BfA and it has been said multiple times lots of stuff will be unveiled regarding Sylvanas during the course of the expansion, so maybe we're all talking for nothing, even though I highly doubt the writers can do something about that considering the low level they've been used to lately.

So you're quite happy to condone the attempted genocide of the Forsaken race by Genn because he has a motive to hate them, but at the same time you'll condemn it when Sylvanas wants to do the same to the Alliance?

That's called a double standard, and you think it's ok because the Alliance are full of pretty races like humans and night elves, but the forsaken are just stinky abominations that need to be returned to the grave.

Besides, why tread over the same tired argument of who started what? We've already been over this in this thread (and a hundred before) and the simple fact is that every single attack by one faction on the other is backed by some kind of justification from the other. So yes, Greymane should have let it go. He chose not to, and this is the consequence.

I never said that, not do I wish that. Don't put words in my mouth. If the survival of the Forsaken requires submitting Gods, then yes I do have a problem with that. Everything she does isn't for the Horde, but for the Forsaken. Every Horde chief is agreeing on that.

I don't think Forsaken are stinky abominations that need to be returned to the grave. I wish they were a complex race but Blizzard turned them into Nazis (experiments on the living, torture, death camps, etc) so it's not even funny anymore. Back then when I started playing Vanilla right after War3, I gladly created and leveled up a Forsaken because they were so different, and that made them interesting. Now it's all Nathanos blahblah.