I hate Sylvanas, but I still want to stab Baine

[Mehrunes]

Alliance posters want Baine in charge, more news at 11.

Damn, why 11. It's such a shocking - shocking, I tell you - development that I need to hear more about it right here and right now. You can't expect me to wait for more news about this unexpected turn of events till 11.

Well no, since all the things you present require a character to be part of the Horde in the first place. Plus Baine has little meaningful interaction with the Alliance; an Alliance-only player will only have seen Baine in the Derek cinematic so it would make sense they'd find him admirable without all the Horde-only context.

Jesus Christ... The entire point of this discussion is whether or not Baine is "Alliance in everything but name". So of course he's technically Horde. Him being technically in the Horde wasn't the point of contention for obvious reasons given what the topic is. And all the things I presented point a clear picture of him favoring Alliance over the Horde and there's no two ways about it.

[Super Dickmann]

She kinda flips back to that mode now anyway and whole time she was "angery" she did precisely nothing aside from expunging blood elfs from Dalaran only to that enver be portrayed in game and then them returning in Legion as if nothing happened and Jaina being CONSTANTLY showns as WRONG, WRONG, EXTRA WRONG with WRONGBERRY SAUCE. She only shown in good light when she reverts to her peaceful ways in BfA. I am so sick and tired of this flying circus that i would rather farm ore entire expansion or do fetch quests for Khadgar then to stomach more of that "conflict" that isnt really a conflict but a lsaughter followed by Horde posters being snarky and smug and then Alliance being a plot device AGAIN.

Of course, the person fighting is always wrong in this game because it's made by Californians pushing babby's first anti-war message. That doesn't make said message less laughable.

[VladlTutushkin]

Damn, why 11. It's such a shocking - shocking, I tell you - development that I need to hear more about it right here and right now. You can't expect me to wait for more news about this unexpected turn of events till 11.




Jesus fucking Christ... The entire point of this discussion is whether or not Baine is "Alliance in everything but name". So no shit he's technically Horde. And all the things I presented point a clear picture of him favoring Alliance over the Horde and there's no two ways about it.

Maybe thats just me but one of the very few things that would cause me to became a turncoat is that if my country commited genocide against another country/nation. And i am very patriotic and pride myself on that.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course, the person fighting is always wrong in this game because it's made by Californians pushing babby's first anti-war message. That doesn't make said message less laughable.

Most likely. But again if they cant write such narrative - i would rather not have it. After all we dont go to sushi place to eat pizza and vice versa. Got what i mean?

[Super Dickmann]

Most likely. But again if they cant write such narrative - i would rather not have it. After all we dont go to sushi place to eat pizza and vice versa. Got what i mean?

I think we've long since settled that we can't agree in terms of end point because we have irreconcilable positions on what kind of story we enjoy relative to what kind of story the game can produce so there's not really much point in carrying on.

Though as regards your first point, Baine didn't rebel over genocide, he rebelled because Derek got raised.

[Asaliah]

Next expansion we will be the warchief

[Ielenia]

How about repeatedly betraying the Horde in favor of the Alliance? Or corresponding with Alliance leader even when his Warchief explicitly told him to cease communication?

I guess you're going to completely ignore the reasoning behind those actions, right?

Or exiling Horde member under his jurisdiction for wanting to fight the Alliance? Or justifying Alliance aggression in a war started by them?

I'm just amused that you guys equate "unwillingness to go to war" as "not having a spine". I'd say it takes more "spine" to stand by your beliefs than just caving to peer pressure.

Or desiring to surrender to the Alliance at the first hurdle?

"First hurdle"? The Horde has gone through many "hurdles" since their "beloved" leader made the biggest bonfire ever.

[fathom81]

In cataclysm 'new races' stopped having a faction town, and lately even racial leaders (only the horde, cause all alliance leaders are alive/replaced...)
If either baine or Sylv go down the horde keeps loosing identity as a band of convenience and alliance seems more and more as a unified front as its name implies.
Anything can happen after 8.2...

[VladlTutushkin]

I think we've long since settled that we can't agree in terms of end point because we have irreconcilable positions on what kind of story we enjoy relative to what kind of story the game can produce so there's not really much point in carrying on.

Though as regards your first point, Baine didn't rebel over genocide, he rebelled because Derek got raised.

Even Blizz shown that this isnt true. But they did it in their own, stupid and contrived manner by making Lor'Themar mention that what happened is a "long overdue" response after Teldrassil. So even game mentions that Baine was about to go against her after genocide and just was... hesitant. You can say he was afraid or maybe he wasnt sure WHAT exactly he can do to "make himself heard" and all that. Whatever. And on the first topic - as i said, WoW cant provide good faction conflict so for example Warhammer titles are my thing for that, while on another hand WoW was simply PERFECT for non-faction conflict while Warhammer cant make any two races band together because there it isnt really a possbility. (aside from few rare cases)

[Ielenia]

with the fact that the Alliance sent an entire Night Elven army to Silithus for even more aggression there being the entire reason why War of Thorns actually worked).

And I see you're going to complete ignore the fact that the only reason the Alliance mobilized that army toward Silithus is because the Horde was already preparing to war and fed the Alliance wrong information, right?

Derek didn't even join the Forsaken to begin with, nor was his free will being denied, because she didn't mind control him.

He was still a forsaken. And I see you did not play the Horde campaign at all if you're claiming his free will wasn't going to be denied to him.

You're saying this as if Alliance posters haven't been bitching about it ever since Cataclysm and using it as one of the chief examples of their HORDE BIAS conspiracy theory.

The only "bitching" from the Alliance (and the Horde) was because the expansion was almost entirely Thrall-centric, ascribing Aspect powers to him and basically making him "green Jesus", not because it was a Horde leader.

- - - Updated - - -

Alliance posters want Baine in charge, more news at 11.

The only reason I want him as the leader of the Horde is so that, for at least one expansion, the Alliance could be the "bad guys" instead of always the Horde.

[Aucald]

I never once said the Horde hadn't committed terrible things but the Alliance is far from innocent. Also, the Kaldorei said fuck you to the Orcs because they believed they were all savage brutes that didn't deserve to share the same air as them. You forget how INCREDIBLY xenophobic Kaldorei used to be. Also, Sylvanas didn't commit genocide. By definition, genocide requires systematically eliminating an entire race, culture, or creed. She just burned down one city. By your logic, the Alliance committed genocide by rampaging through Dazar'alor.

Teldrassil isn't just a city - that's Darnassus, and it is effectively a de facto city-state given that it is the main (and sole) population center of the Night Elven race (just like Stormwind is for Humans, or the Exodar is for Draenei). Teldrassil also has the minor settlements of Rut'theran, the Ban'ethil Barrow Den, Starbreeze Village, Shadowglen, and Dolanaar. All of those villages, settlements, and the capitol city of the Night Elves went up in those flames. I definitely call the Burning of Teldrassil a quasi-genocide if not an outright genocide - and Dazar'alor is not at all comparable to the loss of life that occurred at Teldrassil. If the Alliance firebombed Zuldazar and killed the majority of its inhabitants you'd be able to make a case that Teldrassil was near to what happened during the Battle of Dazar'alor. Dazar'alor of course is still there and none the worse for wear, and Zandalari losses at Dazar'alor were quite minimal discounting the death of Rastakhan.

[Ielenia]

Yes, he went against Sylvanas over the brother of his human buddy. And in Stormheim the Alliance destroyed the Forsaken fleet and stopped Sylvanas from achieving her objective. It's about as clean a win as you can get, it's not like they were going to kill the Forsaken faction leader in a side story to a single questing zone. Speaking of which, we know from BTS that Sylvanas would not have gone to war were Varian still in charge, so even your first point is wrong.

How is it "wrong" since Sylvanas did go to war since she believed the most peace-loving character in WoW would not make the peace last?

[VladlTutushkin]

How is it "wrong" since Sylvanas did go to war since she believed the most peace-loving character in WoW would not make the peace last?

50 years isnt enough bro! Have to kill all Alliance races and scatter the survivors to ensure world peace, thats the stuff.

[Super Dickmann]

Even Blizz shown that this isnt true. But they did it in their own, stupid and contrived manner by making Lor'Themar mention that what happened is a "long overdue" response after Teldrassil. So even game mentions that Baine was about to go against her after genocide and just was... hesitant. You can say he was afraid or maybe he wasnt sure WHAT exactly he can do to "make himself heard" and all that. Whatever. And on the first topic - as i said, WoW cant provide good faction conflict so for example Warhammer titles are my thing for that, while on another hand WoW was simply PERFECT for non-faction conflict while Warhammer cant make any two races band together because there it isnt really a possbility. (aside from few rare cases)

Warcraft is fucked by its format more than anything. But I disagree with your reading. Lor'themar says that he's shown what cracks exist in the Horde since Teldrassil. He does not claim that Baine acted on that basis. We see Baine fairly often and not only does he not bring it up but he's fairly chill about everything except leaving Saurfang behind. Right after his troops get gassed he calmly asks Nathanos what the plan is.

@Ielenia

Believe me, I'd like the Alliance to be more Morally Grey (TM) as well, but the Horde doesn't need to be Baine for this to happen. All that's needed is more things like the dwarf imperialism storyline, humans wanting to burn Forsaken hearts and Genn being aggressive, but just in his vengeance again. Disregarding that it will never happen since our treasure is immortal, turning the Alliance into the agents of a cartoon baddie while the Horde become perfection incarnate will be just as bad as the opposite, barring the memes it will produce.

Sylvanas was wrong in her assumption, but that assumption wasn't that Anduin was evil but that Anduin was weak and that he couldn't keep Genn from acting out. With azerite on the table, it'd be the equivalent of giving your enemy, who's already shown they'd attack you at will, the go ahead to build nuclear weapons and hoping they don't drop them first. She trusted Varian, so she knew this wouldn't happen with him, hence no war. She doubted Anduin's perfection and his effect on the unbelievers and for that she'll be purged and replaced by a noblesavage.

[Mehrunes]

Stop playing dumb. You know exactly what I meant by "always on the defensive". None of what you mentioned wouldn't have happened if Sylvanas didn't go "I don't believe in peace. Wipe them all from existence" and then made the biggest barbecue ever.

Yes, I know exactly what you meant. You were pushing the false crap Alliance narrative that has been false ever since its inception. That's what you meant to do.

And what you're still doing, because the stark majority of what I mentioned happened long before Teldrassil and more than half before Sylvanas even becoming the Warchief. You trying to cherry-pick few examples out and make a separate point out of it doesn't make it so. Even your cherry-picking is wrong, because Silithus still happened before Teldrassil. Which means your reply here makes zero sense whatsoever.

And even if your cherry-picking BS was a valid argument (which it isn't), you're still trying to put the cart before the horse here in an effort to vindicate the Alliance in a situation where you argued yourself into a hole. None of that would have happened if Sylvanas didn't go "I don't believe in peace"? She wouldn't go "I don't believe in peace" if not for the earlier cases of aggression from the Alliance (that you also handwaved because Alliance lollogic).

Sorry if I interrupted you in your heartfelt cry about how Alliance is an innocent victim always forced to defend itself (but for which you need to create a complete falsification of the WoW's story), I guess?

The only time the Alliance was actually on the offensive and it didn't pan out at all, unfortunately.

Right. Completely fucking Sylvanas' plans up by accident and doing so with complete impunity even in light of their High King stating they were in the wrong totally leads to the conclusion of "it didn't pan out at all". But hey, if you squinted your eyes, then gouged them all to sacrifice them on the altar of "Alliance is an innocent little flower that has to defend itself from Horde's unprovoked aggression all the time" narrative, I guess it may look that way.

Sure thing, Baine hater. If you'd like to go against established evidence, not much of a reason to attempt to discuss things with you.

Do you have anything else other than your "Baine hater" ad-hominem cop-out you've been throwing throughout the thread? Oh, why am I asking. If you had you wouldn't squirm out of the argument the way you did. Because the real reason why you want to make no attempt to discuss it further is because deep inside you probably realized how weak your arguments in defense of Baine really are.

I mean, he literally went against Sylvanas to do what he thought was right, but that somehow doesn't count as "growing a spine" for some reason.

And it doesn't count because he did it believing Zelling covered up the tracks perfectly, i.e. he expected to face no repercussions for his actions. Gee, Baine skulking around in the shadows like a coward doesn't really count as him growing a spine. Who'd have guessed.

I guess you're going to completely ignore the reasoning behind those actions, right?

At Theramore he wanted to repay the debt he felt he owed Jaina (which made no sense in light of Jaina's aggression against his people since Grimtotem rebellion as it is). There was nothing about the Horde in that. The second time he was an inconsistent mess where he ignored things like Sylvanas blighting his own people but threw a fit when she resurrected Jaina's brother. I wonder what could be the reason for this inconsistency... And those reasons not only do not help him here one iota, but even if he did actual pro-Horde reasons, that still wouldn't vindicate him and change the fact that he betrayed the Horde to aid the Alliance, making him more Alliance than Horde in the process.

I'm just amused that you guys equate "unwillingness to go to war" as "not having a spine". I'd say it takes more "spine" to stand by your beliefs than just caving to peer pressure.

Pray tell, where are you seeing me equating those things? Because that's not in what you quoted.

"First hurdle"? The Horde has gone through many "hurdles" since their "beloved" leader made the biggest bonfire ever.

Given how Lordaeron was planned by Sylvanas and she moved the population to safety in time and how Arathi is still unresolved, what are those hurdles, again?

And I see you're going to complete ignore the fact that the only reason the Alliance mobilized that army toward Silithus is because the Horde was already preparing to war and fed the Alliance wrong information, right?

How can I ignore a "fact" that you just made up? A Good War makes clear that when Saurfang decided to march to "Silithus" the area around the sword was already secured by Nathanos. There was no Alliance for them to fight there. So no, the Horde sure as shit was not preparing to war in (at least as far as Alliance knew) Silithus.

That was the entire reason why some Horde members were confused about it or even figured out it was a ruse. Hell, the story even outright mentions that the Alliance sent the Night Elven army to Silithus because they were concerned with the Horde's fixation about the zone, not because the Horde was about to wage war against an enemy that wasn't there.

He was still a forsaken. And I see you did not play the Horde campaign at all if you're claiming his free will wasn't going to be denied to him.

When did he join then? I don't remember that part. And really, was Sylvanas going to rob him of his free will in the same way that the Lich King denied the Scourge members of theirs? If not, yet you still want to insist on your nonsense, you're blatantly misrepresenting what the issue of free will with the Forsaken even is about.

The only "bitching" from the Alliance (and the Horde) was because the expansion was almost entirely Thrall-centric, ascribing Aspect powers to him and basically making him "green Jesus", not because it was a Horde leader.

Which changes what, exactly?

[TheImperios]

Must have some serious cognitive dissonance for some of you peeps. Your like flat earthers shown the earths spherical rotation and who still believes its flat somehow.

Hating on a character for trying to defend the honor of his faction in favour of a character whos stopped representing said factions standards, there's something unhealthy about such people. Its also obvious when shit hits the fan for that weird following you have, your cry the loudest wondering why the obvious evil character was beaten.

All I hope is the choices these devs make actually matters, that those who choose to stand with sylvanas instead of baine and saurfang are punished in a way that shows impact for those choices, like any future horde content is denied to them. That would give this meaning.

I hate Sylvanas, OP hates Sylvanas, but working with the enemy during wartime, even for noble reasons, is still a despicable act. We do not like that we are forced to sympathise with collaborateurs. We do not like the narrative in which being good is equated to serving the Alliance.

We were promised a story in which we could fight for our respective factions, to be proud of them and to identify with their values. But we were lied to, for only the Alliance has been given such a story. Meanwhile the Horde players are offered a sadistic choice: remain loyal and be the punching bags for the good humans, or remain honourable and be sidekicks for the good humans.

I would prefer to fight humans without being told how bad I am for doing that. Give us a justifiable reason to fight. Give us a good leader to rally around. Give us a villainous Alliance character to hate. Is that too much to ask?

[Feanoro]

Sylvanas was wrong in her assumption, but that assumption wasn't that Anduin was evil but that Anduin was weak and that he couldn't keep Genn from acting out. With azerite on the table, it'd be the equivalent of giving your enemy, who's already shown they'd attack you at will, the go ahead to build nuclear weapons and hoping they don't drop them first. She trusted Varian, so she knew this wouldn't happen with him, hence no war. She doubted Anduin's perfection and his effect on the unbelievers and for that she'll be purged and replaced by a noblesavage.

If only Blizz thought their own stories through like you.

[ravenmoon]

Also notice they are all connected to the same shackle on each side.

Its art, who says it has to be practical?

For all we know it is magic holding those joints

[Goradan]

Sylvanas is senselessly hostile and out for herself, Baine is stupidly devoted to peace to the point it gets his people killed

Neither are good for the horde

How many others feel similarly?

This is what happens when the pussy horde and the evil horde are not working together. Thrall pussified it, Garrosh ruined it, Vol'Jin didn't do much and now Sylvanas is ruining it even more. And not a lot of leaders of the horde have the balls to lead.

[The Stormbringer]

Baine lives just as long as it takes for Sylvanas to figure out how to raise him as an undead mind controlled warrior that is even more loyal than Nathanos. To serve as her new muscle and a warning to all to not cross or fail her.

She could always use him as the main bulk of a new abomination.

EDIT: I miss the Horde of WC3. They were badass, only struck out when they needed to, and genuinely tried to give peace (or at least non-hostility) a chance. I really wish Rexxar would just kick Sylvanas off the throne, take over, and return to form from back then. It feels like they're setting Baine up to be the new Warchief and no one wants that.

[Alex86el]

He suffers so you could be honorable.

Literally a christ pose, Jesus.

LMAO XD
they actually did this? hahaha