--- snip --- I'm unable to understand the whole "Sylvanas is smart and a master schemer," when there's nothing in the game that supports it. All that we have that support it is Word of God.
Wrathgate/Siege of Lordaeron:
Nothing in it states that she knew about it or even planned it and if she did it was an incredibly stupid plan. The "master plan" involved throwing things at Arthas and hoping he died instead of cutting off his escape routes and then bombarding him with the stuff until he died. Then there's the rebellion itself. If she was truly a master manipulator she would have known it happened and planned for it to happen in order to harvest sympathy points and divert attention away from the Wrathgate since she could easily shovel the blame onto someone else and get rid of anyone opposing her in one fell swoop while at the same time shore up her political support.
Equip Varimathras with a device that blocked his ability to use telepathy, then install a device in secret that monitored his use of telepathy because reading his personality it would be quite obvious that an enslaved Dreadlord would try to get on top. Then when she knew who his coconspirators were, allowed the rebellion to happen, because she knew that others would help her because rather the devil you know. Then finish it off with a short questline where you were sent to investigate the corpse of someone that was just found murdered. The corpse would have some sensitive documents nearby. Reporting back to Sylvanas she would go, "I knew him, he was my advisor and it seemed that he was trying to sell secrets to my enemies when they betrayed him. I'll have my guards look into it, I promise you." Of course, nothing would happen and the reason she said those things were to control the narrative. Then a later reveal would put this event in a new light.
Meeting with Godfrey:
No smart manipulator would ever assume that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend." Instead, it would be "the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy." That means meeting them with caution instead of with open arms as she did and got shot for it.
Siege of Andorhal:
Managed to win against an opponent who had already decided to stop fighting since the logistics were against him. His nearest source of reinforcement was far away and her's was right next door. She had a massive and overwhelming advantage.
Becoming the Warchief:
A master schemer would have put "becoming Warchief" as something that could happen although extremely unlikely if they set out gaining influence. Instead the video shows her in real surprise as the emotion reaches her eyes.
Stealing control of Ayer:
Was done in the dumbest way it could possibly be done. Create a diplomat mission instead of a clandestine one. This would ensure that any movement against her would create tensions and be an excuse for starting the war she wanted to have. And she could go there with guards without anyone being able to do anything without creating tensions.
Burning of Teldrassil:
Nothing she did was premeditated, it was a purely emotional reaction based on what Summermoon said instead of brilliant premeditation. No one could see her and her rage was real as it reached her eyes instead of a pretend rage. A smarter way would have been to normalising the cut. Announce that the penalty for trying to help them would be to execute some of them, That would leave the highly-trained army coming back to get her out unable to act based on the fear of consequences. Then she could invent some NE attackers and execute the NE she had threatened to do. Then she could promise more would die as a punishment and at this point, of course, the NE would act thus perpetuating the cycle until everyone was dead And by making it as a consequence of someone's else actions she could have drawn it out and legitimised her actions which would remove any justification of a rebellion against her.
Second Siege of Lordaeron:
You only use scorched earth tactics if you know you're gonna lose and if doing so nets you a great tactical advantage as the areas is unable to be that useful if reconquered. Until she loses she knows that she's gonna win. And her contingency would be rendered ineffective since it's an upgraded version of her main weapon and if someone could defeat her main weapon they would be able to create great colds, that points towards one person only, Jaina Proudmore, and if she showed up the contingency itself would also be useless to kill Anduin as Jaina can just teleport him out of danger. Result: Massive resentment from her people and an area that could never be reconquered even if greater Lordaeron was retaken.
Time as Warchief:
In the loyalist questline whenever she speaks you get the impression she's in total control and three steps ahead of the rebels. Then in the Mok'gara she looses her cool when she's scratches which makes a lie of the whole "in control and three steps ahead" part.
Loyalist ending:
Before her ouster due to incomåpetently telling her true feelings like an 80s villain, she had refused to make a deal with Anduin since he was untrustworthy because of his advisors, while at the same time having no qualms with making a deal with Azshara whose name is practically synonymous with backstabbing and untrustworthy. "I made a deal with Azshara because she would have honored it." Let me rephrase that to a version that actually makes sense and makes Sylvanas look smart, "I made a deal with Sylvanas because I could somewhat anticipate when she would betray it."
Serving the Jailer:
"I will never let Arthas control me!" and "this undead existence is a curse." She then willingly serves the Jailer in order to extend her curse which she spreads to others without their consent.
I could understand if she was an unreliable narrator, which would make her an interesting character. Instead, we have this abomination of a character who fails all the time, except when she has an overwhelming advantage, that is only Word of God and massive Plot Armour competent. Is she smarter and better at manipulating than the others? Yes, she is, as they're unable to manipulate their way out of a wet newspaper.
The abilities of anyone are only seen as competent if their opposers also have competent skills, else they just less incompetent than their opposition. Sherlock Holmes would just be another smart guy without the existence of antagonists who really tested him and. Else it would just be Holmes smart - the British police massively stupid. Instead, it's the British police smart and Sherlock Holmes many times smarter.
Sylvanas is in no way portrayed as smart since her opposition is bottom levels of acting stupidly and still manages to foil her schemes, which in turn makes her master scheming and manipulation seem even more incompetent than it already is.
People admiring her just seems like the Sunk Cost fallacy to me, people have already invested in her emotionally and thus they have to make up and believe fiction about her in order to justify the emotional attachment they already have because everything that she has done in-game of supposedly brilliant things is on the bottom 1.000.000 of brilliant and manipulative moves anyone have ever done. High school students are better at pulling of intrigue than her. I've lived for less than 40 years and I'm a better schemer and manipulator than someone who's lived for centuries and supposedly knows the ins and outs of people and their actions.
Mod Edit: Let's avoid antagonizing people right off and focus instead on the actual substance of the argument.