I dont want “renewal”. Here is why.

[VladlTutushkin]

Me likey paladins, more so scarlets.



She did make them. That's why I think it is hard for Blizzard to detach the Forsaken from this character. I said this quite a while ago.. a lot of people didn't seem interested in having a new leader for that race.



I know some others been wanting Voss to become the new leader, but I am not down with this idea. If I had to pick between the two, I would give it to Calia at least she has royality roots tied in with hugely popular character in this franchise which is Arthas. Plus I like her mog, so that helps.

Was having this discussion and someone mentioned why can't Arthas just become the new leader of the Forsaken? Honestly I think a lot of people wouldn't enjoy that, but it was a recommendation I have never heard of before.

Ultimately I think the best bet since it's a touchy subject.. if Sylvanas will not remain the leader...

I think it is best to stick with the council route. Which would would mean Voss and Calia would be on it. Personally myself I would add a couple of fun characters to the council to potentially make awesome chemistry on the council. Which I have always informed people I love the whole apothecary vibe so like some guy that fits that mold. Personally I am down with a warlock for this. (Since it is popular with that race) Rogue is taken with Voss so she can lead secret operatives..but I probably would've put a dude there. Still position already filled. So maybe an undead general/warrior guy for battle tactics. They could add even more if they wanted... oh just don't make the male Forsaken be footstools for women and have zero personality and I think they will be ok. *cough* Nathanos *cough* (which a lot of customers seemed to really dislike..) Make all the characters have their own strengths and weaknesses.

The game is sorely lacking some fun characters. This is why I feel Bwonsamdi was such a hit. I personally enjoyed Flynn quite a bit..cause they were fun. SL kinda suffers from seriousness, but it's fine if it ends like that. I would rather it end on a solemn note. If it even gets to end.

Digressing, some people might not enjoy the council route they already set up. Still the Blood Elves already have this kinda set up and I felt like it worked fine. It's just one character tends to hog the spotlight...



Yes sadorcs. Nobody wants wallowing in depression orcs anymore. I offered a couple solutions already. Would be nice for them to be more lively again.


Well... how people feel about certain characters being wetnoodle leaders. This is how I feel about Voss, tbh Calia isn't that much better since she is peaceful. The game seems to suffer from monotone characters.


Well... Tyrande beheaded Sylvana's lover. (To much of the glee of the customers. I honestly wasn't in that boat but whatever...) She went on a rampage that you literally had to follow piles of corpses to find her...a long with taking down a big guy in a cinematic. It's not enough retribution for you?

Let's switch this, what if Sylvanas beheaded Malfurion. I mean it seems kinda harsh to me, but to each their own. Sylvanas lost someone she was attached to. Why is it less drastic? Because people didn't particularly like Nathanos?


What else do people need? They can continue on with this if they really wanted to. Tie it into the finale somehow.. (Which people keep asking for) I prefer Tyrande is in the right state of mind to deal with it. Instead of blind rage.

Blind rage, bloody vengeance and glorious death. I take those any day over pitiful weakness, pathetic surrender to the fate and acceptance of “your place”.

Nathanos was literally “who?” Until recently when Danuser picked him up and essentially replaced with his self insert.

One beheaded crook in exchange for a largest and most humiliating military defeat not only of night elves but of the whole Alliance is not gonna cut it.

Thrall came close to the right idea - Sylvanas head on a stick is a good way to set things on the right path, even though that is still quite a cheap price to pay.

[Venziir]

You do know that there's three letters in the game that make why the "annual war crime whoopsie" can't not happen right? It is called World of WARcraft....

Oh god, how is this argument still around? WARcraft doesn't automatically equal "Horde vs Alliance". It just equals "war", be it between factions, vs Old Gods, Legion, Sha etc etc etc. Every expansion has been one of WAR.

[DatToffer]

Oh god, how is this argument still around? WARcraft doesn't automatically equal "Horde vs Alliance". It just equals "war", be it between factions, vs Old Gods, Legion, Sha etc etc etc. Every expansion has been one of WAR.

Doesn't Blizzard like repeating that Horde/Alliance conflict is at the core of the games ?

[VladlTutushkin]

Doesn't Blizzard like repeating that Horde/Alliance conflict is at the core of the games ?

And yet they always fail to make a good plot out of it.

[Ardenaso]

You do know that there's three letters in the game that make why the "annual war crime whoopsie" can't not happen right? It is called World of WARcraft....

it became world of "peace'craft since like Warcraft 3

[Kithelle]

Precisely.

It's always funny how Horde players always have the gall to say stuff like "But it's warcraft, it's the point, war crimes will happen because it's the setting, deal with it!!!! not peacecraft, warcrat!!!!", but then they still cry and moan about Camp Taurajo, which was an insignificant little camp (totally comparable to Teldrassil lol), or still go on about that incident at the Sunwell with Alleria, which resulted in a total body count of 0 people. Not counting the Void ethereals who were defeated and destroyed in 2 minutes. And let's not even talk about the Purge of Dalaran...

So would Horde players understand that the Alliance nuking Orgrimmar or Silvermoon is for the sake of the setting and the plot, and would come to terms with it, or would they start complaining that Blizzard has a bias against them? Hmm...

It's easy to say "but it's Warcraft, this needs to happen, deal with it" when your favourite is not on the receiving end of the genocide.

And it's not just that...still love to complain about losing 2 warchiefs...the first one was nothing more than a hot headed war monger, he had little depth to him other then Grrrrr WAR! Vol'jin was a lame duck warchief that unfortunately did little other than fill a chair till Sylvanas' turn

We lost Varian, he was a awesome character and had a lot of depth to him...he was probably one of the best Alliance leaders we've had in the game, and we've lost Anduin (opinions heavily vary over him) so it's not like the Alliance hasn't lost anyone

We've lost 2 racial cities and as you mentioned earlier Theramore...the only one the Horde "lost" was nuked by the plague by Sylvanas herself.

Alliance suffers huge losses, Horde typically gets better things...and yet they're always playing the martyr...

[Syegfryed]

She did make them. That's why I think it is hard for Blizzard to detach the Forsaken from this character. I said this quite a while ago.. a lot of people didn't seem interested in having a new leader for that race.

it was not that hard, it quite easy actually, they had the whole council of forsaken leaders, leading the forsaken while sylvanas was absent, they could have re-used the concept and bring the idea forth, Like bringing prominent forsaken people, like, one military guy, one apothecary and one priest, some sort of council of three leaders like the dwarves

but they are delusionals thinking Calia is the best option, trading one sylvanas for another version of it, but now holy model.

- - - Updated - - -

And it's not just that...still love to complain about losing 2 warchiefs...the first one was nothing more than a hot headed war monger, he had little depth to him other then Grrrrr WAR! Vol'jin was a lame duck warchief that unfortunately did little other than fill a chair till Sylvanas' turn

We lost Varian, he was a awesome character and had a lot of depth to him...he was probably one of the best Alliance leaders we've had in the game, and we've lost Anduin (opinions heavily vary over him) so it's not like the Alliance hasn't lost anyone

We've lost 2 racial cities and as you mentioned earlier Theramore...the only one the Horde "lost" was nuked by the plague by Sylvanas herself.

Alliance suffers huge losses, Horde typically gets better things...and yet they're always playing the martyr...

lmao, this has to be a bait, like, you seriously believe in this distorted version?

did you forget is not just two but FOUR warchiefs?

And no, Anduin will not be lost, be real. He is clearly, blatantly, coming back

[Nerovar]

Pre-WC3, you mean. WC3 was released closer to WC1 than to SL. Not much of a foundation. Many people are utterly deluded on what the story is about.

I don't know what to tell you. It's literally the foundation of Warcraft as per definition. The first two games established the setting and introduced the two main factions of the game that still take centre stage in most modern story developments. If you came from a background of playing WC1 and WC2 you'll most likely see this as the baseline of the setting since these games introduced most parts of WoW that are integral to the story to this day.

[chilipopper]

Precisely.

It's always funny how Horde players always have the gall to say stuff like "But it's warcraft, it's the point, war crimes will happen because it's the setting, deal with it!!!! not peacecraft, warcrat!!!!", but then they still cry and moan about Camp Taurajo, which was an insignificant little camp (totally comparable to Teldrassil lol), or still go on about that incident at the Sunwell with Alleria, which resulted in a total body count of 0 people. Not counting the Void ethereals who were defeated and destroyed in 2 minutes. And let's not even talk about the Purge of Dalaran...

So would Horde players understand that the Alliance nuking Orgrimmar or Silvermoon is for the sake of the setting and the plot, and would come to terms with it, or would they start complaining that Blizzard has a bias against them? Hmm...

It's easy to say "but it's Warcraft, this needs to happen, deal with it" when your favourite is not on the receiving end of the genocide.

WoW has always had that subtle undertone of good and evil in the sense that Alliance = Good and Horde = Evil. (ever so slightly)

Alliance doing those kind of actions doesn't seem fitting to their agender. You find evil acts cool - maybe you should have rolled some undead boy.

[DatToffer]

We lost Varian, he was a awesome character and had a lot of depth to him...he was probably one of the best Alliance leaders we've had in the game

Sorry but Varian was mostly a bigger Mary Sue than Thrall and they had to dumb down most of the Alliance leaders to make him look interesting.

He is the reason why the Alliance is now about humans and how the other races are just humans in different sizes and colors.

But I guess if you consider that the death of a character is only important if he was interesting, then the terrible losses of random npcs don't amount to anything.

[Dhrizzle]

Then with that reading, she didn't actually want to help her sister. You can't have it both ways, especially considering the Night Elves have gone thousands of years without any major calamity. Either this is what she intended, or she was fully prepared to do nothing to help the Winter Queen's plight.

Elune & Sylvanas: These are both women willing to treat lives as their personal playthings, in order to fix a giant existential problem, & they both failed.... only one is supposed to be punished & the other, forgiven, completely at random by the writing.

Thousands of years without calamity, did you miss the Battle of Hyjal and Cataclysm?

- - - Updated - - -

Doesn't Blizzard like repeating that Horde/Alliance conflict is at the core of the games ?

Basically yeah, Warcraft lore is very similarly structured to things like Marvel or DC comics where you can have a plotline that changes everything but everyone goes back to their starting positions ready for the next arc (or expansion in this case.)

[huth]

I don't know what to tell you. It's literally the foundation of Warcraft as per definition. The first two games established the setting and introduced the two main factions of the game that still take centre stage in most modern story developments. If you came from a background of playing WC1 and WC2 you'll most likely see this as the baseline of the setting since these games introduced most parts of WoW that are integral to the story to this day.

Not even remotely close. A lot of it was retconned as far back as WC3. Orcs vs. Humans hasn't been the foundation since WC2, when it became "Horde vs Alliance", which lasted all of 1 game, after which we suddenly had 4 factions with Horde-Alliance conflicts being a side story at best, while the real issues lay elsewhere entirely.

If that's what you think of as a solid foundation, i've got a tower in Pisa to sell to you. Supersolid foundation by your standards, guaranteed.

You're part of the problem with your nagging insistence that the story can't leave behind old, no longer relevant, storybeats.

[DatToffer]

Not even remotely close. A lot of it was retconned as far back as WC3. Orcs vs. Humans hasn't been the foundation since WC2, when it became "Horde vs Alliance", which lasted all of 1 game, after which we suddenly had 4 factions with Horde-Alliance conflicts being a side story at best, while the real issues lay elsewhere entirely.

If that's what you think of as a solid foundation, i've got a tower in Pisa to sell to you. Supersolid foundation by your standards, guaranteed.

You're part of the problem with your nagging insistence that the story can't leave behind old, no longer relevant, storybeats.

How can you be so aggressively delusional when Blizzard took those two new factions (undead and NE), put them in the Horde and Alliance in vanilla, then brought that Horde/Alliance as a core concept once again when they decided from the start that there wouldn't be cross faction gameplay ? Every damn extension, no matter what the enemy we get a reminder that Horde and Alliance never miss a chance to throw arms at each other.

The Horde-Alliance conflict has always been at the core of the Warcraft universe. Blizzard declared so everytime we asked them for crossfaction gameplay.

The Language elixir was a tiny step in the right direction. The ending of BFA is another. But they'd need actual balls to complete the walk. Maybe after SL, who knows.

[Nerovar]

Not even remotely close. A lot of it was retconned as far back as WC3. Orcs vs. Humans hasn't been the foundation since WC2, when it became "Horde vs Alliance", which lasted all of 1 game, after which we suddenly had 4 factions with Horde-Alliance conflicts being a side story at best, while the real issues lay elsewhere entirely.

If that's what you think of as a solid foundation, i've got a tower in Pisa to sell to you. Supersolid foundation by your standards, guaranteed.

You're part of the problem with your nagging insistence that the story can't leave behind old, no longer relevant, storybeats.

Do you know what the word 'foundation' means? The Warcraft setting has been about the diametric forces of orcs & humans since it's inception and it really hasn't changed all that much in that regard. Just because this doesn't take centre stage all the time doesn't mean it's irrelevant because the story sooner or later always pans back to it (which already should be all you need to know). The last expansion's box art was literally an allusion to the cover art of WC1 (featuring an orc and a human).

• Warcraft: Orcs & Humans was about... orcs fighting humans - and you're right, lot of the lore from back then was retconned. You know what sticked? Orcs vs humans.
• Warcraft 2: Tides of Darkness was about...orcs fighting humans.
• Warcraft 3: was mainly about the Legion's invasion... still had orcs fighting humans.
• WoW Classic and every single expansion (except Shadowlands, presumably) has orcs fighting humans in the form of zone stories or new battlegrounds.

The fact that the conflicts shifted to "Horde vs Alliance" is also meaningless as these factions are usually represented by, you've guessed it, orcs and humans. This is the lense through which the average person who played WC1/WC2 will see the Warcraft universe. You're once again being wilfully obtuse.

WoW has always had that subtle undertone of good and evil in the sense that Alliance = Good and Horde = Evil. (ever so slightly)

Alliance doing those kind of actions doesn't seem fitting to their agender. You find evil acts cool - maybe you should have rolled some undead boy.

It's not exactly sublte either. WoW Classic's faction intros speak a very clear language in that regard.

[Moozart]

You do know that there's three letters in the game that make why the "annual war crime whoopsie" can't not happen right? It is called World of WARcraft....

The WAR between Horde in alliance doesn't matter anymore.... There are forces WAY WAY bigger than a silly faction war. If 1 side takes the other out no one would be strong enough to beat all the other shit that's in the wow universe.....

This same line of thinking from people is why when we have 100% proof there is alien life and space ships are over our planet the countries are going to still want to fight EACH OTHER, instead of working together.

[Combatbutler]

The WAR between Horde in alliance doesn't matter anymore.... There are forces WAY WAY bigger than a silly faction war. If 1 side takes the other out no one would be strong enough to beat all the other shit that's in the wow universe.....

This same line of thinking from people is why when we have 100% proof there is alien life and space ships are over our planet the countries are going to still want to fight EACH OTHER, instead of working together.

While true, the factions are pretty much the only thing standing in the way of rapid human infestation. Humans are already left right and center in the story narrative. So as long as the broken toasters are the undeniable spotlight, the factions are very much necessary.

[Itisamuh]

You do know that there's three letters in the game that make why the "annual war crime whoopsie" can't not happen right? It is called World of WARcraft....

Burning Legion. Black Empire. Twilight Hammer. Scourge. Mawsworn. Drust. Iron Horde. Scarlet Crusade. Etc...

Alliance vs Horde is not at all necessary to cover the war in Warcraft. All it does is make the story and characters look stupid.

[Orange Joe]

I was referencing your "Craft is in the name too. So why isn't the game based on crafting everything?". War + craft =/= warcraft. Warcraft is its own word. Its along the same lines as "idiot savant" does not mean an idiot who is educated like the two words put together would imply. Same as taking the word "relationship" and breaking it down into "relation" and "ship" implying that its a bond by blood/marriage to a water vessel.

You were focusing on "war" not "warcraft" You specifically pointed out it has war in the name. Thats why I pointed out it also has craft in the name.

[Sinured]

Although, to get back at the real subject (Sorry for digressing), I also would like to see crossfaction gameplay.

I'm tired of losing the mobs I'm targeting to some dude with an orange nametag.

I'd like the Horde council to actually go somewhere and be something.

I wonder if we're gonna have another cosmic expansion or if we're getting back to forging that peace. We could always make war against the usual tribal suspects.



I think it's mostly an american thing. I'm on a French server and we're pretty chill when agreeing that things are turning to shit.

Also MLP never turned to shit. The brony fandom though... Oh boy, the absolute states they went through.

MLP literally turned to shit after season 1.

[geco]

How can you be so aggressively delusional when Blizzard took those two new factions (undead and NE), put them in the Horde and Alliance in vanilla, then brought that Horde/Alliance as a core concept once again when they decided from the start that there wouldn't be cross faction gameplay ? Every damn extension, no matter what the enemy we get a reminder that Horde and Alliance never miss a chance to throw arms at each other.

The Horde-Alliance conflict has always been at the core of the Warcraft universe. Blizzard declared so everytime we asked them for crossfaction gameplay.

The Language elixir was a tiny step in the right direction. The ending of BFA is another. But they'd need actual balls to complete the walk. Maybe after SL, who knows.

You are not really understanding the problem.
The Kaldorei (Part of the Alliance) never had a chance to launch their weapons against the Horde.

That is why this renewal and this peace feels so empty. They did not let the Kaldorei fight.
Tyrande is supposed to be a monster. But seeing what she does, I would like all my enemies to be like her. They will never hurt me except that I go into her house.

(Also all the damage they come and do to the Horde and how she no longer has weapons to fight with)