Is it time to scrap the Alliance and Horde?

[Bakis]

Naa, WoW feels generic as it is already, no harm in keeping them.

[Feanoro]

Because it's the "shamanistic" faction?

Show, don't tell. We're TOLD over and over that orcs and Tauren are peaceful, spiritual, shamanistic, nature lovers. What we're SHOWN is the orcs as killing machines, merrily clear cutting forests, while allowing or even encouraging goblins to strip mine for more weapons, and while providing cover for undead chemical weapons. The Tauren should be outraged or at absolutely weakest be protesting and trying to guide the rest of the Horde away from their destructive acts. Instead, they're completely silent and mostly ignored.

[Caiphon]

Show, don't tell. We're TOLD over and over that orcs and Tauren are peaceful, spiritual, shamanistic, nature lovers. What we're SHOWN is the orcs as killing machines, merrily clear cutting forests, while allowing or even encouraging goblins to strip mine for more weapons, and while providing cover for undead chemical weapons. The Tauren should be outraged or at absolutely weakest be protesting and trying to guide the rest of the Horde away from their destructive acts. Instead, they're completely silent and mostly ignored.

The whole Forsaken biological warfare thing didn't float too well with the orcs. Garrosh Hellscream, of all people, called Sylvanas out for basically acting like the Lich King and even swore at her during the dialogue.... though that part was cut out because NPCs are no longer allowed to utter naughty words.

Plus, if Dark Iron Dwarves, the Alliance equivalent to the goblins in terms of blowing things up, can coexist peacefully with people who literally live in trees and sometimes even become one, the tree loving cow men can probably coexist with the orcs. Especially when they share a common identity as founding members of the current iteration of the Horde.

[Shadowferal]

Plus, if Dark Iron Dwarves, the Alliance equivalent to the goblins in terms of blowing things up, can coexist peacefully with people who literally live in trees and sometimes even become one, the tree loving cow men can probably coexist with the orcs. Especially when they share a common identity as founding members of the current iteration of the Horde.

You're treating differences as if they're the same.

In my own rewrite of lore, Tauren will want nothing to do with goblins and most forsaken.

[Hambo94]

I played WoW since mid WotLK, when i got my account from a friend who couldnt play much so he gave it to me. And i only started playing GW2 AFTER i quit WoW , as few months passed.

Did you play the RTS games before that? Mid WoTLK still puts you in classic territory, but again, for me, basically all my perception of what Warcraft is, comes from the first 3 RTS games.

- - - Updated - - -

My point wasn't that your feelings weren't valid, because that's a ridiculous argument to make. My point was that the Alliance/Horde conflict has only ever been a small component of the pillar you've been describing, with orcs vs humans forming the underlying thread through the WC RTS franchise, rather than the actual Alliance vs Horde conflict. Thus, the RTS conflict can exist devoid of either Alliance or Horde. My questions for you: is the current Alliance/Horde structure the only way to depict this pillar for you (vs other strategies they've tried, like Aldor vs Scryer or Oracle vs Frenzyheart rep-style conflicts)? And how, mechanically, do you want to see players set up to fulfill this fantasy (exclusive player bases, world PvP zones, narrative conflict between player-connected factions, etc.)?

You list plenty of other criticisms of the game, such as spaceships and "Shadowlands" (it's not clear what part of the expansion is the issue here: traveling to another realm, the concept of the Shadowlands, exploration of afterlives, etc.), and this all occurs when we have the separate Horde/Alliance factions, so clearly the factions alone are not sufficient to make the game enjoyable. The essence of this thread is, are they necessary? They weren't in WC or WC3. Are they in WoW?

Yeah ok, and I understand that what you're saying is that narratively in the whole scope of the entire franchise, most of the stories arent about Alliance/horde fighting, they're about other things like the legion, lich king, etc etc.

But my point is that all things stories/themes are not equal. As I said, you could probably do this for any franchise, if you read the books, or analyse the stories, you find greater meaning in them or different meaning all together, but to the casual player/viewer, or casual fan who consumes the content without thinking too deep, the themes mean a lot different.

I played WC1, 2, and 3, 1 and 3 being the most played. I literally remember the first ever mission I did on WC1, orcs vs humans. In WC3 I completed the story multiple times but yet I dont remember half of it in detail anymore. I did complete it though, and loved it, and I did the frozen throne too multiple times. But I spent a ton of time doing skirmishes and custom games. And the point being, the WC3 story can be about XYZ, but to a lot of Warcraft fans, you can write a story about XYZ, but its still about the different factions, humans, orcs, night elves, undead etc etc. Because that is like the base line theme of the entire franchise. You can build stories ontop of that, or outside those themes, but to lots of old school WC fans, you cant just remove that. I hope that makes sense. Again, I totally get MOST of the stories/conflicts are not just orcs kill humans, humans kill orcs, and this pillar might not be huge in your mind when you really boil down the entire franchise, but to a lot of people it is, because its not really relevant how big it is under a focused eye, it only matters how it is in peoples minds.

I guarantee you if I ask my 10 buddies to describe Warcraft, they'll start by saying its like the alliance guys vs the horde and then theres also other enemies like the legion and stuff. Even if thats a super crude description of the game, I just know they will, because we're very alike and all grew up through our childhood years playing the RTS in the same way, and because I know first hand what they dont like about the modern xpacs.

How would I change it, I mean thats a very very large question but I can give you a few examples. The second they announced Warfronts, I remember saying in a call, watch them fuck that up, that feature has such awesome potential but watch they'll find a way to make it boring and suck. It ended up being this AFK fest, no skill, where half the time you're cutting trees or mining, then this mindless push to win the game. I did like 2 and then quit, it sucked that bad, complete waste of my time tbh.

They could have made it anywhere from 1-4 players per team, a mini RTS game inside WoW, where you can play against the opposite faction/side AI or against players, where unlike the original RTS games where you have to build your altar to spawn a hero, your hero starts like 30s in, giving you 30s to commence basic choices of how you want to fight, then, you spawn in as your own character. Create mob packs that drop buffs or consumables similar to how you had to level in the RTS, and create menu's that you can pop up from anywhere in the world to do the RTS stuff, eg, spend more gold on more peons, tell your peons what split you want between gold/lumber, use your resources to purchase different buildings that can then spawn different units. Essentially have a bit of fucking ambition and try to make something unique and use your wealth of experience in the RTS genre to make something slightly different. You have the experience, you know half the players love the RTS games/played them, and you can literally continue to make new 'warfront battle locations' with new rewards, different factions, all over the world, for expansion after expansion.

In my opinion, that could have become another staple of the game along with M+, arena, BG, raids. Literally become a commander and partake in strategy style battles. Its similar to BG's but different of course. It could become rated, competitive, an esport, anything. It would sure take some balancing, but I dont see why it would be that much harder to make than what they made which sucked!

Player bases for me isnt something im interested in so it would be unfair for me to comment, I get people want them but I really cant comment on that as Ive never enjoyed base building in any game. World PvP zones yes like wintergrasp, more of that stuff with better rewards, titles, mounts, stuff that genuinely makes it worthwhile to do every now and then.

Theres so much they can do and honestly, If I sat here today im sure I could reel off a ton of ideas of stuff I think would be cool, but yeah, not everything will work, but many things would, and havent been done. Again, for me, that warfront rts style thing would have been a game changer if done properly/well.

Im not interested in this small subplots like aldor vs scryer etc, they're something I quest through with my brain half switched off. Id prefer to see them telling more stories through these RTS style battleground things as I said.

Spaceships and shadowlands - the problem I was describing is that my friends criticism of WoW is that its become too focused at times on content that dosent feel like classic warcraft. We both know that the legion has spaceships and theres all this cosmos stuff, but spending an entire expansion in afterlife land really disconnects you from the warcraft feel, I agree with him personally. The SL zones were super fucking cool as always with wow zones, like revendreth, but it literally feels like I could be playing any other MMO at that point.

and this all occurs when we have the separate Horde/Alliance factions

Not really because once you're in shadowlands you're bombarded with only shadowlands themes, it feels like the horde/alliance barely exists at that point.

[username993720]

In a world where magic is real and all sorts of higher powers roam the earth (the Zandalari loa literally live on the island with the trolls that worship them) I'd say mysticism is the norm rather than a 'primitive' exercise. A human priest drawing power from his belief in the light is no different from a Priestess of the Moon being granted power from Elune, or a Zandalari prelate drawing power from Rezan.

Even in terms of technology, if you exclude the eredar-derived races who are literal aliens of a far older civilisation, the technological level between the factions isn't all that significant. There's a reason why gnomish and goblin engineering were equivalents back in the day.

If you compare it to the real-world, the Mayans, Aztecs and such weren't on the level of Europeans.

Show, don't tell. We're TOLD over and over that orcs and Tauren are peaceful, spiritual, shamanistic, nature lovers. What we're SHOWN is the orcs as killing machines, merrily clear cutting forests, while allowing or even encouraging goblins to strip mine for more weapons, and while providing cover for undead chemical weapons. The Tauren should be outraged or at absolutely weakest be protesting and trying to guide the rest of the Horde away from their destructive acts. Instead, they're completely silent and mostly ignored.

Shamanistics are not necesarily hippies. That's the role of the Druids. I'm talking about barbaric and primitive races.

[Aucald]

If you compare it to the real-world, the Mayans, Aztecs and such weren't on the level of Europeans.

Only in terms of logistics and weaponry - the latter of which the Europeans owe to access to China and their invention of gunpowder, which basically comes down to being lucky with proximity. The Mayans and Aztecs had very advanced and innovative civic architecture, noted by their impressive use of chinampas to sustain city-states with hundreds of thousands of people with minimally arable land. What they lacked, regrettably, was easy access to draft animals like the Europeans had, and of course access to firearms with their enhanced lethality. Tenochtitlan rivaled European cities in size and grandiosity, with great temples and fanes that could easily compare to the grand cathedrals of Europe. It's also a myth that either the Mayans or Aztecs had a central empire that was conquered in one fell swoop by European invaders - neither culture really had a central capitol, but was instead a collection of city-states stretching across the Yucatan peninsula or the Andes. What the "more advanced" Europeans really did was leverage their advanced weaponry against smallish city-states and gobble up riches from unsuspecting natives, where they weren't employing guile or graft to get their way.

[Maljinwo]

If you compare it to the real-world, the Mayans, Aztecs and such weren't on the level of Europeans.

Only on the firearm department, which was thanks to china really.
Mesoamerican civilization was architectural, religiously and philosophically advanced.

Which of course, has no bearing on the Zandalari since the trolls already have access to technology and their magic puts them on par on whatever mising tech they may lack. Calling them primitive is pretty ignorant on how Azeroth (And other cultures irl) works

Lightbound using robots and barriers were no match for the trolls' "primitive" magic on Drustvar

[Loreth88]

Shamanistics are not necesarily hippies. That's the role of the Druids. I'm talking about barbaric and primitive races.

As druids are not, hippies are against wars, druids are ready to fight and have participated in every battle fought by the night elves since the War of the Ancients.

[Feanoro]

Shamanistics are not necesarily hippies. That's the role of the Druids. I'm talking about barbaric and primitive races.

Great, what does that have to do with what I said? Tauren should be outraged by the actions of orcs, undead, and goblins. That they're not is writer laziness and failure in consistency.

[Hambo94]

Only in terms of logistics and weaponry - the latter of which the Europeans owe to access to China and their invention of gunpowder, which basically comes down to being lucky with proximity. The Mayans and Aztecs had very advanced and innovative civic architecture, noted by their impressive use of chinampas to sustain city-states with hundreds of thousands of people with minimally arable land. What they lacked, regrettably, was easy access to draft animals like the Europeans had, and of course access to firearms with their enhanced lethality. Tenochtitlan rivaled European cities in size and grandiosity, with great temples and fanes that could easily compare to the grand cathedrals of Europe. It's also a myth that either the Mayans or Aztecs had a central empire that was conquered in one fell swoop by European invaders - neither culture really had a central capitol, but was instead a collection of city-states stretching across the Yucatan peninsula or the Andes. What the "more advanced" Europeans really did was leverage their advanced weaponry against smallish city-states and gobble up riches from unsuspecting natives, where they weren't employing guile or graft to get their way.

Aztec civilization might be more advanced than people realise in some elements, especially their understanding of astronomy, mathematics etc, but to say that South American cities were comparable in size or grandiosity at the time is outright incorrect.

For example, pyramids of the Mayans/Aztecs might be grand to us today looking back on them, but pyramids are one of if not the most simple structures of all in construction, and to compare an Aztec pyramid to a great cathedral in the then Constantinople or even Roman/Greek architecture which predated them by over 1000 years is a non argument. Greek structures from BC were far more complex than the pyramids of the Aztecs as were Roman structures.

And in terms of population, many capital cities of Europe had population peaks over 1 million inhabitants between BC and 1500. Tenochtitlan had a population in the low hundred of thousands estimated, Constantinople at the same time had a population 500k-1m, Rome had a population over 1m for hundreds of years before a drastic drop in dark age, medieval, and renaissance period, I could go on and on about cities in Europe that were bigger.

The Aztecs werent even familiar with Metallurgy, let alone getting to firearms. Obsidian axes, spears and atlatls are not even comparable to European weaponry and armour from over 1500 years earlier than the Aztecs.

Im not trying to say that Tenochtitlan wasnt an interesting city, in an interesting region, but Aztec empire was nowhere near as advanced in almost any way as Europeans.

Most of what killed the Aztecs were diseases brought from Europe though that spread throughout the continent over a long period.

Also Europeans didnt get gunpowder from China, they got it via the mongols and the Muslim empires, though im not sure if you're just mentioning that China invented it and it found its way to Europe rather than Europeans going directly to China?

- - - Updated - - -

Only on the firearm department, which was thanks to china really.
Mesoamerican civilization was architectural, religiously and philosophically advanced.

Which of course, has no bearing on the Zandalari since the trolls already have access to technology and their magic puts them on par on whatever mising tech they may lack. Calling them primitive is pretty ignorant on how Azeroth (And other cultures irl) works

Lightbound using robots and barriers were no match for the trolls' "primitive" magic on Drustvar

See above^

[Aucald]

Aztec civilization might be more advanced than people realise in some elements, especially their understanding of astronomy, mathematics etc, but to say that South American cities were comparable in size or grandiosity at the time is outright incorrect.

For example, pyramids of the Mayans/Aztecs might be grand to us today looking back on them, but pyramids are one of if not the most simple structures of all in construction, and to compare an Aztec pyramid to a great cathedral in the then Constantinople or even Roman/Greek architecture which predated them by over 1000 years is a non argument. Greek structures from BC were far more complex than the pyramids of the Aztecs as were Roman structures.

And in terms of population, many capital cities of Europe had population peaks over 1 million inhabitants between BC and 1500. Tenochtitlan had a population in the low hundred of thousands estimated, Constantinople at the same time had a population 500k-1m, Rome had a population over 1m for hundreds of years before a drastic drop in dark age, medieval, and renaissance period, I could go on and on about cities in Europe that were bigger.

The Azteks werent even familiar with Metallurgy, let alone getting to firearms. Obsidian axes, spears and atlatls are not even comparable to European weaponry and armour from over 1500 years earlier than the Azteks.

Im not trying to say that Tenochtitlan wasnt an interesting city, in an interesting region, but Aztek empire was nowhere near as advanced in almost any way as Europeans.

Most of what killed the Aztecs were diseases brought from Europe though that spread throughout the continent over a long period.

Also Europeans didnt get gunpowder from China, they got it via the mongols and the Muslim empires, though im not sure if you're just mentioning that China invented it and it found its way to Europe rather than Europeans going directly to China?

Mayan and Aztec city-states couldn't be as grandiose or far-reaching as European cities due to the lack of draft animals and logistical technology, which again boils down to luck of the draw with Europe being relatively flush with animals able to be domesticated and the Americas having little to no such stock animals available. But again, technology and engineering aren't on a single scale - where they lacked in one discipline they excelled in others, as you mentioned with astronomy, mathematics, art, and civil engineering. Supporting a population of 200,000+ people in a metropolis amidst barely arable land is itself a feat in civilization and engineering. Mesoamerican architecture also wasn't limited to "just pyramids," but also advanced ziggurats, sprawling courts, temple complexes, and walled gardens. Cortes himself spoke of the elegance of the Aztec structures he encountered: "... that the temples of Tenochtitlan were higher than the cathedral in Spain," and that Montezuma lived in a palace so marvelous that "it seems to me impossible to describe its excellence and grandeur... in Spain, there is nothing to compare to it." The Mayans and Aztecs also used architectural technology beyond ancient Greece, including multi-tiered colonnades, in their more important and impressive structures.

Mineral wealth is also down to luck for the European civilizations, the areas where the Mayans and Aztecs flourished were mineral poor in general, and so it's quite understandable that they had little knowledge of or experience with metalworking. The invading conquistadors, even with their metal armor and firearms, feared the Aztec macuahuitl, as it could rend through metal armor easily and expose soldiers to ranged fire (often in the form of poisoned darts, spears, and arrows). Many macuahuitls were sent back to Europe for study, given the weapon's well-deserved notoriety.

Gunpowder traces its lineage to China, where it was invented. The Europeans didn't invent it, nor was it well understood from a technological standpoint at that time in history - they traded for it, or simply stole it, when and where they could.

But this historical discussion is getting off-topic from the point of the thread, which is more about the necessity of the Alliance and Horde as factions.

[Unlimited Power]

Given they've already said they're planning to allow cross faction guilds at some point throughout Dragonflight, it's pretty safe to say that narratively, it's rather unlikely that the focus of the story will ever center around faction conflict again.

They can't ever make future instanced content that is differentiated by faction like we've seen with stuff such as Siege of Boralus or Battle of Dazar'alor.

That's just a technical limitation of the current cross faction implementation, and they've already committed to making content available cross faction.

[Hambo94]

Mayan and Aztec city-states couldn't be as grandiose or far-reaching as European cities due to the lack of draft animals and logistical technology, which again boils down to luck of the draw with Europe being relatively flush with animals able to be domesticated and the Americas having little to no such stock animals available. But again, technology and engineering aren't on a single scale - where they lacked in one discipline they excelled in others, as you mentioned with astronomy, mathematics, art, and civil engineering. Supporting a population of 200,000+ people in a metropolis amidst barely arable land is itself a feat in civilization and engineering. Mesoamerican architecture also wasn't limited to "just pyramids," but also advanced ziggurats, sprawling courts, temple complexes, and walled gardens. Cortes himself spoke of the elegance of the Aztec structures he encountered: "... that the temples of Tenochtitlan were higher than the cathedral in Spain," and that Montezuma lived in a palace so marvelous that "it seems to me impossible to describe its excellence and grandeur... in Spain, there is nothing to compare to it." The Mayans and Aztecs also used architectural technology beyond ancient Greece, including multi-tiered colonnades, in their more important and impressive structures.

Mineral wealth is also down to luck for the European civilizations, the areas where the Mayans and Aztecs flourished were mineral poor in general, and so it's quite understandable that they had little knowledge of or experience with metalworking. The invading conquistadors, even with their metal armor and firearms, feared the Aztec macuahuitl, as it could rend through metal armor easily and expose soldiers to ranged fire (often in the form of poisoned darts, spears, and arrows). Many macuahuitls were sent back to Europe for study, given the weapon's well-deserved notoriety.

Gunpowder traces its lineage to China, where it was invented. The Europeans didn't invent it, nor was it well understood from a technological standpoint at that time in history - they traded for it, or simply stole it, when and where they could.

I should be clear, although I think you and I already agree on this, im not saying they werent smart, or that they werent clever to adapt to difficult conditions. Building Tenochtitlan wasnt easy, and chinampas are clever agriculture with a very high potential yield under good conditions, but im talking broadly here, they were significantly behind European civilisation, and I mean significantly. Yes they might have excelled in astronomy, mathematics, art, civil engineering, but that still dosent make them superior. The greeks and egyptians laid foundations for astronomy and mathematics thousands of years before the Aztecs even existed, and to my knowledge the Aztecs were never mathematically superior or even close to European civilization in terms of knowledge.

Art is a matter of taste, there are certainly some great stonework pieces from the Aztec culture, but again, thats more a matter of talent/taste than technology. Again, all over Europe we were doing frescos on domes hundreds of feet in the air that took literal decades to complete, amazing sculptures and statues that dwarf anything the mayans were able to create, mosaics floors, and again, thousands of years earlier..

Civil architecture again, the pyramids might be interesting, but they are simple incomparable from an engineering POV to European buildings. Building a pyramid isnt hard. Building the Hagia Sophia, pantheon, Parthenon, and literally hundreds of other architectural and engineering wonders for their time are vastly more complex and advanced than anything the Aztecs were able to create. "but also advanced ziggurats, sprawling courts, temple complexes, and walled gardens" are not complex compared to the above and more complex structures had existed for thousands of years in Europe and north Africa (if we can include that for Ancient Egypt).

Cortes himself spoke of the elegance of the Aztec structures he encountered: "... that the temples of Tenochtitlan were higher than the cathedral in Spain," and that Montezuma lived in a palace so marvelous that "it seems to me impossible to describe its excellence and grandeur... in Spain

Cortes was shocked by the grandeur that Montezuma lived in, because Montezuma was literally viewed as a god by his people. Montezuma was showered with the wealth of an entire empire/continent, all of the gold, silver, jewels that could possibly surround one individual. That dosent mean that they are more advanced than Europeans though, sure, Montezuma lived in pure wealth, im not going to deny that, but most European Royalty lived in extreme wealth, some more than others. There are estimates that some Romans had equivalent wealth in the trillions in todays money. There are Galleons in the Azores and wrecked all around the Carribean from Spanish and Portuguese merchants worth tens of billions, and there are a lot of them, but again, describing a continents wealth in terms of the gold/gems it has accumulated dosent really prove its advanced, rather that its ruler is supreme and had a great reach, which he did. A lot of this gold/jems made it to Europe and boosted already rich Monarchs, but it didnt really 'advance' European civilisation, rather just fuelled its lavishness.

Again, pyramids are far simpler structures than Cathedrals from an Engineering POV. Building a Cathedral with arched ceilings, domes, spires etc is vastly more complex than stacking blocks ontop of one another until you reach a great height. The Pyramids of Giza comparatively were bigger than anything in south America and were built in the 26th century BC. All of the biggest structures in the world were European until the modern period, far bigger than anything in the Aztec empire. You have to remember, Cortes was probably taken back by the fact that Montezuma was so rich, and that yes, the pyramids might have been 'bigger' than the cathedral that he was familiar with in SPAIN, but that dosent make the pyramids more grand than European civilization, only what he was familiar with. Im not sure which cathedral he was referring to, but there are hundreds of bigger buildings in Europe, with vastly more advanced architecture than the pyramids that Cortes encountered.

The Mayans and Aztecs also used architectural technology beyond ancient Greece, including multi-tiered colonnades, in their more important and impressive structures.

My understanding is that the Aztecs were not beyond ancient greece, or medieval Europe in argicultural technology. They had higher yield and more sturdy crops, such as the legendary maize and potato, which Europeans didnt have, but thats not the same as technology, rather access to something. Im not sure what you mean by Multi tiered colonades, but if you're simply talking about multi tiered platforms to grow on, Europe definitely had the ability to create that, but no need. Suitable locations to grow were a problem in South America, it wasnt in Europe, we simply had large ploughed fields and no space issues preventing us from yielding enough food for the population. We also had other technology such as ploughs and horse collars to enable greatly increased yields of crops, as well as crop rotations. I am aware that Europe had access to 'beasts of burden' that the Aztecs didnt, in a similar way to the Aztecs having maize and potatoes, but the technology around those was pretty similar. The Aztecs definitely didnt have more advanced agricultural, more that it was just 'geared' to their system, and ours was geared to lower yielding poorer crops that we had access to.

Mineral wealth is also down to luck for the European civilizations, the areas where the Mayans and Aztecs flourished were mineral poor in general, and so it's quite understandable that they had little knowledge of or experience with metalworking.

Thats not true, the Aztecs definitely had access to iron, copper mineral resources, they just hadnt developed the understanding and technology to work with it yet.

The invading conquistadors, even with their metal armor and firearms, feared the Aztec macuahuitl, as it could rend through metal armor easily and expose soldiers to ranged fire (often in the form of poised darts and spears).

That is definitely not true. The Macuahuitl club was feared because the obsidian blades being glass could cause massive damage against flesh, seeing someone get clubbed in the face and their head being hacked in half is always going to instil fear, but again, vastly inferior to European weaponry from even thousands of years earlier. The obsidian weapons they had, had tremendous cutting power, but are incredibly brittle, and so are completely useless against steel weapons, and armour, theres no way that they'd even cut through chainmail. So the quote there about it rending through metal armour is definitely false. Even European weapons couldnt get through steel plate armour, you can see this on Tods workshop youtube channel, even hardened steel armour piercing head arrows, fired from a 200 pound warbow, or armour piercing bolts fired from a 1200 pound siege crossbow, cant penetrate a real steel breastplate. No sword on earth could, not European steel, Katana, Chinese, nothing. The only weak points in a knight were the mail which arrows and bolts COULD penetrate, as well as spears etc, mail was something from an older age that was kept in use for the sake of extra protection, and it being good again slashing weapons. Knights were essentially 100% impervious (through the plates) until firearms.

The Macuahuitl clubs would have been sent back as ceremonial weapons of conquest, and as you said, to tell a story of their notoriety, but not because they were particularly special. Even a Dacian Falx from the BC is significantly more advanced. A steel curved blade that was capable of cutting through the thin and poor quality roman legionary helmets from a direct vertical strike, to the point where the Roman army made it a requirement to have re-enforcing plates placed into the top of their helmets. A Macuahuitl would have just shattered hitting a helmet. Sure you might break the guys neck, or give him some pretty god damn severe whiplash or concussion, but obsidian is objectively inferior to high quality steel. Sharp as hell, sure, effective against metal? No.

Long story short, European mathematics were superior, art is a matter of taste, though id say European art is objectively more complex than Aztec stonework, we had our own stonework styles at the time all over Europe, Architecture and engineering is objectively massively superior, agriculture was where id say the Aztecs were similar, they had a very strong grasp of farming and good technology to supplement what they had access to, very good but Europeans still had advanced farming techniques based on what they equally had access to, and in terms of weaponry and armour, I really cant overstate the impact of metal on a civilisation. An Atlatl is a brilliant ranged weapon in terms of range, but inferior to a longbow or crossbow, or an eastern reflex bow, and obsidian weapons whilst scary sharp, are vastly vastly inferior to steel, and Europeans had steel for thousands of years even before Cortes went to SA.

People underestimate the quality of European armour and weapons too. Theres this false belief that Katanas are somehow these ultra superior weapons in both design and quality. They arent. The japanese have built a reputation for quality and workmanship quite rightly, and katanas, especially good ones, are very sharp, but again, medieval steelwork was if not superior at the highest end to japanese steelwork, and a European longsword has been demonstrated to be significantly sturdier, less likely to break, be more versatile in that you can strike with multiple parts of the sword and use it in a clubbing motion, and even, be sharper and have greater or equal cutting power to a katana. People seriously underestimate the challenge that a conquistadoor with a metal plate cuirass, gloves, vambraces and greaves, and a steel steel/sword posed to someone wearing no armour or perhaps some leather, with a sharp but incredible unversatile obsidian weapon. Sure the poison darts and stuff is dangerous but its hardly an equaliser against a full army wearing essentially impenetrable armour that shatters your weapons edges and shatters upon impact with their swords or shields.

The truth is, they were just hundreds if not thousands of years behind Europe. Given time no doubt they would have developed their understanding of metallurgy, first through bronze, then iron, then steel, and who knows, built ships and come visited Europe to trade some of their potatoes and corn for our horses and beasts of burden, but by the time European civilisation rocked up on the shores of SA the Aztecs were a primitive civilisation by comparison.

Gunpowder was invented in China yes, but it didnt come to Europe directly, it came via the mongols, muslim empires etc, sort of a hand it to your neighbour thing.

But yeah, again another one, Gunpowder by the time that came about, was similar to the way steel was to not understanding metallurgy. You have a 1500 pound horse and FULL plate armour head to toe, the best that money can buy, you can be a king if you like, bang, arquebus, you're dead straight through your plate, and I mean dead, old firearms were very high calibre, most muskets started at 70 calibre IIRC, so yeah you get shot by a 70 calibre lead ball, you're just dead.

Interesting conversation though

Oh and I forgot to mention regarding the superior European steel thing, yeah the point was, even European swords and spears couldnt get through the plate, only chain with stabbing motions, thats why maces, halberds and warhammers became the common weapons. Because you didnt need to get through the plate to kill someone.

[Fullmetal89]

Factions are one of the core pillars of WoW, I don't think they would ever truly remove the restrictions completely. Personally, I would like factions to exist but have the ability to join the faction rather than have races restricted to a particular faction. With the introduction of crossfaction raiding and guilds, it seems like the right time to lift that restriction. I have been meaning to play a Dark Iron Dwarf for years but being on the Alliance and all my characters on Horde means I will just abandon the character once I hit level cap.

[Caiphon]

In an attempt to bring the conversation back on topic before you go full HEMA youtuber, however one may think of real life civilisations that Azerothian races are loosely built upon, I think it’s quite difficult to say one faction is more ‘advanced’ than the other in any meaningful way.

The Zandalari have (or had) an armada of a fleet that Anduin thought only Kul Tiras could have any chance against, and Kul Tiras is more or less portrayed as the most technologically advanced human nation on Azeroth. The city of Zuldazar easily rivals Stormwind in size and scope, and unlike real life Aztecs the Zandalari are perfectly well versed in smelting and smithing. The only ‘primitive’ things about them are their rituals and beliefs, but da Voodoo is fundamentally no more or less advanced than humans following the Light. They both draw power from supernatural sources, the only difference is flavour.

One can even argue that orcs aren’t really behind humans either, at least when by humans we mean Stormwind and Lordaeron. While humans do have a larger population orcs are a relatively recent arrival and have decided to settle in a place that’s literally called ‘The Barrens’. The level of technology is quite similar if you take gnomes, dwarves and goblins out of the picture. The main difference here is that the humans are settled while the orcs are nomadic, and that’s hardly a measure of how ‘advanced’ a civilisation is.

At the end of the day the core distinction between the two factions lie imo in ‘flavour’ or ‘feels’. The Alliance clearly has a European flavour to it, while most Horde races feel distinctly non-European. In terms of development or technology I’d say they’re about equal, with a clear outlier in the space travelling goat people.

[username993720]

Only in terms of logistics and weaponry - the latter of which the Europeans owe to access to China and their invention of gunpowder, which basically comes down to being lucky with proximity. The Mayans and Aztecs had very advanced and innovative civic architecture, noted by their impressive use of chinampas to sustain city-states with hundreds of thousands of people with minimally arable land. What they lacked, regrettably, was easy access to draft animals like the Europeans had, and of course access to firearms with their enhanced lethality. Tenochtitlan rivaled European cities in size and grandiosity, with great temples and fanes that could easily compare to the grand cathedrals of Europe. It's also a myth that either the Mayans or Aztecs had a central empire that was conquered in one fell swoop by European invaders - neither culture really had a central capitol, but was instead a collection of city-states stretching across the Yucatan peninsula or the Andes. What the "more advanced" Europeans really did was leverage their advanced weaponry against smallish city-states and gobble up riches from unsuspecting natives, where they weren't employing guile or graft to get their way.

Not in terms of warfare. From what i know, they used human sacrifices.

Only on the firearm department, which was thanks to china really.
Mesoamerican civilization was architectural, religiously and philosophically advanced.

Which of course, has no bearing on the Zandalari since the trolls already have access to technology and their magic puts them on par on whatever mising tech they may lack. Calling them primitive is pretty ignorant on how Azeroth (And other cultures irl) works

Lightbound using robots and barriers were no match for the trolls' "primitive" magic on Drustvar

That's for narrative balance. Otherwise, the Alliance would dominate.
The moment they'd travel through space and invent complex machinary, you'd have a point.

As druids are not, hippies are against wars, druids are ready to fight and have participated in every battle fought by the night elves since the War of the Ancients.

Druids care for the fauna and flora. Shamans less so.

Great, what does that have to do with what I said? Tauren should be outraged by the actions of orcs, undead, and goblins. That they're not is writer laziness and failure in consistency.

Goblins and Undead, yes.
I don't know so much about the Orcs', as they are a Warrior race as well.

[Loreth88]

Druids care for the fauna and flora. Shamans less so.

Yes, but hippies don't. The many good things they stand for, most of them care about sex, acid and dance (after the acid ofc).

[Maljinwo]

That's for narrative balance. Otherwise, the Alliance would dominate.
The moment they'd travel through space and invent complex machinary, you'd have a point.
.

Ok, so you admit that narratively the draenei are not up to snuff against troll magic.
Let me know when the primitive draenei robots can at least damage 3 Voodoo masks
Honestly, what a backwards society

[Shadowferal]

Judging how advanced a society is by its ability to kill and commit violence seems counterintuitive to say the least.