Was thrall a very good leader in his rule?

[Maximus Testiculos]

I am asking this because in cataclysm there are some orcs who talk about about how their families were hungry and they were begging in the streets of orgrimmar.We know that thrall was trying to keep peace.But was he good on other issues?Or did he go worse after making orgrimmar?

[ramboxmb]

He the best leader the orc have ever had. By far.

[BM-Hunter]

He is the best leader the world of Azeroth has ever seen.

[Negrido]

It seems that the orchis pop of the horde has a massive erection for Garrosh. They pontificate endlessly over his great achievements in northrend. Of which there are none. It would make sense that these same orcs would lie in regards to how Thrall led them.

Though to be fair, Garrosh seems somewhat competent. I simply use them as an example.

[sethr266]

He is the best leader the world of Azeroth has ever seen.

this

[Nahte]

He is the best leader in a time of peace.

In war, however, I imagine his peaceful tendencies would do the Orcs harm, and are why he chose Garrosh to lead his people for the time being.

[Rystastic]

Either way: No matter how good a leader is, there will always be people living in poverty.

[apepi]

The question should be how was he a bad ruler?

[Xylense]

He was both liked and disliked by orcish society. I would think the veterans of war respected Thrall more than the younger orcish generation, all about wanting to go to war even though he strives for peace.

He's done better than any other Orc could do, imo, but society can't be made perfect.

[Elanale]

I would say that the Orcs fared well under Thrall. There are times, viewing Orcish NPCs, that I wonder if Thrall and his ilk are exceptions to the Orcish rule, atypical and unusual, but that's neither here nor there. He was a good leader.

Now, as a general, he tended to be increasingly hands-off as time progressed, though he did well in the early going there too (Hyjal, Founding of Durotar).

[ramboxmb]

He is the best leader in a time of peace.

In war, however, I imagine his peaceful tendencies would do the Orcs harm, and are why he chose Garrosh to lead his people for the time being.

He didnt give up his role because of the war.... he gave it up because he has to save the world from elements. He led the horde in times of war.. agaisnt the freakin burning legion (who are a much bigger threat than anything else)..

[Inos]

well think about it like this. garrosh would never have accepted help from tirion which in the lich king fight delt the final blow and "saved" everyone. if not for thralls diplomacy we would all be fighting each other instead of the evil in this world. in cata though i agree with thrall and we need a leader who is willing to go to war. so thrall was good for times of peace. and garrosh is good in times of war. even thrall could see that

[Negrido]

The question should be how was he a bad ruler?

I feel he could have done more grooming on Garrosh. Being objective you could argue that allowing the Forsaken in was very risky. Thats like, all I can think of.

[Eldar45]

Thrall is Blizzard's way of describing the perfect leader.
A lover of peace, but is willing and able to fight if it is necessary. He has an ability to see an argument from all sides, he has the ability to put aside old resentments and bring together peoples that would normally hate/distrust each other.

Hell, if he ran for President, I'd vote for him :P

[Grimmer]

Can we get screenshots of that, OP? If it's true, Thrall is even MORE my favorite character now (because he's not as much of a Stu).

[Inos]

i agree that the forsaken was a risk and even now it looks like sylvannas might turn on them all. but i still think she is actually good at heart and even though everything she does seems evil (raising undead to build her army) i feel deep down she really just cares for her people and dosnt think that just because they are dead they arnt "dead" and expendable items for the horde to use

[Deleted]

Great at making alliances, not that great at keeping them I'm afraid.

As I see it he's way too much of a thinker and too little of a polititian. But then, Garrosh isn't either, he's just a warlord.

[schippie]

He is the best leader the world of Azeroth has ever seen.

/this for horde atleast xd
tho i do get why they wanted somebody else to get the war in warcraft back and how much i do hate garrosh i do think it fits(i would have loved saurfang more but okay xd)

[Deleted]

YES!

Going by the lore he would have been good. Bringing the orcs back to their shamanistic ways, making them proud again, uncorrupted etc. They had been at peace with the Draenei before the whole mess, they could have, in the long term, made peace with the Alliance. Many old veterans full-heartedly supported Thrall in this, the ones who had actually experienced the wars, the corruption, the betrayal. Not the young bucks who yearn for glory in battle but had never experienced the bad side of war, the ones who follow Garrosh (Krom'Gar and the asshole general that killed the tauren druid's kid).

But Blizzard wanted him to be not quite so good a leader so we'd buy into Garrosh easier thus they said he wasn't. End of Story. Unfortunately.

[Togarox]

Thrall was probably the best leader the horde can have but his biggest weakness is believing that their can be peace between the horde and alliance. He realizes that in Cataclysm and gives his position as warchief over to Garrosh.

That being said poverty is everywhere. In RL there isn't a single country in the world that doesn't have it and that goes for WoW as well.