"Decisive naval victories"

Story Forum
12/03/2012 04:11 PMPosted by Bossil
I have an odd feeling that when no one is in the war room Garrosh plays with those model ships like toys.
"Pew pew pew! TAKE THAT, PUNY ALLIANCE!!!"
"...What are you doing, Warchief?"
"OH, Malkorok! Just, uh, reevaluating our strategy...and stuff..."


"DID YOU SEE ANYTHING?!"

"No, Warchief! I definately didn't see you playing with your toy boats again!"

"GOOD!"
'Decisive' always has to refer to what is being decided.

It can mean anything, for example, victory off the coast of Tanaris has denied the Alliance access to the banana trees of Tel Abim.

More realistically, the Alliance denied the use of Gadgetzan, and whatever the hell Tol Barad is good for. These may be meaningful strategically but I don't think they are vital.

I took Nazgrim at his word and it didn't really bother me. Varian may be playing for a checkmate rather than focusing on taking out individual pieces.
12/03/2012 04:05 PMPosted by Mirari
I have an odd feeling that when no one is in the war room Garrosh plays with those model ships like toys.


http://www.thedailyblink.com/2012/09/garroshs-dark-spiral/
12/03/2012 06:07 PMPosted by Eprouvil
and whatever the hell Tol Barad is good for.


Tol Barad was a big deal in Cata because the Horde gaining a foothold there would mean they'd have a staging area within striking distance of the Alliance capital (and the southern end of the Eastern Kingdoms in general). Presumably it's still important for the same reasons.

Presuming the orcs haven't run themselves dry on heavy weapons and air support (which might be the case given the notable lack of planes/zeppelins/etc. in the Krasarang Campaign) it could be a game changer.
Personally, I took it as quite literal. That the horde has had victories at tol barad. But so has the alliance. I mean it was back and forth the entire expansion

12/03/2012 07:46 PMPosted by Mirari
Tol Barad was a big deal in Cata because the Horde gaining a foothold there would mean they'd have a staging area within striking distance of the Alliance capital (and the southern end of the Eastern Kingdoms in general). Presumably it's still important for the same reasons.


different islands
Yeah, spaced out there for a second.
How can the Horde win these naval victories anyway? It seems almost every battle at sea has the Horde winning. How? Did the Orcs suddenly become masters in just 20 years when the Human kingdoms have been at it for far, far longer?
12/03/2012 09:46 PMPosted by Wickham
That's okay! Garrosh logic is: if you're a child of the enemy, you will grow up to be the enemy someday and it's okay to kill you! Seriously. This is the Horde's idea of their saviour now?


Pretty sure that was Grom's view in "Lord of the Clans", correct me if I'm wrong, it's been about two years since I last re-read the book.


It's also some people's views here on the forums. But it's ok if we believe in it..right?

Right?
12/03/2012 09:20 PMPosted by Archimkazile
How can the Horde win these naval victories anyway? It seems almost every battle at sea has the Horde winning. How? Did the Orcs suddenly become masters in just 20 years when the Human kingdoms have been at it for far, far longer?


not to mention a certain human nation whose entire strength lies in navy power has yet to see the light of day in the World of Warcraft
12/03/2012 03:00 PMPosted by Vyrin
I get the feeling that they weren't that decisive at all but Nazgrim was trumping up his report for Garrosh.


so he lied in an offical lore point to make alliance players feel better? there is no chance that reported factual information to his boss that would influence later military actions?

man the horde lossing things and reporting them as victories is a sure fire military win in this war.

or they were deciisive and no one lied... which ever requires the least amount of information added to the text.
12/03/2012 10:39 PMPosted by Juibloc
so he lied in an offical lore point to make alliance players feel better?


The naval battle that occurred off the coast of Tanaris resulted in the loss of one Alliance ship and one Horde ship. That's hardly a "decisive victory" for either side.

12/03/2012 10:39 PMPosted by Juibloc
man the horde lossing things and reporting them as victories is a sure fire military win in this war.


Garrosh isn't going to win this war. The fact that he rules through fear and harshly punishes failure is one of the things that makes him a poor leader: his subordinates aren't going to want to give him bad news.

Even the cutscene in question, we see that Garrosh is prone to sudden, angry outbursts and that Nazgrim is afraid of him. It's not much of a stretch to imagine he might aggrandize his reports, even if only to keep Garrosh's fearsome temper in check.
The naval battle that occurred off the coast of Tanaris resulted in the loss of one Alliance ship and one Horde ship. That's hardly a "decisive victory" for either side.


Except that battle occurred before Theramore was destroyed.
Garrosh...we forgot to give you pancakes....

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT *Gets in Nazgrim's face*

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum