Topic
Closed
I'm trying to imagine her like that and I can't do it. |
|
Edited by Jashin on 4/13/12 4:53 PM (PDT)
You couldn't of said this on the other thread instead of making a second one? The orphan child would only serve as a spy, and I don't think Sylvanas would be the one to actually make the child do anything, most likely a dark ranger would exploit this opportunity. I just wanted to get people's attention on what I truly feel. Also it is nearly impossible for me to find my threads on my profile or even keep track of them. Egrem, I am ignoring you in 5...4...3...2...1. |
|
Peopleeeeee. Stop saying Garrosh and/or Sylvanas are master tacticians. They're not. They haven't set up any ambushes, they haven't caught anything by surprise. They haven't done any impressive maneuvers a la Hannibal of Carthage. They do not have brilliant strategies. Catapulting a barrel full of plague is by no means a strategical, brilliant move at all. Using a nuclear bomb doesn't make me super smart. It's a cheap strategy. It's not brilliant. The only intellectual thing odne in using the plague is its fabrication, and she had nothing to do with it, that was the Apothecaries. Garrosh just has his plot armor. And they both decided to assault their enemies when they couldn't have possibly been at a weaker state, making it very doubtful that they could have achieved more than 20% of what they did nowadays had they assaulted their enemies when they were at their average maount of power. They are not brilliant tacticians. And Sylvanas is far from smart. She trusted a Dreadlord for pity's sake, that puts her on the same level of Miss South Carolina. "Uhhmm yeah I think that people uhm...can't point out Lordaeron on a map cuz' uhh...hey! Vari! Uhmm...like...they don't have maps and uh...stuff, right? Let's plague them!" |
|
Behold the tip of the iceberg: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3967589876 http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/4138437556 http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/4253899646 |
|
|
Behold the tip of the iceberg: *man falling from cliff* NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!! *SPLAT* |
|
To be fair on one thing, Garrosh actually told her to invade Gilneas. Actually if we're going to be fair, Garrosh invaded while she was off trying to off herself, and then she came back and took it over from Garrosh, and continued the attack. It's still just as valid. |
Jashin makes threads fetishizing Sylvanas on a regular basis. He also writes fan-fiction in which she's a mother figure who raises orphans (who serve as his self-insert characters). It's quite bizarre. In that respect, Sylvanas is a fetish, so is Whitemane.. This is the internet man, how is this bizzare? |
|
Edited by Onimontu on 4/9/12 2:57 PM (PDT)
Peopleeeeee. Stop saying Garrosh and/or Sylvanas are master tacticians. They're not. She is a brilliant tactician, BECAUSE BLIZZARD says so! joking aside what you're witnessing is a common fallacy in visualized fiction. In a written work of fiction one is able to apply tributes to a character that they are far from acknowledged on. For example, Metzen can basically say that sylvanas is a military genius and can apply this to character trait into the cannonity, people recognizing it and all. In a written format Metzen could easily describe an abstract example of how good she is by lets say comparing a battle to a game of chess, describing how she counters an enemy here and attacks this specific point, ending in a glorious checkmate. Through this poetic abstract description one can get an idea of how good she is without Metzen having to describe a complete battle, tactics and all. Metzen isn't a military genius and therefore lacks the ability to give sylvanas the tactical prestige he so claims she has. So in a written format he essentially did what I stated earlier. A lot of writers do this, specifically when their readers might lack the complete understanding of the subject as well (Even if warfare in wow was convincing it would still lock childish and bland from the perspective of an actual tactician). The problem is that in visual environment, specifically in a videogame where Montage's or stylistic metaphorical visuals aren't possible, it is difficult to accurately show some of the characters attributes in a way that's convincing. Sylvanas tactics look completely terrible to us because really blizzard has the inability to make them look good. This isn't something to take in a deep rooted speculator sense as if blizzard is attempting to make her look like an idiot on purpose, this is just the quest devs ignorance when it comes to warfare. |
|
Edited by Bullcowsby on 4/9/12 3:06 PM (PDT)
To be fair on one thing, Garrosh actually told her to invade Gilneas. That's a real stretch :P She didn't take over from Garrosh and continue the attack because she was all about attacking Gilneas. She took over from Garrosh because he was wasting her meat shields. :P She most certainly could not have ordered Garrosh to stop attacking. So she did what she could to make sure her soldiers weren't being used as fodder. It's not like she was like "Garrosh! Can you start that invasion while I'm gone trying to kill myself?" (must be imagined in Wolowitz's mother's voice.) @Onimontu But sadly some will refuse to believe it unless they're "shown" it. I even quoted someone recently who said as much. I think YOU were arguing against him. |
Sylvanas and the Forsaken, of course! |
|
|
Blizzard made Crowley and Bloodfang look good. They outmaneuvered Sylvanas at every turn, despite having fewer troops, by using ambushes and traps. Sylvanas just tried to win through attrition and super-weapons. In RTS terms, it was like a match between someone who knows how to micro and someone who just told her army to attack-move. |
|
Edited by Onimontu on 4/9/12 3:24 PM (PDT)
I don't remember, but my point wasn't whether or not it should be taken seriously, but the reason why blizzard is unable to show her true tactician skills. Displaying basic concepts like a creature being "Strong" or "skilled with a sword" are easy character attributes.. but complex things such as military tactics? very rare in a game franchise outside of "Some" of the military fps.I love to speculate on deep rooted concepts and implications as the next guy but I've lost a lot of faith. Remember my Druid/Shaman theories? I pretty much feel that blizzard has five or six different yet vague explanations for how shaman and druids work that keep stacking on each others as different authors place in their media pop references and comic book pizazz. Basically, why argue about deep philosophical meaning behind someones motives when the author could simply be slapping on random ideas, specifically with sylvanas. I no longer believe blizzard questions their own work. Sylvanas? Misunderstood, sad, wants revenge, Evil, genocidal, cold, redeemable, Damned, I'm sure it will change at random, I don't even think Cdevs grasp what the Quest Devs have done. At this point, anything we don't know outside of basic future plot progressions is also unknown by blizzard. |
Blizzard made Crowley and Bloodfang look good. They outmaneuvered Sylvanas at every turn, despite having fewer troops, by using ambushes and traps. Sylvanas just tried to win through attrition and super-weapons. Which in itself could be a representation of the problem in the end. The way Sylvanas is described she shouldn't be outmaneuvered at every turn, especially by groups with fewer troops -- she shouldn't be an "attack-move" player. Now, if the distinction were that Sylvanas was somehow brand new to the idea of ambush and traps, the Worgen wins might hold up. I'm not convinced she's all that new to ambushes and traps, though :P And so it makes you wonder what the intent was in having her bested so frequently and with such little real consequence, and if there was no such intent to have her made to look inept... *shrug* Then you have the problem that Onimontu was discussing. In the end, though, if Blizzard says she is a master tactician then she is. How that fits into the narrative, though, is another thing. One of the problems with a world of heroes, imo. |
|
Edited by Vyrin on 4/9/12 3:32 PM (PDT)
Sylvanas was fighting the Alliance. She was expecting to fight footmen making shield-walls and advancing slowly as one unit with support units in the back throwing arrows and fireballs at her lines, and that most of them would be humans and hence vulnerable to the val'kyr. Much more critically, she was expecting them to play by Queensbury rules and adhere to their moral code, which she could exploit.
She wasn't expecting a force of guerilla fighters backed by the Alliance's most elite special operations team, most of whom were immune to her necromancy and resistant to her plague. Hence the losses. The fact that Worgen are portrayed to be very effective at fighting undead and the 7th Legion has experience fighting undead way stronger than the Forsaken in the form of Naxxramas meant that she had little choice but to manage to eke out that stalemate by literally throwing everything she had at them, especially since both groups were willing to fight dirty by sacrificing their own troops to hurt the Forsaken and using terror tactics. It's like in Vietnam, when the US troops, who were using Cold War tactics, were found to be very vulnerable to guerilla forces and they responded by simply using overwhelming force. |
Blizzard made Crowley and Bloodfang look good. They outmaneuvered Sylvanas at every turn, despite having fewer troops, by using ambushes and traps. Sylvanas just tried to win through attrition and super-weapons. The entire scenario was very basic and designed to keep either side from winning, If it had been written in a novel format I'm sure Crowley would have been attributed to being a very skilled general capable of going toe to toe with sylvanas tactical genius. |
More importantly he would HAVE to be, or another reason for her ineptitude provided. As it is, it doesn't really mesh and just makes Blizzard look like they don't really know their own characters. It all stems from ICC. May Azeroth never fail to remember the terrible price we paid for our weakness... for our pride. But what now, hero? What of those freed from his grasp, but still shackled to their mortal coils? Leave me. I have much to ponder. *jump off a cliff* |
That line doesn't even make any sense. What weakness and pride? |
Like I said man, I no longer believe they do. They might say they have a plan for everything but some things are just said to give us "thinks to much about fiction" types peace of mind. I mean really, for a videogame one needs a game engine, an idea for the system and a quick basic plot idea to throw in some CG models, they don't have the resources to coordinate a detailed story. Videogames tend to have weak plots because the plot must remain easy to manipulate in favor of game mechanics or a lack of synergy among different development teams. |
