Theory on Garrosh and the Siege of Orgrimmar

100 Dwarf Paladin
13395
The war has to end and for that to happen someone has to lose. Someone has to feel defeated. The orcs need to feel defeated. Otherwise being in the Alliance will suck since they're stuck in a never ending cycle of ceasefires and doublespeak with nothing to show for it except more territory and lives lost.


From a detached lore perspective I might agree with you. But Blizzard is ultimately a business, and a business isn't going to have the finale of an expansion involve a massive defeat for half their playerbase. Having so many players experience the largest defeat either faction has ever suffered in WoW is no way of ending an expansion if they want them to return for expansion 5 (and there will be a 5th expansion, Blizzard is already in the planning stages for it).

I've also brought up the point before that we can't consider the Siege of Orgrimmar in a vacuum. So while the Siege itself needs to leave both factions feeling like they won, there's a lot of stuff in the middle that isn't bound by that. In fact I think having the Alliance take the clear upper hand in the mid-to-late expansion might be the perfect way to compel Garrosh to seek outside assistance.

Imagine a situation where the Alliance has recently accomplished a string of impressive and in some cases improbable victories. They ripped half the Horde's offensive into Pandaria to pieces, then sank the Horde fleet bringing reinforcements and are on track to push the Horde completely off the continent within a few months. Cracks are opening up on other fronts as the Alliance pushes further and further into Ashenvale. The Syndicate have turned to the Alliance to protect themselves from the Forsaken, and have turned the fighting in the Northern Eastern Kingdoms firmly into the Alliance's favor. The Horde might be holding their ground on other fronts, but they know that victory is becoming less and less likely and some leaders are even speaking of making peace while the Horde can still negotiate from a relatively strong position.

It is in this dark hour that Garrosh makes his pact with the Mogu to build a new army. One that could not only destroy the Alliance, but make all of Azeroth subservient to the Horde. The other Horde leaders are then forced to make a choice, back Garrosh and become nothing better then the Horde of the First War (demon control or not), or risk everything by rising in rebellion to restore honor to the Horde.
Reply Quote
100 Troll Shaman
5930
The problem with that is there isn't a reason for the Alliance to stop. When you have the upper hand in a war, you do NOT stop until it's finally ended. Only an utter idiot would do that. After what's happened in Cata, the Alliance doesn't have one single reason to not take this war to it's ultimate conclusion. The utter defeat of the other side.

That's the issue a lot of people will have with MoP and the Raid on Org is that no one can think of a good reason why the Alliance wouldn't do it's best to wipe out the rest of the Horde leadership while they are in Org. Or at least, burn the place to the ground.

Really?

No one can think of anything?

Because I can come up with a dozen ways the Alliance might be in no position (either unwilling or unable) to press the advantage, from the mundane to the Deus Ex Machina.

The problem isn't that players can't find a way for the Alliance to utterly annihilate the Horde without utterly annihilating the Horde, it's that they're considering that only if the Alliance utterly annihilates the Horde can the ending be satisfactory. You're starting from a flawed premise.
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Rogue
12040
@Falrinn:

Brilliant. And yes, there is a TON of ground to cover before we even get to the siege.

Look folks, Metzen has already said that Thrall is going to be Warchief again and that he will rule from Orgrimmar. Agruing for and demanding anything different accomplishes nothing but angering the Blizz employees that read these forums. So instead of asking for the Alliance to deliver a crushing defeat to the Horde (and what Horde victory in WoW to this point has been crushing? Don't talk about Theramore either. We don't know how that will go.) ask for a few less severe, but no less clear, victories on several fronts. You know, kinda like the Horde got this expansion.
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Druid
11055
04/19/2012 08:23 AMPosted by Kynrind
Alliance doesn't have one single reason to not take this war to it's ultimate conclusion.


The repercussions of doing such re: civilians in itself is enough of a reason. Remember, from Blizzard's viewpoint (and Varian's) it's not the Horde in general at fault for this stuff. Going "all the way" in this case is being misdefined by players - "all the way" would be the removal of what Varian sees as the cause of problems. Additionally, Blizzard wants the Alliance to feel introspective during this and reaffirming what it is they stand for.

04/19/2012 08:28 AMPosted by Kellick
The problem isn't that players can't find a way for the Alliance to utterly annihilate the Horde without utterly annihilating the Horde, it's that they're considering that only if the Alliance utterly annihilates the Horde can the ending be satisfactory. You're starting from a flawed premise.


Basically this. Blizzard has already said that utter annihilation isn't the ultimate conclusion they want. Players need to take that into consideration - it goes back to unrealistic expectations.
Edited by Bullcowsby on 4/19/2012 8:31 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Troll Rogue
9870
I've also brought up the point before that we can't consider the Siege of Orgrimmar in a vacuum. So while the Siege itself needs to leave both factions feeling like they won, there's a lot of stuff in the middle that isn't bound by that. In fact I think having the Alliance take the clear upper hand in the mid-to-late expansion might be the perfect way to compel Garrosh to seek outside assistance.

Imagine a situation where the Alliance has recently accomplished a string of impressive and in some cases improbable victories. They ripped half the Horde's offensive into Pandaria to pieces, then sank the Horde fleet bringing reinforcements and are on track to push the Horde completely off the continent within a few months. Cracks are opening up on other fronts as the Alliance pushes further and further into Ashenvale. The Syndicate have turned to the Alliance to protect themselves from the Forsaken, and have turned the fighting in the Northern Eastern Kingdoms firmly into the Alliance's favor. The Horde might be holding their ground on other fronts, but they know that victory is becoming less and less likely and some leaders are even speaking of making peace while the Horde can still negotiate from a relatively strong position.


The problem with that is there isn't a reason for the Alliance to stop. When you have the upper hand in a war, you do NOT stop until it's finally ended. Only an utter idiot would do that. After what's happened in Cata, the Alliance doesn't have one single reason to not take this war to it's ultimate conclusion. The utter defeat of the other side.

That's the issue a lot of people will have with MoP and the Raid on Org is that no one can think of a good reason why the Alliance wouldn't do it's best to wipe out the rest of the Horde leadership while they are in Org. Or at least, burn the place to the ground.


If people are only willing to accept annhilation as a satisfactory resolution, then yeah, they will not be happy with the siege of Orgrimmar.
Reply Quote
100 Undead Mage
10860
I've also brought up the point before that we can't consider the Siege of Orgrimmar in a vacuum. So while the Siege itself needs to leave both factions feeling like they won, there's a lot of stuff in the middle that isn't bound by that. In fact I think having the Alliance take the clear upper hand in the mid-to-late expansion might be the perfect way to compel Garrosh to seek outside assistance.

Imagine a situation where the Alliance has recently accomplished a string of impressive and in some cases improbable victories. They ripped half the Horde's offensive into Pandaria to pieces, then sank the Horde fleet bringing reinforcements and are on track to push the Horde completely off the continent within a few months. Cracks are opening up on other fronts as the Alliance pushes further and further into Ashenvale. The Syndicate have turned to the Alliance to protect themselves from the Forsaken, and have turned the fighting in the Northern Eastern Kingdoms firmly into the Alliance's favor. The Horde might be holding their ground on other fronts, but they know that victory is becoming less and less likely and some leaders are even speaking of making peace while the Horde can still negotiate from a relatively strong position.


The problem with that is there isn't a reason for the Alliance to stop. When you have the upper hand in a war, you do NOT stop until it's finally ended. Only an utter idiot would do that. After what's happened in Cata, the Alliance doesn't have one single reason to not take this war to it's ultimate conclusion. The utter defeat of the other side.

That's the issue a lot of people will have with MoP and the Raid on Org is that no one can think of a good reason why the Alliance wouldn't do it's best to wipe out the rest of the Horde leadership while they are in Org. Or at least, burn the place to the ground.

1. They don't have a reason to stop YET. Things may change. As I have said before, the Alliance and Horde Rebellion could strike a deal to take down Garrosh, and with how much you guys love your honor, you'd keep your word if the right general lead your forces, and Thrall, Saurfang, and Vol'jin (im almost positive it will be one or more of them leading my side) would as well, for a time at least.

2. You ever try to burn metal? It's quite difficult.
Reply Quote
100 Dwarf Paladin
13395
The problem with that is there isn't a reason for the Alliance to stop. When you have the upper hand in a war, you do NOT stop until it's finally ended. Only an utter idiot would do that. After what's happened in Cata, the Alliance doesn't have one single reason to not take this war to it's ultimate conclusion. The utter defeat of the other side.

That's the issue a lot of people will have with MoP and the Raid on Org is that no one can think of a good reason why the Alliance wouldn't do it's best to wipe out the rest of the Horde leadership while they are in Org. Or at least, burn the place to the ground.


Again, I might agree if we were arguing from a detacted lore perspective where the game doesn't matter.

However we are not arguing from a detached lore perspective and the game does matter, and ending an expansion where half the players are expected to relive the worst defeat either faction has ever suffered in the history of WoW (even the fall of Theramore wouldn't come close) for 6+ months is completely unacceptable.

By saying the only satisfactory ending is if the Alliance destroys Orgrimmar, you are essentially saying that for you, there can be no satisfactory ending. All you are doing is setting yourself up for a disappoint because the nature of the game prevents the one ending that would satisfy you from ever happening.
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Paladin
14910
04/19/2012 08:10 AMPosted by Falrinn
From a detached lore perspective I might agree with you. But Blizzard is ultimately a business, and a business isn't going to have the finale of an expansion involve a massive defeat for half their playerbase. Having so many players experience the largest defeat either faction has ever suffered in WoW is no way of ending an expansion if they want them to return for expansion 5 (and there will be a 5th expansion, Blizzard is already in the planning stages for it).


And yet ending it with brotherly love would be even more bitter than defeat. Basically the way WoW works and will continue to work is if you ever really want to stick it to the opposing player faction, play Horde. Not only do you win, but you won't ever lose.

I've also brought up the point before that we can't consider the Siege of Orgrimmar in a vacuum. So while the Siege itself needs to leave both factions feeling like they won, there's a lot of stuff in the middle that isn't bound by that. In fact I think having the Alliance take the clear upper hand in the mid-to-late expansion might be the perfect way to compel Garrosh to seek outside assistance.


I might be okay with that if Pandaeria more or less ends up belonging to the Alliance. Northrend too. Outland as well.

Imagine a situation where the Alliance has recently accomplished a string of impressive and in some cases improbable victories. They ripped half the Horde's offensive into Pandaria to pieces, then sank the Horde fleet bringing reinforcements and are on track to push the Horde completely off the continent within a few months. Cracks are opening up on other fronts as the Alliance pushes further and further into Ashenvale. The Syndicate have turned to the Alliance to protect themselves from the Forsaken, and have turned the fighting in the Northern Eastern Kingdoms firmly into the Alliance's favor. The Horde might be holding their ground on other fronts, but they know that victory is becoming less and less likely and some leaders are even speaking of making peace while the Horde can still negotiate from a relatively strong position.


I want to win the war and break the Orcs like I know the Alliance is capable of doing. Winning a series of battles that the Horde player base are going to be utterly detached from doesn't mean anything to me.

It is in this dark hour that Garrosh makes his pact with the Mogu to build a new army. One that could not only destroy the Alliance, but make all of Azeroth subservient to the Horde. The other Horde leaders are then forced to make a choice, back Garrosh and become nothing better then the Horde of the First War (demon control or not), or risk everything by rising in rebellion to restore honor to the Horde.


And lose to the Alliance in the process, because everyone in the Horde would totally risk losing the war in order to depose Garrosh. Unless the Alliance is stupid enough to accept Garrosh's head in exchange for ending the war, because honestly it's never been about Garrosh or Thrall. It's been about the Orcs and what they've done what they've continue to do and they're total and utter unrepetence.
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Rogue
12040
@Kynrind:

You want some reasons why Varian and Blizz are having the Alliance leave Orgrimmar more or less intact? (its being besieged after all) Fine I'll give you 2, one for in game and one for out.

In-game: As I said earlier in this post, the Alliance and Stormwind in particular has been on a war footing for about 30 years. I don't have the specific source information in front me but WC1 happened when Varian was about 10 years old. He's about 40 now. In that time the Alliance has fought about a half dozen wars against mortal opponents, 2 Burning Legion invasions, 3 Scourge assaults, at least 2 major Old God incursions, counter-attacked to Outland, counter-attacked to Northrend, fought the War of the Shifting Sands (which could count and 3rd Old God incursion), killed 2 Aspects, prevented a 3rd Burning Legion invasion and survived the largest elemental upheaval since the Titans left Azeroth.

The Alliance could (and probably should) be utterly exhausted. Families want their fathers/mothers/sister/brothers ect home. People are starving because the farmers have all been drafted. Bandits are running wild because the law enforcement is elsewhere. Infrastructure is being neglected because the resources are going to the front of the month. If Varian does what you suggest then he is in this war until one side is dead. Period. After a defeat like the breaking of Orgimmar it likely would be the Horde that loses. But then what? Fighting such a war could shatter the Alliance politically and economically and then both sides lose. Sound satisfying? Not to me.

Out-of-game: Not one, not a single one, of the Horde victories in Cata has been as crushing as having THE major faction city burned to the ground. Even adding all the Horde victories together and tossing in Theramore to boot is not as crushing. You want several of the Horde leaders to die on top of that.

Think about how angry you are about the state of the Alliance in-game right now. Do you think the Horde players will feel any different? Of course they will, they'll be even more upset. If the Alliance were allowed to do what you are saying then the next expansion, in order to keep or get back customers, Blizz (a business) will have to burn Stormwind AND Ironforge just to prove there is no Alliance bias. And then the Alliance will have to burn Thunderbluff, Sen'jin Village AND Undercity. And the cycle repeats, basically forcing out all the other cool stories like the Burning Legion, Old Gods, Zandalari ect and killing the entire Warcraft franchise. Sound satisfying? Not to me.
Reply Quote
100 Undead Mage
10860
04/19/2012 09:57 AMPosted by Kynrind
1. They don't have a reason to stop YET. Things may change. As I have said before, the Alliance and Horde Rebellion could strike a deal to take down Garrosh, and with how much you guys love your honor, you'd keep your word if the right general lead your forces, and Thrall, Saurfang, and Vol'jin (im almost positive it will be one or more of them leading my side) would as well, for a time at least.


1. Hell no. To the hell with human honor. By now I want vengeance. I play a Night elf and their idea of honor is a lot different than a human or orcs sense of honor. None of my characters would feel bound by any agreement that left Kaldorei land in the hands of the orcs. As long as that remains, they will kill orcs. You think the Night elves would be willing to stop fighting when half of their homeland is under foreign occupation?

If you had read me say this anywhere before, you'd know I say the Horde's side of the agreement would be to withdraw from most or all territories conquered while Garrosh is Warchief. that includes everything beyond Splintertree excluding Zoram'gar.
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Druid
11055
04/19/2012 09:48 AMPosted by Kynrind
Only in the last 30-40 years has this -ever- been taken into consideration. Before that and in many places even now, civilian casualties were a non-factor in deciding when to stop a war.


I'm not arguing real world - I'm stating exactly what Blizzard has indicated about the feelings in-universe. Remember all the white-knighting Hawthorne gets?

That's where your answer lies.

04/19/2012 09:48 AMPosted by Kynrind
By any measure it is the only conclusion the Alliance should reasonably look for.


Not any measure - your measure.

they've made total victory the only reasonable goal for either side to aim for.


I've underlined the phrase that you and others seek to define as factual when in truth it is relative.

04/19/2012 09:48 AMPosted by Kynrind
The Alliance has taken it ton the chin, and in the face, gut and crotch in Cata and it will likely continue in MoP.


Please stop with the victimization - this is a gross misrepresentation of the actual events in the lore. You're confusing your player experience with the Alliance's experience.
The Alliance is being told that it will not be able to win. We're not allowed to. It would take things away from the precious Horde. The only real victory will be putting Thrall back in charge of the Horde. Then we will leave and demand nothing else.


No one is being told they can't win. Your problem, and others share it, is that you continue to confuse "win" with "utter annihilation" or something similar. Win is not so statically defined - unrealistic expectations. How you can argue with such certainty and assertion something that we know almost nothing about boggles the mind (in reference to the bolded).

And seriously, can we ditch the charged language? It's condescending enough having people prognosticate based on little more than what they can pull out of their backsides without that language too.
Edited by Bullcowsby on 4/19/2012 11:32 AM PDT
Reply Quote
85 Troll Shaman
6465
Maybe Garrosh's corruption was my fault?

I mean, I went to Nagrand, helped him build confidence and later introduced him to Thrall. I wonder if this will come back to bite me in the rear...

Eh probably not. I bet he won't even recognize me amidst the other raiders.
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Druid
11055
04/19/2012 11:46 AMPosted by Pajeh
Eh probably not. I bet he won't even recognize me amidst the other raiders.


And now that you said that, the devs will make sure that he calls players out that have completed that questline.

awesome.
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Paladin
14910
You want some reasons why Varian and Blizz are having the Alliance leave Orgrimmar more or less intact? (its being besieged after all) Fine I'll give you 2, one for in game and one for out.

In-game: As I said earlier in this post, the Alliance and Stormwind in particular has been on a war footing for about 30 years. I don't have the specific source information in front me but WC1 happened when Varian was about 10 years old. He's about 40 now. In that time the Alliance has fought about a half dozen wars against mortal opponents, 2 Burning Legion invasions, 3 Scourge assaults, at least 2 major Old God incursions, counter-attacked to Outland, counter-attacked to Northrend, fought the War of the Shifting Sands (which could count and 3rd Old God incursion), killed 2 Aspects, prevented a 3rd Burning Legion invasion and survived the largest elemental upheaval since the Titans left Azeroth.

The Alliance could (and probably should) be utterly exhausted. Families want their fathers/mothers/sister/brothers ect home. People are starving because the farmers have all been drafted. Bandits are running wild because the law enforcement is elsewhere. Infrastructure is being neglected because the resources are going to the front of the month. If Varian does what you suggest then he is in this war until one side is dead. Period. After a defeat like the breaking of Orgimmar it likely would be the Horde that loses. But then what? Fighting such a war could shatter the Alliance politically and economically and then both sides lose. Sound satisfying? Not to me.


I agree, which is why the war will end after Orgrimmar is destroyed. The rest of the Horde will be left to rebuild and fortify, while the Orcs meekly cling to them for support and shelter. The Alliance, having had more than enough warfare, will like-wise do the same and limp away, head held high, with the tattered remains of Orcish pride burning behind it.

If Thrall wants to come in afterwards to pick up the pieces, fine, I suppose in saving the world he's earned his people a third chance (even though he royally screwed up their second chance), but only after they've been made to taste utter and total defeat at the ends of a wrathful and righteous enemy. The ones they've hurt not only in recent times but in not so distant past need to be the ones to destroy them and bring them low.

As for the rest of the Horde, none of the other Horde races are going to want to commit to a retalitory strike against the Alliance. They've all been reluctant allies to the Orcs' latest war, sticking it out only because of Thrall and his kool-aid, but not one of them did it because they thought it was a good idea and there is going to be resentment of the costs' incurred.

Out-of-game: Not one, not a single one, of the Horde victories in Cata has been as crushing as having THE major faction city burned to the ground. Even adding all the Horde victories together and tossing in Theramore to boot is not as crushing. You want several of the Horde leaders to die on top of that.

Think about how angry you are about the state of the Alliance in-game right now. Do you think the Horde players will feel any different? Of course they will, they'll be even more upset. If the Alliance were allowed to do what you are saying then the next expansion, in order to keep or get back customers, Blizz (a business) will have to burn Stormwind AND Ironforge just to prove there is no Alliance bias. And then the Alliance will have to burn Thunderbluff, Sen'jin Village AND Undercity. And the cycle repeats, basically forcing out all the other cool stories like the Burning Legion, Old Gods, Zandalari ect and killing the entire Warcraft franchise. Sound satisfying? Not to me.


Most of the capital cities are ghost towns. Moving the center of Horde power to, let's say, Azshara would be no different than moving out of Ironforge to Stormwind.

Maybe Garrosh's corruption was my fault?

I mean, I went to Nagrand, helped him build confidence and later introduced him to Thrall. I wonder if this will come back to bite me in the rear...

Eh probably not. I bet he won't even recognize me amidst the other raiders.


I don't know. Thorim remembered me from the mountains.
Edited by Cbredbeard on 4/19/2012 12:28 PM PDT
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]