Reasons for war between Alliance/Horde

90 Tauren Shaman
10525
Ask CDev response, China iirc.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Rogue
8970
Ask CDev response, China iirc.


Thought so. Let's go over it.

Q:
The Alliance army who invaded the Barrens wore the tabard of Theramore. Were they under Jaina Proudmoore's command? And their invasion happened way before the time of the incoming destruction of Theramore incident, so what's the reason behind their attack on Orgrimmar's territory? It seems the Alliance and the Horde were already in total war in Cataclysm.

A:
Because Garrosh wants to defeat the night elves and conquer the whole of Kalimdor under the banner of the Horde. So the humans of Theramore sent their army and tried to establish a military line between the night elf territory and Theramore. But it seems the result is not what they expected.


It's a pretty literal interpretation to claim that this somehow retcons other sources. "Wants to" and "Is trying to" are definitely not mutually exclusive. I would say instead that the former is required for the latter.

That said, this isn't a serious rebuttal to Stranglethorn as an alternative unless the Horde was throwing off signs that they wanted to invade Ashenvale at the same time.
Edited by Kyalin on 6/25/2012 4:41 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
You didn't even mention the part that Kellick addressed, so I have no idea what you're on about.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Rogue
8970
06/25/2012 04:50 PMPosted by Iyotanka
You didn't even mention the part that Kellick addressed, so I have no idea what you're on about.


Yeah, not getting into this. I did, I'm not repeating myself six times for your amusement while you chirp back "nuh uh", and doing that doesn't make your argument valid anyway.
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
06/25/2012 04:59 PMPosted by Kyalin
You didn't even mention the part that Kellick addressed, so I have no idea what you're on about.


Yeah, not getting into this. I did, I'm not repeating myself six times for your amusement while you chirp back "nuh uh", and doing that doesn't make your argument valid anyway.


Ah, my bad. You said "wants to" and did not focus on "desire". Honest misreading - the quotes threw me off. Your condescension was duly noted.
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
Anyone have a link to the Cata manual, btw? I seem to remember arguing about this already.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Rogue
8970
06/25/2012 05:12 PMPosted by Iyotanka
Anyone have a link to the Cata manual, btw? I seem to remember arguing about this already.


Lemme quote it:

In light of all that has transpired, the wise shaman Thrall has chosen to investigate the world’s growing elemental instability. Thus he has temporarily relinquished his title of Horde warchief and passed it on to Garrosh Hellscream, son of the legendary orc hero Grom. Under Garrosh’s command, the Horde’s belligerence toward the Alliance is growing. Most recently the headstrong new warchief led his forces on a rampage through neighboring Ashenvale, claiming much of what was once night elf land.

King Varian Wrynn has not backed down from Garrosh’s aggression, nor has the rest of the Alliance. Offensives into the Southern Barrens have secured territory once belonging to the Horde for Varian and his allies, who are also working to retake portions of Ashenvale. With tensions rising, both factions are on the brink of all-out warfare.
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
The earliest known blow in the war happened with the Alliance invasion of the Barrens before the Cataclysm, which included the siege of the Crossroads and destruction of Honor's Stand.

The earliest Horde attack in this war was actually the invasion of Gilneas which took place at approximately the same time (though it wasn't part of the Alliance at the time) followed by Ashenvale circa Wolfheart.


Garrosh's aggression there refers to the second wave in Ashenvale which takes place before Horde players arrive.

A more recent source by way of word of god tells us the Alliance reacted to Garrosh's desire to conquer Ashenvale, something which was made patently clear long before the events of Cataclysm, which would seem to confirm the fact the Alliance's initial invasion of the Barrens came first.


Not really sure how that contradicts anything with the manual? The manual says that the Alliance is not backing down from Garrosh's aggression in Ashenvale. This does not preclude them from also acting offensively.

It could be as simple as this:

1. Garrosh wants Kalimdor. This is known.
2. The Alliance, in reaction to this desire, attacks The Barrens.
3. Garrosh, needing more resources and to work towards his goal of Kalimdor, attacks Ashenvale.
4. The Alliance responds with additional attacks, sending troops from Theramore to try and establish lines with Ashenvale.

None of those things prevents the other.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Rogue
8970
It could be as simple as this:

1. Garrosh wants Kalimdor. This is known.
2. The Alliance, in reaction to this desire, attacks The Barrens.
3. Garrosh, needing more resources and to work towards his goal of Kalimdor, attacks Ashenvale.
4. The Alliance responds with additional attacks, sending troops from Theramore to try and establish lines with Ashenvale.

None of those things prevents the other.


Assuming this is true, something I disagree with, but I'll put that aside from now, Garrosh going after trade with the goblins and saying something along the lines of "I'll come to the table if you will" would knock #1 right out, throwing out that troublesome extra cost of a global war with the Alliance.
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
06/25/2012 05:56 PMPosted by Kyalin
Garrosh going after trade with the goblins and saying something along the lines of "I'll come to the table if you will" would knock #1 right out, throwing out that troublesome extra cost of a global war with the Alliance.


I'm sorry, I have a headache. That didn't make sense to me. I'm not really sure how "I'll come to the table if you will" changes his desires to control Kalimdor for the Horde?
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Paladin
14910
One reason that I think is overlooked is that the Orcs hate the Alliance for locking them up for 20 years. Another reason is that the Orcs think they wiped the slate clean by fighting the Burning Legion a couple times. The Orcs are completely unsympathetic and are totally full of themselves.
Reply Quote
25 Blood Elf Paladin
0
1. Garrosh wants Kalimdor. This is known.
2. The Alliance, in reaction to this desire, attacks The Barrens.


No.

The Alliance had absolutely no knowledge of Garrosh's ambitions until Wolfheart when he attacked Ashenvale. The same book says that at the time of the attack Jaina is not leading any attack on the Barrens.

Furthermore, the Cataclysm manual says "Varian has not backed down from Garrosh's aggression." "Aggression" means that he's actually acted. Having a desire =/= aggression. The line also indicates that the attack on the Barrens was completely reactionary, not proactive. The manual also says that at the same time the Barrens were invaded, Alliance forces are also working to "retake" lost lands in Ashenvale, indicating that they were lost prior to any operations in the Barrens.

The Horde struck first.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Rogue
8970
I'm sorry, I have a headache. That didn't make sense to me. I'm not really sure how "I'll come to the table if you will" changes his desires to control Kalimdor for the Horde?


My point is, if your theory was correct, a theory which I disagree with on the grounds that Vyrin has just explained, Garrosh would have been able to draw down tensions by seeking trade with the goblins in Stranglethorn instead, and indicating that he's willing to talk to mend relations.

That of course, isn't characteristic for Garrosh, but the point is to show that the Orcs had an alternative, one that wouldn't have catapulted them into global war.

They just chose not to take it.
Reply Quote
96 Troll Shaman
5540
06/25/2012 06:21 PMPosted by Vyrin
Furthermore, the Cataclysm manual says "Varian has not backed down from Garrosh's aggression." "Aggression" means that he's actually acted. Having a desire =/= aggression. The line also indicates that the attack on the Barrens was completely reactionary, not proactive. The manual also says that at the same time the Barrens were invaded, Alliance forces are also working to "retake" lost lands in Ashenvale, indicating that they were lost prior to any operations in the Barrens.

So the blue post would have been a retcon to confirm Barrens flavour text, in your mind?
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
1. Garrosh wants Kalimdor. This is known.
2. The Alliance, in reaction to this desire, attacks The Barrens.


No.

The Alliance had absolutely no knowledge of Garrosh's ambitions until Wolfheart when he attacked Ashenvale. The same book says that at the time of the attack Jaina is not leading any attack on the Barrens.

Furthermore, the Cataclysm manual says "Varian has not backed down from Garrosh's aggression." "Aggression" means that he's actually acted. Having a desire =/= aggression. The line also indicates that the attack on the Barrens was completely reactionary, not proactive. The manual also says that at the same time the Barrens were invaded, Alliance forces are also working to "retake" lost lands in Ashenvale, indicating that they were lost prior to any operations in the Barrens.

The Horde struck first.


You're confusing "acting" with "invading" or "attacking". Your responses are quite often aggressive, despite you not having hit me. Mine are equally aggressive at times because of the nature of the posts, not because of a specific action. "Aggression" CAN refer to physical actions, but just as easily can refer to behaviors or dispositions.

I would ask you to source the thing about "they didn't know", but I have already done so in past "discussions" and been met with mockery and insult.

06/25/2012 06:26 PMPosted by Kyalin
Garrosh would have been able to draw down tensions by seeking trade with the goblins in Stranglethorn instead, and indicating that he's willing to talk to mend relations.


... this doesn't make sense. If you are accepting for this argument that Garrosh had aggressive intentions for Kalimdor, then how how would that make the Goblins more or less willing to sell anything to him? "I want all of Kalimdor... but first, let's be friends so I can have your lumber. Then I'll dominate you." ???? How does that make any sense?
Edited by Iyotanka on 6/25/2012 6:59 PM PDT
Reply Quote
85 Blood Elf Paladin
5740
06/25/2012 06:21 PMPosted by Vyrin
The Alliance had absolutely no knowledge of Garrosh's ambitions


Then SI-7 is horrible Garrosh practiclly brings it up in casual conversations

Grunt "Hail Warchief!"

Garrosh "Soon we will conquer all of Kalimdor! The Horde Reich will rise upon the ashes of the alliance!"
Reply Quote
25 Blood Elf Paladin
0
You're confusing "acting" with "invading" or "attacking". Your responses are quite often aggressive, despite you not having hit me. Mine are equally aggressive at times because of the nature of the posts, not because of a specific action. "Aggression" CAN refer to physical actions, but just as easily can refer to behaviors or dispositions.


And the Alliance had not witnessed any behaviour or disposition to indicate that Garrosh wanted to conquer Kalimdor until Wolfheart. He appeared hotheaded and too big for his heels but there was nothing to suggest anything else.

You keep on arguing "Well maybe the Alliance was pre-emptively invading due to Garrosh's wishes!" but you have yet to supply any indication that the Alliance was ever aware of his intentions until he actually executed his plans.

And again, having an aggressive disposition is not enough to prompt war, especially war from Jaina and Varian, both of whom would rather have peace.

06/25/2012 06:56 PMPosted by Iyotanka
I would ask you to source the thing about "they didn't know", but I have already done so in past "discussions" and been met with mockery and insult.


Stop asking for negative proof and supply some evidence to back up YOUR assertion. Where did Garrosh declare that he wants to wipe out the Night Elves and conquer Kalimdor in the presence of the Alliance?
Edited by Vyrin on 6/25/2012 7:00 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Shaman
10525
06/25/2012 06:59 PMPosted by Vyrin
Where did Garrosh declare that he wants to wipe out the Night Elves and conquer Kalimdor in the presence of the Alliance?


Who said anything about wiping out the Nelves? Why does it have to be said in the presence of the Alliance for them to know about it? Are they really THAT bad at espionage that things MUST be said in front of them for them to know about it? I never said it had to be said in front of an Alliance member. Why are you creating these qualifications?

I provided my source. The Alliance attacked based on that knowledge -- Word of God says so. If you want an Alliance NPC that is standing in front of Garrosh when he says it explicitly I'm afraid you'll have to take that up with CDev.

Oh, as for the other stuff? Your response to me was "I don't believe they would have done that." So I'm not sure how I can respond without saying "NUH UH". Your opinion is valid... just not fact.
Edited by Iyotanka on 6/25/2012 7:05 PM PDT
Reply Quote
25 Blood Elf Paladin
0
Who said anything about wiping out the Nelves? Why does it have to be said in the presence of the Alliance for them to know about it? Are they really THAT bad at espionage that things MUST be said in front of them for them to know about it? I never said it had to be said in front of an Alliance member. Why are you creating these qualifications?


Because if the Alliance was going to act based on Garrosh's wish to wipe out the Night Elves then they'd need to know about it. And you've supplied nothing to even suggest that they knew about it prior to Wolfheart aside from maybe if you really REALLY want it to be true it will become true.

I provided my source. The Alliance attacked based on that knowledge -- Word of God says so. If you want an Alliance NPC that is standing in front of Garrosh when he says it explicitly I'm afraid you'll have to take that up with CDev.


And how did they acquire that knowledge? The only point in time that we see in World of Warcraft where they were made aware of it was in Wolfheart, and the only way they were made aware of it was via the fact that Garrosh attacked them.

Hence, that's when they learned about it, and hence, the Horde struck the first blow in the war.

Oh, as for the other stuff? Your response to me was "I don't believe they would have done that." So I'm not sure how I can respond without saying "NUH UH". Your opinion is valid... just not fact.


Your position is literally:

"Garrosh said that he wants to wipe out the Night Elves in some private conversations with those he trusts, therefore the Alliance invaded the Barrens pre-emptively despite having no knowledge of Garrosh's plans and despite Jaina and Varian both being charactereized as people who wouldn't do that."

There's stubborn, and then there's you. For someone who presents himself as such a stickler for evidence you've provided none of your own. You're flat out making things up.
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)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]