Has Alliance aggression been retconned out?

90 Undead Warlock
5995
12/10/2012 09:41 AMPosted by Mordstreich
It wouldn't whitewash it anymore than saying the Wrathgate was all Putress and wasn't a result of Sylvanas keeping a dreadlord/ordering the blight to be made. There's other things going on here, but to the Horde it would look like it was the Alliance thus causing a misunderstanding, however it would prove that the Alliance races are also capable of savagery.


Yeah I misread your post, and edited mine.

12/10/2012 09:41 AMPosted by Mordstreich
But as you said, they were pirate/neutral ships, so that's probably the reasoning there.


From what I can tell, they were just shooting ships, since the only description of the event is the captain calling them trigger happy, reckless and paranoid. I think the captain works for Ratchet, so it's possible they were shooting neutral ships.
Edited by Ximothy on 12/10/2012 9:45 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Orc Warlock
11315
12/10/2012 09:42 AMPosted by Ximothy
From what I can tell, they were just shooting ships, since the only description of the event is the captain calling them trigger happy, reckless and paranoid. I think the captain works for Ratchet, so it's possible they were shooting neutral ships.


Given that in vanilla there was a pirate ship parked about twenty feet down the coast from Ratchet and Ratchet itself has a shipping link with a pirate hold it's not hard to imagine how the Northwatch gunners might get things confused.
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Paladin
14910
No matter how justified the Alliance is in going to war with the Horde, they've retconned everything to the point that everything is Garrosh's fault.
Reply Quote
85 Tauren Shaman
6230
12/10/2012 10:15 AMPosted by Cbredbeard
No matter how justified the Alliance is in going to war with the Horde, they've retconned everything to the point that everything is Garrosh's fault.


Thus, if you don't like, or disagree with the Alliance, you must be evil.
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warlock
6505
Also, all that stuff that happened in Ashenvale prior to the actual shattering by Deathwing was the Twilight's hammer
Reply Quote
90 Troll Hunter
13130
12/10/2012 10:59 AMPosted by Mephelis
Also, all that stuff that happened in Ashenvale prior to the actual shattering by Deathwing was the Twilight's hammer

In their defense, the Alliance in game doesn't know that (And neither does the Horde).
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
16345
I,m not sure anymore about how the events of Cata have evolved. Some sources say that the Alliance invaded the Barrens first, others say that they did so as reprisal for the Horde's invasion of Ashenvale.

If Blizz has decided that the Horde invaded first, then I guess it makes it quite clear who did what first.
Reply Quote
90 Orc Warrior
11095
I actually finally got around to reading wolfheart. (was kinda hesitant to buy a Knaak book with the crap he gets on this forum)

I'm about halfway through and so far there's not really anything that implies the barrens invasion hasn't happened. In fact, it says Jaina could not attend the summit because her martial knowledge is needed to organize alliance forces. That could change I guess but the fighting in ashenvale has begun so it would take someone just stating it as fact, a quote I've asked for several times in the past and never gotten a reply.

It does imply there has been no conflict in ashenvale, which I suppose one could interpret as no war. But for the worgen to be in teldrassil and the goblins to be in the horde and bilgewater harbor to exist, the war has to have already begun.

So unless I run into some counter exposition, I may start going back to the idea that third parties exploited existing tension and tricked the Alliance into sparking the war. Then Garrosh escalates things with Ashenvale and Gilneas

Unless someone wants to prove me wrong, then by all means please do
Reply Quote
90 Human Monk
2460
It struck me as bad story telling, for sure. What happened in the Southern Barrens ended in bitter blood feuds on both sides.

Cataclysm was supposed to mark the point in which the Alliance and Horde go into full out war. But because Blizzard wants this to be "the war expansion", they've apparently decided to act like Cataclysm was a "You ain't seen nothin' yet" sort of thing.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
5420
From what I understand, the attack on Gilneas was first, the people were evacuated to Teldrassil. Then the meeting in Teldrassil about the Worgen. At that time, Garrosh launches a surprise attack on Ashenvale, taking most of it by somehow outfighting, planning, stratagizing and tacticing (is that a word?) the Night elves in their own territory, managing to have -everything- happen practically perfectly despite several scouts escaping when they were supposed to be killed, who somehow summon the reinforcements Garrosh was expecting and things go swimmingly.
Until Varian shows up and runs across an entire continent in a day(?), pushing back the Horde everywhere in Ashenvale and engages Garrosh in hand to hand combat and beat him.

Yet none of that is shown in game. /sigh The Horde has a decent advancement and Zoram'gar is left completely intact.
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warlock
6505
It struck me as bad story telling, for sure. What happened in the Southern Barrens ended in bitter blood feuds on both sides.

Cataclysm was supposed to mark the point in which the Alliance and Horde go into full out war. But because Blizzard wants this to be "the war expansion", they've apparently decided to act like Cataclysm was a "You ain't seen nothin' yet" sort of thing.


This.

To be honest, this war has started about 3 times. First it was Declared by Varian at the end of Battle for Undercity. Then the Twilights Hammer somehow provoked it into starting in The Shattering, and then apparently Garrosh declares war by attacking Northwatch
Reply Quote
90 Orc Warrior
11095
how does that explain the forsaken invasion fleet being hit by the cataclysm, while the alliance were in the barrens before the cataclysm?
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warlock
6505
I actually finally got around to reading wolfheart. (was kinda hesitant to buy a Knaak book with the crap he gets on this forum)

I'm about halfway through and so far there's not really anything that implies the barrens invasion hasn't happened. In fact, it says Jaina could not attend the summit because her martial knowledge is needed to organize alliance forces. That could change I guess but the fighting in ashenvale has begun so it would take someone just stating it as fact, a quote I've asked for several times in the past and never gotten a reply.

It does imply there has been no conflict in ashenvale, which I suppose one could interpret as no war. But for the worgen to be in teldrassil and the goblins to be in the horde and bilgewater harbor to exist, the war has to have already begun.

So unless I run into some counter exposition, I may start going back to the idea that third parties exploited existing tension and tricked the Alliance into sparking the war. Then Garrosh escalates things with Ashenvale and Gilneas

Unless someone wants to prove me wrong, then by all means please do


The Alliance is confirmed to have invaded the Barrens before the cataclysm hit by quest text. Someone says that they were in the middle of a battle when the Barrens split in two, and I think one of the Alliance bases was actually damaged by the cataclysm.

Since the Worgen were in Wolfheart, and the cataclysm happens during their starting quests, the Barrens invasion happened before or during the Gilneas invasion, so it goes Barrens->Gilneas->Ashenvale

I had also forgot about the Goblin starting zone. The Alliance is trying to capture Thrall on his way to the Maelstrom, this takes place almost immediately after the cataclysm, and they have a fleet in full force there, implying that they set off to take out Thrall before they would have gotten news of Gilneas even happening
Edited by Mephelis on 12/10/2012 12:14 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
5420
It's safe to say that Blizzard itself probably doesn't know when the war started. They have contradictory events happening in game, in the books (which are canon) and via CDev. They need to sit down and finally figure out what the real chain of events is and then let us know it so we can put an end to who started what and when,
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warlock
6505
12/10/2012 12:20 PMPosted by Kynrind
It's safe to say that Blizzard itself probably doesn't know when the war started. They have contradictory events happening in game, in the books (which are canon) and via CDev. They need to sit down and finally figure out what the real chain of events is and then let us know it so we can put an end to who started what and when,


Blizzard has a bad habit of rewriting it's own canon to make sure that everything paves the way for what they want to do at the moment.

This war has so many contradictions it reminds me of the chain of event of the Clone Wars
Edited by Mephelis on 12/10/2012 12:24 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Human Monk
2460
12/10/2012 12:20 PMPosted by Kynrind
It's safe to say that Blizzard itself probably doesn't know when the war started. They have contradictory events happening in game, in the books (which are canon) and via CDev. They need to sit down and finally figure out what the real chain of events is and then let us know it so we can put an end to who started what and when,


Oh it gets worse than that.

I remember when the PvP honor system was first introduced in a patch in vanilla, the preview on the website said something like "It's time to get this war going in full swing!".

Only the factions weren't at war. The Battlegrounds contradicted the hell out of that, and so Blizzard just justified them later on as uncontrolled skirmishes......even though they all had factions for you to gain rep with.
Reply Quote
90 Orc Warrior
11095
It's safe to say that Blizzard itself probably doesn't know when the war started. They have contradictory events happening in game, in the books (which are canon) and via CDev. They need to sit down and finally figure out what the real chain of events is and then let us know it so we can put an end to who started what and when,


I don't see any contradictions in this regard. A lack of an exact timeline maybe but we're told the alliance were in the barrens pre cataclysm and everything else happens post cataclysm.

This goes along with the fact there was peace, and the horde is the only faction to be framed for acts of aggression, first in ashenvale, then camp T. Alliance had reason to attack, horde didn't.

Before someone tries to accuse me of it, I'm not trying to say it makes the alliance evil, warmongering, or hypocrites, there was aggression on both sides. It's just really starting to look like they they started the war.

The only thing I would hope to come out of it is less posts about how the alliance can't trust the horde, the horde is warmongering, etc.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
16345
12/10/2012 12:42 PMPosted by Shippyship
It's safe to say that Blizzard itself probably doesn't know when the war started. They have contradictory events happening in game, in the books (which are canon) and via CDev. They need to sit down and finally figure out what the real chain of events is and then let us know it so we can put an end to who started what and when,


I don't see any contradictions in this regard. A lack of an exact timeline maybe but we're told the alliance were in the barrens pre cataclysm and everything else happens post cataclysm.

This goes along with the fact there was peace, and the horde is the only faction to be framed for acts of aggression, first in ashenvale, then camp T. Alliance had reason to attack, horde didn't.

Before someone tries to accuse me of it, I'm not trying to say it makes the alliance evil, warmongering, or hypocrites, there was aggression on both sides. It's just really starting to look like they they started the war.

The only thing I would hope to come out of it is less posts about how the alliance can't trust the horde, the horde is warmongering, etc.


There is proof that both the Alliance and the Horde started the war. At different times. You can give me proof that the Barrens campaign was what began everything, I can give you equal proof that Garrosh invaded Ashenvale first. There is simply no way for us to know unless Blizz tells us straight what happened when. Quest text isn't always truthful. Someone messed up and had the Forsaken attack neutral Dalaran in Silverpine when they weren't supposed to. Tides of War states that the Barrens campaign was launched as reprisal for the Ashenvale one.
Reply Quote
90 Orc Warrior
11095
12/10/2012 12:49 PMPosted by Resileaf
I can give you equal proof that Garrosh invaded Ashenvale first.


I've asked for this multiple times now so please do provide.

12/10/2012 12:49 PMPosted by Resileaf
Tides of War states that the Barrens campaign was launched as reprisal for the Ashenvale one.


I also don't recall this either. Especially considering it was revealed Camp T was attacked because of bad intel and not part of a counter invasion
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
16345
12/10/2012 12:54 PMPosted by Shippyship
I can give you equal proof that Garrosh invaded Ashenvale first.


I've asked for this multiple times now so please do provide.

Tides of War states that the Barrens campaign was launched as reprisal for the Ashenvale one.


I also don't recall this either. Especially considering it was revealed Camp T was attacked because of bad intel and not part of a counter invasion


Wrong book then. May have been in Wolfheart. I dunno though, haven't read that one.
Not planning on either. Just been told by other people who read the book what's being said.
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]