Concerning 5.3

100 Tauren Shaman
14190
Except I'm going to turn your analogy on its head just by saying we're paying $15 for our McDonald's and you're paying $15 for your Grade A Wagyu Beef.


We arent getting Grade A Wagyu Beef. Contary to what you think we arent having it that good. Grass is greener.

Also, he's not your warchief. You say it like you ever liked Garrosh. Garrosh isn't your warchief anymore either as of 5.3, sad you don't get a choice in the matter.


This argument might wash if you guys didnt keep bringing up cata. You know, the expansion Garrosh in all his jerkyness was force fed down horde players throats weither we like it or not and the faction we loved got tossed down the path to the ruin it is now. Do remember we were still playing good little Garrosh lackeys as recently as the start of 5.1.

However, I will say that constantly eating your 'more expensive' food as you put it, has made you extremely uncaring to the plight of those stuck with Mc Donalds.

But who cares right? You're be taken care of.


There are plenty of horde players who have been very sympathetic to the issues Alliance player have. Contary to what alot of you think, horde players arent smerking at you and dont have it in for you. Our problem usually arises when you falsely portray our side of things as some type of promised land and propose solutions which require our experiance to end up in the toilet.

I hope you believe me when I tell you this, but I too would like to not have to drag you into it.

However, it is a Double Edged Sword at the moment, and we need to make comparisson's to the story line in given situations to prove points. The other fact of that we are constantly being absorbed into 'Horde' story lines is one of the major issues of being alliance.


Fair enough but there are a number of issues here that stem from the direction that blizzard has taken the story. They have kind of written themselves into a corner cause the Alliance has very little logical reason to take it easy on any part of the horde now that the horde is at its mercy.

Further, they have trapped themselves with how they can provide content for both. Without having completely different event areas with different quest lines, which they cant do due to the development time and resources, the two stories have to share in game resources. In this same situation they want to get the two groups to start working together while at the same time not like each other. They have made it hard on each others.

Dont get me wrong. Ive seen the Alliance starting quests vs the Horde ones. I do have issues with the Horde ones but they are pretty minor and stem from other issues with the story. The Alliance quest though are rubbish. Considering what they could have done with a infiltration/sabotage plot and the tech they have at their disposal to do so the quest are extremely disappointing.

Having shared content has been a problem for a long time and was actually an issue for the horde first. Ive followed Brann around quite alot of titan facilities. Infact Ulduar had no horde reps present at all and we were the ones who didnt walk out of the meeting. Even after the Reliquary was introduced I follow Brann around.

This is a problem Blizz has with using faction characters as neutrals. People dont like their heros going neutral and also dont like following characters from the opposite faction.

If we want to get into interfaction interaction issues theres a whole other set of stuff to discuss but this wall of text is already long enough. My key point from my earlier post is that its more productive to point out what is wrong with the Alliance experiance rather than going on about what the horde has that you dont have.
Reply Quote
100 Gnome Mage
20735
My key point from my earlier post is that its more productive to point out what is wrong with the Alliance experiance rather than going on about what the horde has that you dont have.


This is true, to an extent. However, you have to consider that really part of the reason Horde content keeps being brought up is that it is somewhat the causal effect. Horde content is prioritized above Alliance content. I don't think it is an intentional stick it to the Alliance move. It think it is just that the writers are focused on the Horde story. This creates a couple issues.

The first is the direction of the story. The Horde drive the story. The Alliance never really gets to be in the driver seat. This is why people talk about the Alliance be reactionary. It isn't just that the Alliance reacts to the Horde, it is the Alliance only functions to progress the Horde story along. The Alliance events are never the driving events of what is happening. Ashenvale is a good example of this. The Alliance puts out fires and fights a stalling action. Once the Horde assault part of the story ends, so does the Alliance. A few random gather X quests just finish it off, or it just inexplicably ends. The Alliance actions never drive what is happening. There is no Alliance counter which then drives what is happening. It is all just what the Horde accomplishes and the Alliance gets fit around it. 5.3 is starting the same way. It is setting up everything for the Horde progressing story. The Alliance are just fit in. The story is being completely driven by the Darkspear revolution. The Alliance don't really have any part in the story.

The second problem is expenditure of resources. Because the Horde story and content is developed first, cuts happen to Alliance content. Why was Alliance cata so bad? Horde content got flushed out, time ran out on Alliance content, Alliance content got cut. Shared content is developed for the Horde and the Alliance is fit into the mix. The is especially evident in 5.3 where the story is Horde and Alliance players might as well be Horde, only with less quests. The Alliance bring up the Horde having a better story because we would like to see Alliance content get the priority at least some of the time. It would be nice if at least some of the time content was cut that it was Horde content cut to keep Alliance content in. It should be 50/50, but right now it isn't.

So, Horde content matters in the context of: Focus on it has been excluding the Alliance content. The Alliance needs to be given the wheel to drive the story at times. The Alliance content needs to sometimes take priority. If one faction has to have content cut for time, sometimes it needs to be the Horde. (Note, I am saying sometimes. It just needs to be a fair distribution, which it has not been.)
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Shaman
14190
Neeber, IM going to assume your only talking about recent content development, as in this expac. If we go back further then I know your wrong at least on several accounts, particularly in Wrath.

I am curious where you got this deep insight into the development techniques blizzard uses? Are you basing this of the dialog bugs in shared quest in 5.2 because the issue there was sloppy QA work not that the Alliance got less development. Shared content is designed to be mirrored. It would make no difference which side got the quests developed first.

You seem to be making quite a few assumptions and Id like to see where the proof is so that I can comment on it fairly.

As it stands I disagree at least in part on the issue with Alliance questing in Cata 1-60. The 80-85 experiance was mostly on par or shared from my experiance of it. Infact Twilight Highlands was the only zone where the content really differed and the alliance side was very solid. The biggest problem with Alliance early questing in cata was too many pop culture references at bad times and a frankly depressing presentation. It was zone story not development which was the problem. Even when you one you left most zones feeling that you'd lost alot.
Edited by Trook on 4/17/2013 7:36 AM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Paladin
15280
McDonald's has pretty good fries, at least.

I'm more of an In and Out Burger person though. Best fast food burger ever. One of the nicer things about living in California.


Ah yeah, In-N-Out.
Reply Quote
We arent getting Grade A Wagyu Beef. Contary to what you think we arent having it that good. Grass is greener.


Your story is richer and has more going on. It is a fist pumping moment for 'You' the horde player to be killing Garrosh. It is a fist pumping moment for 'You' the horde player is being allied beneath well fleshed out Horde characters like Vol'jin and Green Jesus.

We're just along for the ride.

This argument might wash if you guys didnt keep bringing up cata. You know, the expansion Garrosh in all his jerkyness was force fed down horde players throats weither we like it or not and the faction we loved got tossed down the path to the ruin it is now. Do remember we were still playing good little Garrosh lackeys as recently as the start of 5.1.


The unfortunateness of the matter of cata is that Garrosh's character made sense back then, and was supposed to be a fist-pumping experience for the Horde to be able to take victories in lands that they've been struggling in. Garrosh was going to be this Warchief that got things done, not stand back and advocate a false peace.

Then you find out from Metzen that Thrall will be coming back and that Garrosh was just a stepping stone in his storyline. It cheapened Garrosh's character. Given 2 expansions of the Honorable (but take no !@#$ from anyone) Savage that Garrosh was, he would have been better than Thrall. All emotional ties were severed once you heard SoO was a thing, and that Garrosh would be the boss of the zone.

I loved to hate Garrosh, he did things the horde has been doing without tip-toeing around the situation. The horde needed lumber, food, fuel. Garrosh delivered in spades and accomplished what Thrall couldn't. By no longer advocating a peace, and directly attacking and getting what they needed, Garrosh was great. His former self was compelling.

I just don't see why Horde players didn't see Garrosh as the grand provider, who also took center stage and lead his horde in many missions, something Thrall would have sent a grunt (not a real one, mind you) to oversee it.

So yes, I'll use this statement boldly. You may not have liked him, but he got stuff done, whereas Thrall let the Horde stagnate under 'peace' and the outliers of his faction did what HAD to be done, as terrible as it was. Hell I don't like Garrosh, he literally planted his size 26 into the Alliance Posterior and turned left. But he was also a compelling and amazing character.

There are plenty of horde players who have been very sympathetic to the issues Alliance player have. Contary to what alot of you think, horde players arent smerking at you and dont have it in for you. Our problem usually arises when you falsely portray our side of things as some type of promised land and propose solutions which require our experiance to end up in the toilet.


Just as you don't want us to generalize you for things a vocal 'some' might say, don't generalize us either. I don't want Horde story to suffer like the Alliance one has. Alliance is getting the short end of the stick in story. Horde story is generated first, Alliance is taken care of as an afterthought. When it is a mirrored story line, you get stuff like Modera with Aethas' text, where they literally copy/pasted from one to the other, and didn't bother changing any conotations.

Is there some reason that we can't have half the stick? I understand that you can't always win and you can't always be a victor, but our story should always have a semblance of rewards/consequences/ramifications. Not a story that is left with an air of absolute confusion.

However, I have seen that what little courtesy that is extended to the Alliance as sympathy is also no longer there, as I have seen many say they no longer feel any such sympathy because they choose to listen to the vocal 'some' that want to see the horde in shambles, unable to stand back up.

"I" get how you feel.

Fair enough but there are a number of issues here that stem from the direction that blizzard has taken the story. They have kind of written themselves into a corner cause the Alliance has very little logical reason to take it easy on any part of the horde now that the horde is at its mercy.


It was going good until...

Further, they have trapped themselves with how they can provide content for both. Without having completely different event areas with different quest lines, which they cant do due to the development time and resources, the two stories have to share in game resources.


I can't help but feel you have just said, "Deal with it" here in this part, because blizzard can't provide engaging content for both. I completely understand that Blizzard doesn't have dev time and resources to make 2 completely different questing zones for characters. At the same time, I can't in good faith believe that their constraints are so thick that they can't put two sides of a story in the same zone.

One of the major problems with Alliance story is that time and again, we have to work with Horde Heroes instead of our own. We report to them, we give them aide, we collect things to make our enemies stronger. No matter how many times "Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" comes up, in this example, it isn't correct. It is the Enemy of my Enemy is still my Enemy.

Blizzard makes this grand hyuk hyuk at Alliance by having Vol'jin saying he has a better plan. To let the Alliance go in first and then let his people come in and clean them up afterwards, give the corpses to Sylvanas.

I wish I could retort back that we'll just leave. He's closer to the doorstep than we are, and we can wait for the Horde to kill itself. Then we'll just step in and torch the whole valley, preventing the corpses from ever being used. That is my response to his "better" plan. There is always a better plan, and when both halves of the horde break themselves apart, we'll come in and finish it.

I don't cow to horde threats, and I don't deal with horde pests. If they think they can do it without us, we'll leave and wait on the borders in our airship. If they fall flat, they can come back and beg me for help.
Reply Quote
100 Gnome Mage
20735
If you followed the Beta development of Cata, it was pretty obvious. You saw a steady progression of Horde side being flushed out. The Alliance side started getting flushed out toward the end of it, only to get lots just pushed in as time ran out. Twighlight Highlands is a good example. Both Horde and Alliance had the temporary 'go to X' intro into the zone. Both had datamined sound files and quest text to indicated different intros where planned. Horde intro was eventually added into the beta and is what we have on live. The Horde arrive in an air fleet with Garrosh. Time ran out, the Alliance intro. The into originally was going to be arrival with Varian and a naval fleet. But, because time ran out, it was cut and the live version became the same as the short temp version from beta. We hop on a plan, cut to black, and are in the zone.

Basically, if you pay attention to the order things are released you can see the development cycle. You can actually see content get release and flushed out. It is kind of neat. Which is why I enjoy the betas and test realms. Patterns do emerge.

You can also watch what the Devs talk about. Things that get them worked up. Right now, you can see them very excited by the Horde story. Which is why I do NOT believe it is something they have against the Alliance. It is just very obvious that the Horde story has them excited and working on it. The unfortunate effect is the Alliance not receiving comparable attention.

04/17/2013 07:32 AMPosted by Trook
The biggest problem with Alliance early questing in cata was too many pop culture references


They did have a lot of those. But I think it falls back to a lack of attention to the Alliance story in general.

a frankly depressing presentation. It was zone story not development which was the problem. Even when you one you left most zones feeling that you'd lost alot.


But why was that? Why did you feel like you lost? Why did every time the Horde and Alliance engaged the Alliance walked away feeling like they just got kicked in the nuts? Ultimately it was because the story was driven by the Horde. The Horde attack, get their victories and progress. Written from the Horde side you see some nice progression and story development. When you land on the Alliance side you experience all those Horde victories as the Horde drives the story. Then when you should be the one taking the wheel for a period, getting to push and drive the story, it just ends.
Reply Quote
Seebach, what Garrosh delivered was a massive world war.

Smash and grab isn't the best developmental strategy.

Don't wish this on the alliance, please.
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Shaman
14190
Your story is richer and has more going on. It is a fist pumping moment for 'You' the horde player to be killing Garrosh. It is a fist pumping moment for 'You' the horde player is being allied beneath well fleshed out Horde characters like Vol'jin and Green Jesus.

We're just along for the ride.


Then using the food analogy we had to eat refuse for 2 years just to finally get to eat our 5 star meal. If killing Garrosh is a fist pumping moment its because we have had to put up with his !@#$ for so long. Personally its more of a relief than a fist pumping moment.

As for Vol'jin and Thrall, Im glad they are along. To be honest though Vol'jin's development is pretty recent. Depending on who you guys bring to the Seige you have your fair share of developed characters that are likely to be coming along.

Developed characters isnt something the Alliance has a shortage of.

The unfortunateness of the matter of cata is that Garrosh's character made sense back then, and was supposed to be a fist-pumping experience for the Horde to be able to take victories in lands that they've been struggling in. Garrosh was going to be this Warchief that got things done, not stand back and advocate a false peace.


The problem is very few people who played horde I know actually liked anything Garrosh did. It didnt help that he was a insulting %^- to us alot of the time.

Take into account alot of Horde players were the ones that pulled Garrosh out of his sulk in Nagrand. He was pathetic back then and frankly when he turned up talking smack to us it was hard to hold him with much respect. Wrath made it worse when he sent us on stupid and suicidal missions which required Saurfang's intervention to keep from turning into disasters.

He didnt improve at all in Cata. He kept putting fools in charge, starting unneccesary fights, destroying our resources to fuel his war and treating non orcs like crap. His commanders were not much better.

Just as you don't want us to generalize you for things a vocal 'some' might say, don't generalize us either. I don't want Horde story to suffer like the Alliance one has. Alliance is getting the short end of the stick in story. Horde story is generated first, Alliance is taken care of as an afterthought. When it is a mirrored story line, you get stuff like Modera with Aethas' text, where they literally copy/pasted from one to the other, and didn't bother changing any conotations.


I have quite a bit to say on this but its late for me so Ill have to come back to it later.

I can't help but feel you have just said, "Deal with it" here in this part, because blizzard can't provide engaging content for both. I completely understand that Blizzard doesn't have dev time and resources to make 2 completely different questing zones for characters. At the same time, I can't in good faith believe that their constraints are so thick that they can't put two sides of a story in the same zone.


No Im not. I think the Alliance could have a very exciting and compelling quest line leading to their contacting the Darkspear rebellion. Using the Darkspear rebellion makes sense for the horde but establishing that has a plan could be done much much better in a much more effecting and exciting way. Make it and Alliance plan with clear goals and objectives. Show why its going to help the allaince.

Im actually thinking of starting a post where plot ideas of the types of things people would like to see as alliance questlines could give some examples of the type of things alliance players are after. I have a few ideas myself. I do actually play alliance. I LIKE the alliance.

The issue of the rebellion and the Alliance working together and dealing with each other is a tricky one. I think there are interfaction interaction issues there which cause problems with this plot in a two faction setting but again thats really something for a completely different post.

I wish I could retort back that we'll just leave. He's closer to the doorstep than we are, and we can wait for the Horde to kill itself. Then we'll just step in and torch the whole valley, preventing the corpses from ever being used. That is my response to his "better" plan. There is always a better plan, and when both halves of the horde break themselves apart, we'll come in and finish it.


By the sound of it they are going to let you do just that. Im not sure Im thrilled that my potental future warcheif is going to get talked down. Personally I think it would have been better if the whole dialog option was left out. Its a pretty stupid thing for a Alliance agent to say when trying to establish a working relationship with a group your not on good terms with. I think a better option would be that alliance players had the option of laying out certain requirements that the alliance would expect as condition of its help. Im not talking about post war negociations. Things like access to resources and infomations. Secure supply lines. Tactical information and support in acheiving Alliance objectives. That way again its establishing that the Alliance is doing this for its reasons not the hordes.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
5130
04/16/2013 11:01 PMPosted by Rixita
Horde players are being served 5 star quality restaurant meals.
I get that you think Horde story is better than Alliance story.

But sometimes hyperbole goes too far.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
5130

I get that you think Horde story is better than Alliance story.

But sometimes hyperbole goes too far.
That's fine. How would you feel if the Horde were following orders from Varian Wrynn and fighting under him, collecting resources for the Alliance since the Darkspear Rebellion is clearly too weak to fight the Horde on its own?
Wrynn? I compare Wrynn to Garrosh and if I was working alongside Moira or Muradin to kill Wrynn, I'd be bloody ecstatic.

What I wouldn't do is compare it to a 5 star restaurant for anyone.
Edited by Manion on 4/17/2013 9:05 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
5130
04/17/2013 09:08 AMPosted by Rixita
If that's the only thing working you up, let it go and move on. This isn't a case of 'grass in greener'. Throughout WotLK, TBC, and vanilla I played both factions and never see a drastic imbalance in story quality.
Where you looking? Onyxia's ties to the Alliance, the missing king, those were all very interesting. And the Horde got the Dark Horde, which was amazingly only a single flightpoint from Ironforge to fight.

Perhaps you didn't notice because you didn't visit the forums and see all the talk about it. But it was there right alongside "Horde cities have a back entrance!"
Reply Quote
100 Orc Hunter
18445
04/09/2013 08:22 PMPosted by Wreave
The Ally rage you're seeing now is just the warmup.


When aren't the Alliance raging.
Reply Quote
100 Troll Hunter
13645
I will say that Onyxia was an interesting touch, but at the same time compare Bolvar Fordragon with Warchief Thrall. Bolvar didn't do barely anything until WotLK, and even then he did not do much.

And Thrall did?

All Thrall really had was some quests based around the Burning Blade, and a few around Blackrock.

My point is, every leader sucked during Vanilla.
Edited by Pyronaptor on 4/17/2013 10:35 AM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Human Death Knight
13475
04/17/2013 10:23 AMPosted by Lytum
The Ally rage you're seeing now is just the warmup.


When aren't the Alliance raging.


When the Horde's raging.

It's not the Alliance that's demanding the heads of Jaina, Vereesa, and Rogers be served to them on platters.
Reply Quote
100 Human Death Knight
13475
04/17/2013 10:50 AMPosted by Rixita
Thrall had the prior experience of Warcraft 3 to build his character. No one knew who Bolvar was, and if I may be so bold, I don't think many people cared about him either. He was a pretty boring character with no real personality until WotLK, and very little even then.


Bolvar got a pretty major following because of The Great Masquerade.

He's more akin to Saurfang, in that they were characters introduced in WoW who gained a following as a result of what they did in-game. Bolvar had the above mentioned Great Masquerade, while Saurfang had the Might of Kalimdor.

Of course, most people who did not witness or participate in those events didn't have any reason to relate to them. Especially since Vanilla had much less invested in the story side, so there was little interaction with them outside of those events.

Thrall, meanwhile, was one of the major NPCs in Vanilla who mostly just ran on inertia from their appearances in previous games, like Tyrande, Sylvanas, and Jaina.
Edited by Arterius on 4/17/2013 11:01 AM 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]