Let me kill Surfang as horde

General Discussion
Following the Thread De-Railing for a moment
11/09/2018 10:35 AMPosted by Maizono
I hope you're trolling, because there were still rules in World War 1.
There have never been rules in War. There still are not rules.
The Geneva Accords, strictly speaking, began as an agreement on the treatment of prisoners. It was not until after WWI that they drafted an agreement to not use poison gas.

And the Geneva Conventions only apply to the countries which ratified them. Japan, during WWII, was not part of the treaty and was under no obligation to treat prisoners humanely. It's the entire point of The Bridge Over the River Kwai.

There are customs in War. And those customs are most often dictated by the ruling class to protect the ruling class. They have always dispensed with any niceties when it came to the rank and file soldiers.

The entire idea of "Honorable Combat" comes from the Middle Ages when it was okay for trained warriors who were fully armored men riding on horseback to plow through ranks of boys and farmers wearing a helmet and holding a rake or pitchfork if they were lucky. The only "rules" were it was agreed that the farmers were not allowed to kill the horses because buying and training new horses was expensive and took too long.

The only people who think there are rules and honor in war are the people who are ready to spend other lives for their honor instead of risking their own lives for it themselves.
11/09/2018 11:20 AMPosted by Jellarie
11/08/2018 09:15 PMPosted by Dramshin
He is pathetic. Let me kill him as a horde player.

The war has dragged on because of him. Good Horde have died because of him. The alliance can retaliate because of him.

A bonus, let me kill Thrall as well. Thrall was good until you butchered him from Cata and onward. Cata made him pathetic and MoP made him into trash ‘what have you done Garrosh’, He only threw garrosh into power when he didn’t want it and cheated in the duel to kill him.

Garrosh has been the only decent warchief, but they butchered the well developed one in Cata for the dumb brute one in MoP.


Ok then let my horde kill Arthasia I mean Sylvanus


+1 for Sylvanus.
11/09/2018 11:33 AMPosted by Shadestalkër
Nothing says "I support genocide" like "let me kill Saurfang."


You say that as if the Night Elves were just poor innocent bystanders. Good riddance. Hopefully we dont stop with Teldrasil.
11/09/2018 11:46 AMPosted by Romanna
Following the Thread De-Railing for a moment
11/09/2018 10:35 AMPosted by Maizono
I hope you're trolling, because there were still rules in World War 1.
There have never been rules in War. There still are not rules.
The Geneva Accords, strictly speaking, began as an agreement on the treatment of prisoners. It was not until after WWI that they drafted an agreement to not use poison gas.

And the Geneva Conventions only apply to the countries which ratified them. Japan, during WWII, was not part of the treaty and was under no obligation to treat prisoners humanely. It's the entire point of The Bridge Over the River Kwai.

There are customs in War. And those customs are most often dictated by the ruling class to protect the ruling class. They have always dispensed with any niceties when it came to the rank and file soldiers.

The entire idea of "Honorable Combat" comes from the Middle Ages when it was okay for trained warriors who were fully armored men riding on horseback to plow through ranks of boys and farmers wearing a helmet and holding a rake or pitchfork if they were lucky. The only "rules" were it was agreed that the farmers were not allowed to kill the horses because buying and training new horses was expensive and took too long.

The only people who think there are rules and honor in war are the people who are ready to spend other lives for their honor instead of risking their own lives for it themselves.


Wait, what? So you are completely OK with soldiers at war commiting atrocities and just saying 'uh this is war, I do whatever my rules let me' like war is a free pass to forget about morals, ethic and humanity?

What a lunatic.

11/09/2018 11:50 AMPosted by Vynlordros
11/09/2018 11:33 AMPosted by Shadestalkër
Nothing says "I support genocide" like "let me kill Saurfang."


You say that as if the Night Elves were just poor innocent bystanders. Good riddance. Hopefully we dont stop with Teldrasil.


Civilians. They experienced one of the most horrible ways to die because they were living there. Justify that, warmonger.
Pretty sure Saurfang can kill one level 1 orc.
Please, let Saurfang cleave all of these nu-Scourge players into tiny, edgy pieces.
Saurfang would split you up the middle.
11/09/2018 01:12 PMPosted by Panoptes
11/09/2018 11:46 AMPosted by Romanna
Following the Thread De-Railing for a moment...There have never been rules in War. There still are not rules.
The Geneva Accords, strictly speaking, began as an agreement on the treatment of prisoners. It was not until after WWI that they drafted an agreement to not use poison gas.

And the Geneva Conventions only apply to the countries which ratified them. Japan, during WWII, was not part of the treaty and was under no obligation to treat prisoners humanely. It's the entire point of The Bridge Over the River Kwai.

There are customs in War. And those customs are most often dictated by the ruling class to protect the ruling class. They have always dispensed with any niceties when it came to the rank and file soldiers.

The entire idea of "Honorable Combat" comes from the Middle Ages when it was okay for trained warriors who were fully armored men riding on horseback to plow through ranks of boys and farmers wearing a helmet and holding a rake or pitchfork if they were lucky. The only "rules" were it was agreed that the farmers were not allowed to kill the horses because buying and training new horses was expensive and took too long.

The only people who think there are rules and honor in war are the people who are ready to spend other lives for their honor instead of risking their own lives for it themselves.


Wait, what? So you are completely OK with soldiers at war commiting atrocities and just saying 'uh this is war, I do whatever my rules let me' like war is a free pass to forget about morals, ethic and humanity?

What a lunatic.

11/09/2018 11:50 AMPosted by Vynlordros
...

You say that as if the Night Elves were just poor innocent bystanders. Good riddance. Hopefully we dont stop with Teldrasil.


Civilians. They experienced one of the most horrible ways to die because they were living there. Justify that, warmonger.


History is filled with civilians being collateral damage. Every nation's history is filled with it. For the massacre of natives, the burning of cities in the civil war, the bombing of Japan's cities (and nuking), and the Vietnam killings.

Even today, if you think bombs dropping in Syria aren't killing innocent people, you're delusional.

11/09/2018 01:16 PMPosted by Yasudra
Pretty sure Saurfang can kill one level 1 orc.


He couldn't even kill an afk Malfurion with almost zero health left. Even I could do that.
11/09/2018 05:59 AMPosted by Ayaani
It's always Blood Elves and Undead. Lmao.


They got to try extra hard to prove they're really Horde races, I imagine.

Especially the Blood Elves, who totally weren't added to the Horde for gameplay reasons and weren't historically always terrible allies to anyone but themselves.
11/09/2018 06:49 AMPosted by Taugra
Blood Elves. They have closer ties to The Draenei than to their actual allies in The Horde. Their race has entertained defecting to The Alliance en masse back in Mists of Pandaria and has recently had a large-scale defection to The Alliance in the form of their void-elf exiles.

The writers really needs to just pull the trigger and return blood elves to The Alliance already so these "hardcore" edge lord blood elf posters can go away.

Saurfang is on a quest to return sanity to The Horde. To return the real horde; Thrall's horde of WC3. That's the identity of The Horde that's been lost over the years. First with Garrosh now with Sylvanas.

I want to be a noble orc. One that hopes to live in peace, but will not hesitate to fight for my place in the world.


I thought the real horde was all jacked up on Demon's Blood and conquest?
You'll die trying.

/popcorn
Wait, what? So you are completely OK with soldiers at war commiting atrocities and just saying 'uh this is war, I do whatever my rules let me' like war is a free pass to forget about morals, ethic and humanity?

What a lunatic.
At no point in any post has anyone said anything remotely resembling this. But you bring up a good point.

Are you saying that the only thing keeping you from going out killing your neighbors and sexually assaulting their children is because the law in your city says you cannot?

That makes you a sociopath.

What people are saying is that war is horrible, brutish and foul. You cannot make it pretty. You cannot have "honorable" combat. Before a battle starts, they don't count heads and make sure both sides are evenly matched.

And the only thing I said in my post was that the person who claimed that WWI had internationally agreed upon "Rules for War" had no understanding of the Geneva Conventions and only a minimal understanding of what happened during World War One.
11/08/2018 09:15 PMPosted by Dramshin
Good Horde have died because of him
Those Horde at the battle for Undercity that died because Sylvie plagued them must not have been "good Horde" then, eh?
The only thing that can kill Saurfang is Saurfang.
11/08/2018 09:15 PMPosted by Dramshin
He is pathetic. Let me kill him as a horde player.

The war has dragged on because of him. Good Horde have died because of him.


And good Horde died at the Wrathgate because Sylvanas ordered them to be Blighted. I for one would be interested in a body count. Who killed more Horde troops? My bets on Sylvanas. Death to the living indeed.
11/08/2018 09:15 PMPosted by Dramshin
He is pathetic. Let me kill him as a horde player.

The war has dragged on because of him. Good Horde have died because of him. The alliance can retaliate because of him.

A bonus, let me kill Thrall as well. Thrall was good until you butchered him from Cata and onward. Cata made him pathetic and MoP made him into trash ‘what have you done Garrosh’, He only threw garrosh into power when he didn’t want it and cheated in the duel to kill him.

Garrosh has been the only decent warchief, but they butchered the well developed one in Cata for the dumb brute one in MoP.
Speak for yourself,and post on your main ya damn coward. Sylvanas despite what you fanboys think,is a cancer to the horde and what it's supposed to represent. It's about survival, it being heartless monsters obsessed with murder the way that b*tch twisted it into. It's about tenacity in battle while not losing oneself or their honor. It's a out being fierce yet not above compassion to friend and foe alike.

This was the horde Thrall found and the horde we all remember and love from WC3,Vanilla all the way up to wrath. The faction war is old hat and should have ended when we found out about Azeroth's condition but NOOOOO you fanboys kicked and screamed wanting to have your collective Dick waving contest against the alliance. While I cant hope for Sylvanas' final death I CAN hope the wench gets knocked down a peg. Saufang cares about the horde where Sylvanas only cares for herself.
11/08/2018 11:07 PMPosted by Zaraka
How about, instead of killing Saurfang, we kill Sylvanas and all her minions? She's the one that started this war against life after all, and they enable and protect her.

It won't be possible, Blizzard will never allow us to kill other members of the same faction =/ so she and her minions will unfortunately live on.
Traitors get what they deserve. Like Ned Stark at the end of season 1.
I love how this faction War is more Sylvanas versus Saurfang that Horde vs Alliance.

And I am being facetious about the "I love" part.
<span class="truncated">...</span>

Surfang was pro war until he saw the methods being used.

He doesn't like true total war style the war has become. His generation is too old.

Surfang is the equivalent of having your soldiers March in an orderly column and demand certain rules of warfare be followed while we are engaging in world war 1 where there are no rules besides the ones you make.

Surfang's idea of honor in warfare is dead. Both factions are fighting for survival, not over just a tact of land. Anything but total war is a half measure.


I hope you're trolling, because there were still rules in World War 1.


Stop trying to look intelligent WW1 was one of the bloodiest in history because rules of combat evolved and engagement was being adapted too. Hence why Vietnam was often compared to WW1 in terms of how we needed to adapt to the new enemy.

Dont believe me...

Britannica "Why did so many people die in World War I?"

World War I combat was a clash between 19th-century tactics and 20th-century technology. Imagine an American Civil War battle with large groups of men charging across open ground except the other side has heavy artillery and machine guns.


His comment was actually quite witty considering the games storyline atm.

The idea of fighting with "honor" is subjective...at best. This is war and guess what? There is no right way to fight a war. Unless I guess you mean the right way is TO WIN.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum