Will the Siege of Orgrimmar end the war?

Story Forum
Prev 1 2 3 10 Next
12/05/2012 06:52 PMPosted by Kynrind
Since the Horde showed up, the Alliance has done nothing but lose population, land and nations. Gilnes was one of the seven kingdoms and it's gone. Dalaran is finally coming back to the Alliance, but Lordaeron, Stomgard, Alterac and Kul Tiras are gone or MIA for the last several decades (Blizzard will have a real hard time explaining what Kul Tiras has been doing since Admiral Proudmore was sailing around.) That leaves only one intact kingdom and it has come back from being destroyed in the First War. While the Horde has gotten stronger and more powerful. As long as the Horde exists, the Alliance is at risk because the Horde can't control itself.
Ignoring the fact that the Alliance wouldn't even exist without the Horde, and that most of its member states weren't even all that fond of each other until they were united by a common enemy.

And you still seem to be blaming the Horde for most of those losses that they had nothing to do with.
12/05/2012 06:51 PMPosted by Vegdrasil
Will you shut the hell up about how the Alliance is lawful good?
Except, y'know, that that's how Chris Metzen's described them. It's not a hard and fast "every single member of the Alliance is lawful good forever and always," but it's still broadly true.


Metzen needs to suck on an exhaust pipe for a few hours, or be fired, or transferred to another department. He's stuck on WC1 and it's stupid. WoW has advanced past that description. His 'lawful good overdrive' is turning -every- Alliance race into different shaped and colored humans. I didn't join WoW to play a human. I joined to play a Night/Blood elf or a Draenei.
12/05/2012 06:54 PMPosted by Vegdrasil
Since the Horde showed up, the Alliance has done nothing but lose population, land and nations. Gilnes was one of the seven kingdoms and it's gone. Dalaran is finally coming back to the Alliance, but Lordaeron, Stomgard, Alterac and Kul Tiras are gone or MIA for the last several decades (Blizzard will have a real hard time explaining what Kul Tiras has been doing since Admiral Proudmore was sailing around.) That leaves only one intact kingdom and it has come back from being destroyed in the First War. While the Horde has gotten stronger and more powerful. As long as the Horde exists, the Alliance is at risk because the Horde can't control itself.
Ignoring the fact that the Alliance wouldn't even exist without the Horde, and that most of its member states weren't even all that fond of each other until they were united by a common enemy.

And you still seem to be blaming the Horde for most of those losses that they had nothing to do with.


So bloody what? That doesn't absolve the Horde for what it's done to the Alliance. The Scourge would not have existed if not for the Horde. Kil'jaeden used the orc shaman, Ner'zul(? I can't remember off of the top of my head). Many of the current Horde (orcs) are from the original Horde that invaded Azeroth, with a whole new crop of younger ones that are acting -just- like those orcs. Stormwind was completely destroyed, Lordaeron suffered a huge number of casualties, Alterac was wiped out (yes it was Horde caused because it betrayed the Alliance for the Horde), Quel'thalas suffered a lot (so they think).

Since then Stromgard has ceased to exist, Lordaeron completely wiped out and a large number of it's population turned into undead. Who then marched north to nearly wipe out Quel'thalas. In modern times, Gilneas, a neutral isolationist nation, was attacked and basically destroyed because Garrosh wanted it's port. Ashenvale is under major attack (it's been under near constant attack for the last 10 years game time) and in threat of being overrun, yet the Horde's intent is to conquer -all- of Kalimdor.

Despite the fact that the Alliance did come into being because of the Horde (I admit that), why should they thank the Horde for the hundreds of thousands to millions of dead that are a direct result of the Horde being on Azeroth? Should they say; 'Thank you for brutally and ruthlessly murdering hundreds of thousands to possibly millions of our citizens and laying large portions of our world into ruins and attacking us AGAIN and trying to take over the entire world like you tried the first two times. Thank you indeed." Is that want you're wanting?
So bloody what? That doesn't absolve the Horde for what it's done to the Alliance. The Scourge would not have existed if not for the Horde. Kil'jaeden used the orc shaman, Ner'zul(? I can't remember off of the top of my head).
I could make the argument that the Burning Legion wouldn't have invaded Azeroth twice in the last ten years if not for the existence of Dalaran, as the two individuals who summoned them were both former members of the Kirin Tor. Doesn't make it any less ridiculous to blame them for it.

Since then Stromgard has ceased to exist, Lordaeron completely wiped out and a large number of it's population turned into undead. Who then marched north to nearly wipe out Quel'thalas.
None of which the Horde is at all responsible for.

Despite the fact that the Alliance did come into being because of the Horde (I admit that), why should they thank the Horde for the hundreds of thousands to millions of dead that are a direct result of the Horde being on Azeroth? Should they say; 'Thank you for brutally and ruthlessly murdering hundreds of thousands to possibly millions of our citizens and laying large portions of our world into ruins and attacking us AGAIN and trying to take over the entire world like you tried the first two times. Thank you indeed." Is that want you're wanting?
Hyperbole and strawman arguments do not suit you. You're coming across as an angry hate-monger more than someone looking for a rational debate, and frankly it makes me more inclined to ignore you than to listen. Statements like "shut the hell up about the Alliance being lawful good" and "Metzen should suck on an exhaust pipe" don't do your arguments any favors either.
Kyn just going to say, calm the heck down. I haven't been rude to you or insulted you, so why should you. If anything you're just proving how correct I was about you, full of hate and anger and taking things so personally as if the Horde murdered your family and Metzen gave you the finger.

Take a break from the game or grow up.
Hyperbole and strawman arguments do not suit you. You're coming across as an angry hate-monger more than someone looking for a rational debate, and frankly it makes me more inclined to ignore you than to listen. Statements like "shut the hell up about the Alliance being lawful good" and "Metzen should suck on an exhaust pipe" don't do your arguments any favors either.


Your argument is that the Alliance should be grateful for the Horde? Which is wrong. Even if the Alliance came into being by the Horde, it should not be thankful to the Horde for that. It should be mad as hell for the sheer amount of death and destruction that has happened since the Horde showed up. Even if they aren't directly responsible for some of it happening (Scourge) a part of their race did have a part in it. Even the Forsaken (classic to Wrath) are former Scourge and took part in destroying 2 kingdoms (albeit they were under the Lich King's control for those actions, so most of them get a pass on that). However their actions since the have proven they are despicable rotten hearted people for the most part.

Through out it's entire existence, the Horde has done nothing for the Alliance but bring death and destruction to it.

I said "shut the hell up about the Alliance being lawful good" because the poster I meant it too is constantly wanting the -entire- Alliance to be lawful stupid good and kindly restrain the Horde in the most gentle way possible. That poster and a few others like him want the entire Alliance to be the same cookie cutter lawful good group. From the humans to the Draenei, Night elves, worgen, all of them. Which is boring as hell. Each race should be shown to have it's own unique culture, ethics and morals.

My Metzen comment is because he is one of the biggest problems with the lore today. He needs to be replaced or the lore isn't going to get better.
My Metzen comment is because he is one of the biggest problems with the lore today. He needs to be replaced or the lore isn't going to get better.

Still doesn't make your comment any less inappropriate.
Kyn just going to say, calm the heck down. I haven't been rude to you or insulted you, so why should you. If anything you're just proving how correct I was about you, full of hate and anger and taking things so personally as if the Horde murdered your family and Metzen gave you the finger.

Take a break from the game or grow up.


I'm very passionate about my favorite race and the lore, which has, for the most part lately, sucked. Your comment about how the Alliance is all lawful good is annoying because it shouldn't be that way. It should vary from race to race. Yet you are fine with painting the entire Alliance, and every race in it, as lawful good. Gentle warrior and fighters who should never do anything even remotely bad or dark or it's 'OMG We're the Blue Horde!'

I'm not so laid back that I want everything to be the same either. I want variety, differences, unique cultures and races. Not varying shades of different humans.
12/05/2012 07:38 PMPosted by Kellick
My Metzen comment is because he is one of the biggest problems with the lore today. He needs to be replaced or the lore isn't going to get better.

Still doesn't make your comment any less inappropriate.


I was being kind and didn't want a forum ban. I didn't say shoot him, have him run over by a bus or anything like that. Compared to what others have said before, it's tame. Still, he does need to go. He's doing nothing but hurting the game.
12/05/2012 05:30 PMPosted by Noitora
Ultimately, I don't expect we'll see any sort of definitive end to the conflict between the Alliance and the Horde


If Bizz decides to be incredibly lazy, this will happen. If they want artistic credibility and logical story progression, the war will end with Garrosh being put down, and his loyalists being culled with him. It would be incredibly asinine to have the war continue afterwards, not to mention making no sense since obviously the Alliance will be taking part of the Siege and will be aiding Vol'Jin/Baine/Thrall's rebellion. Ending the war.
12/05/2012 07:52 PMPosted by Archimkazile
If Bizz decides to be incredibly lazy, this will happen. If they want artistic credibility and logical story progression, the war will end with Garrosh being put down, and his loyalists being culled with him. It would be incredibly asinine to have the war continue afterwards, not to mention making no sense since obviously the Alliance will be taking part of the Siege and will be aiding Vol'Jin/Baine/Thrall's rebellion. Ending the war.


Hopefully there will be some in game(I mean lore) consequences such as the Horde withdrawing from certain lands and such. Show by action that it wants peace, and reins in Sylvanas big time. She and the Forsaken are one of the sticking points of any peace agreement.
the war will end with Garrosh being put down, and his loyalists being culled with him

Bolded is what a lot of people don't seem to realize.

We don't pin this entire war on Garrosh. He has followers, who will also die.
12/05/2012 07:52 PMPosted by Archimkazile
Ultimately, I don't expect we'll see any sort of definitive end to the conflict between the Alliance and the Horde


If Bizz decides to be incredibly lazy, this will happen. If they want artistic credibility and logical story progression, the war will end with Garrosh being put down, and his loyalists being culled with him. It would be incredibly asinine to have the war continue afterwards, not to mention making no sense since obviously the Alliance will be taking part of the Siege and will be aiding Vol'Jin/Baine/Thrall's rebellion. Ending the war.

Maybe I need to qualify my original statement.

I believe the theme of the Alliance/Horde war is one which is here to stay in some capacity for the duration of the franchise. So in that respect, I don't believe we'll see a definitive end to the war in that it is likely to return in some form at some point.

That doesn't preclude the conflict from coming to a stop post-Siege of Orgrimmar.
12/05/2012 07:59 PMPosted by Pyronaptor
the war will end with Garrosh being put down, and his loyalists being culled with him

Bolded is what a lot of people don't seem to realize.

We don't pin this entire war on Garrosh. He has followers, who will also die.


There are also people like the Blackrock who swear loyalty to the new guy at the last minute. There are survivors of every regime. There's also the more darker/pragmatic leaders such as Sylvanas and Gallywix. Then there are the Blood Elves.

I'll even be the first to admit that there is a chance that the Alliance will be the ones who start the next conflict. People are holding out hope for Turalyon and Alleria to be Alliance, but if they are the same Horde hating/fighting pair, they will probably screw up the peace.
Back in Warcraft 3, it went something like this:

1. Everybody discovered a new continent.

2. Medivh warned some humans and orcs about the impending cataclysm.

3. Thrall and Jaina teamed up to defeat Grom.

4. Mount Hyjal, Burning Legion, etc...

5. A few months of relative peace between Thrall and Jaina.

6. Daelin showed up and stoked the old grudges.

So far, MoP is shaping up to be something like this:

1. Everybody discovers a new continent.

2. Wrathion warns some humans, orcs, night elves, tauren, gnomes, goblins, worgen, undead, dwarves, trolls, draenei, blood elves, and pandaren about the impending cataclysm.

3. Vol'jin and Varian team up to defeat Garrosh.

4. Burning Legion, Argus, etc?

5. A few months of relative peace between Varian and Vol'jin.

6. Somebody shows up and stokes the old grudges. (Turalyon, perhaps.)
I think it should. What would be nice is if after the war ends battlegrounds are more like gladiator matches in that they are for glory and honor than territorial conquest.
12/05/2012 11:50 PMPosted by Gibbons
6. Somebody shows up and stokes the old grudges. (Turalyon, perhaps.)

Oh god. That would be so perfect.

Nothing I could think of could possibly break the backs of the Alliance fanbase more than making the Alliance put down Turalyon because he and his forces don't want to be BFFs with the Horde.
12/05/2012 11:54 PMPosted by Aureus
6. Somebody shows up and stokes the old grudges. (Turalyon, perhaps.)

Oh god. That would be so perfect.

Nothing I could think of could possibly break the backs of the Alliance fanbase more than making the Alliance put down Turalyon because he and his forces don't want to be BFFs with the Horde.


If they do that..I swear to god.....

JUST STOP IT....I don't want Blizzard doing that. Rexxar should do it.
And the problem, of course, is that Turalyon could never seize Stormwind from Varian the way Daelin seized Theramore from Jaina.
12/05/2012 11:53 PMPosted by Tevinter
I think it should. What would be nice is if after the war ends battlegrounds are more like gladiator matches in that they are for glory and honor than territorial conquest.

It would make sense. Although I think that having factions within the factions that wanted to continue the war using the battlegrounds would be better for some of the BG's.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum