Sure, maybe for Alliance members, bar Night Elves, they are willing to throw the coin, but for one it makes game more interesting that not every member is on same page and that having a solid reasoning behind it. That good mood can be shifted both sides.
Having Alleria’s and Turalyons shady approach might also bring some more flavor to Alliance politics.
The original message is that both sides conceptually could go toward peace. And there are ways IMO how it could be done with mutual benefits.
Now, there are also plenty of ways to go closer to conflicts.
But regardless, I think it’s a good idea IMO to distinguish what the players think and what the devs will do. Because the things that will happen are likely once again to be about the dev convenience rather than common sense, should we touch the faction conflict again.
So, it’s fun to chat about what seems to be reasonable or logical, as long as there is no ill intent between the players. But we’re discussing parallel WoW which likely won’t happen.
What is more interesting to have in the game - depends on where it all should go IMO. On paper having factions and conflict could be interesting, just as abandoning them are finding new answers for what makes a good game. But at the same time, I am not sure if the devs can do a good faction conflict story after seeing both Garrosh and BfA ones. I am just sceptical with whatever goes in that direction.
gl hf
Agreed, agreed! I mean possibilities are always there and it can be diverted in whichever direction devs wish to, no one would think that peace between Undead and Humans might have been possible, but with Anduin they gave a small flicker to it.
It’s just debate to what is more reasonable or appealing thing to go towards, what woks and what not.
1).
2). Forcing civilians to work in the iron mine, until they die.
3). Attack with genocide on fisherman’s village.
4). Attack with genocide on Norwingston Estate.
5). Attack with spreading the plague on Drustvar.
6). Attack on the main KulTiras capital city during the siege by pirates.
7). Finally as bonus, they may want to revenge for their beloved Admiral Daelina Praudmoor.
They would probably thinks the same about the Alliance.
In fact, them thinking such was why many went along with the War of Thorns.
Still, if you want to argue how either side is to make amendments, or prove their commitment, that would include anyone suspect of willing to turn down and violate a truce.
And as far as the games history goes, the Alliance did so with the last one.
The thing is, that I do not see why would the Horde even wish to prove anything else.
They already sabotaged their own war effort in deference towards their enemies.
They ousted, killed and imprisoned those that wanted to continue the war.
They outright denounced or rebuked those that had valid reasons to want to pursue said conflict any further. To the point some were killed for it.
And they collaborated alongside the Alliance, to bring down any third party that threatened the world.
In all, the Horde has already built and cemented much more in terms of peacekeeping and compromise, than the Alliance, who still has to explain how is it that Genn went unpunished after stirring trouble during a ceasefire amidst a demonic invasion, or Jaina killing and invading the city of a third party that had yet to be involved in the faction conflict.
What compromise in terms of peacekeeping, has the Alliance done, that wasn’t mimicked in some way by the Horde?
All this talk about “the Horde must prove itself” comes of rather ridiculous and hypocritical if we are to ignore that this truce thing, is a two sides sort of deal.
To put it blunt, the Horde may start feeling willing to amend for the actions in this war, when the ones that killed Rastakhan answer for it.
Are they willing to? No? Then neither is the Horde to make any more concessions. Specially after shooting down any chance they had in this war, and spending half of it prosecuting fellow faction members simply because of how they treated the enemy.
Azsuna doesn’t match with Stormheim for a wide range of reasons.
First of all, the dialogue on Durotar explicitly addresses how the Forsaken fleet has yet to set sail to the Broken Shore.
Second, the common folk and soldiers in said fleet had no idea about Sylvanas motives, as these were all cards she held tight to her chest.
Thirdly, in the Alliance dialogue not once references said events as the trigger for their actions. Instead, they focus solely on the fact that Sylvanas has departed from Durotar with the Forsaken fleet:
Sky Admiral Rogers says: Our official orders are to escort you to Stormheim and ensure your success on this trial.
Sky Admiral Rogers says: Unofficially, however, we have another mission…
Sky Admiral Rogers says: The 7th Legion. The toughest men and women the Alliance has to offer. They, too, have come on direct orders from the king.
Sky Admiral Rogers says: Three days ago, the Forsaken fleet set sail from Durotar, heading straight for the Broken Isles. We think Sylvanas Windrunner herself may be among them.
Sky Admiral Rogers says: We are to track them from a safe distance. We may engage, but only if the situation demands.
Sky Admiral Rogers says: I strongly suspect the situation will demand it.
Genn Greymane says: It had better.
Genn Greymane says: I am not in the habit of tracking prey unless I intend on killing it.
And fourthly, those quests in Azsuna are still of dubious canon regarding which side exactly fished out said journal.
I don’t know how accurate the time with questing is tbf.
They don’t need to know, I cant see how is that relevant to the case.
Sure they don’t enclose that info to pc but that doesn’t absolve existence of the info.
Thats why I said its bit shady. Its not really clarified who got the journal.
But overall point stands that Stormheim coupe has not been mentioned or raised single time to spearhead the war. It was based on old hatred. Even In Lordaeron she doesn’t use that arguement to defend Hirde position.
You know as well as everyone else that Anduin is not capable or willing to keep the pro War-Characters in line, as shown again with Genn, who was not punished even a little bit for Attacking Sylvanas in Stormheim while having explicit Orders not to do that.
So: He has shown to be a toothless Lion, faced with a rabid Wolf.
It’s the chief reason that got Saurfang to agree to it:
There were whispers that Greymane had ordered the attack without Anduin’s permission, but as far as Saurfang knew, Greymane had not been punished. The implications of that were troubling, and every possible explanation led to same conclusion: the old worgen would always drive the Alliance toward war against the Horde.
The entire War of Thorns hinges on Saurfang agreeing that the Alliance was unreliable regarding whether they’d commit to any truce.
And Stormheim was shown to exemplify how they weren’t.
Rumors and whispers, there was no direct rallying Saurfang knew some of the story not whole of it.
Also Sylvanas never directly said so it was her words that triggered that thought. And don’t forget Saurfang knew as well that worgen would drive towards war not only because they desired but that they had solid reasoning for it. There was bad blood between forsaken and worgen.
Except for that one thought happening in Saurfangs head there is no mention of it, because youn know as well that Sylvanas had her hands dirty there and bringing that up would quickly backlash on her.
The expanded reasoning included different segments willing to commit to said war for varying reasons.
Still, most would be mere soldiers that followed on the orders of their commander in chief, and that could’ve just as easily decided to stay at home if commanded to do such.
But fact is, that the supreme commander of the Horde armies weighted the reasons for this conflict. And amongst them, was this incident.
One shown to highlight why a preemptive strike was indeed in the Hordes best interest, as the Alliance didn’t seem all that interest to commit to the armistice.
Saurfang knew about as much as every other Horde character: that Genn had dumped the truce agreed upon by both factions in order to take advantage of an opening that caught the Horde army unsuspecting, and try and settle an old grudge he had against Sylvanas.
If the top general of the Horde acknowledges said circumstance as enough to call the whole deal void, then that serves to highlight it as the triggering event that led the Horde to strike back in Ashenvale.
Because had it not happened, Saurfang would have zero reasons to worry about the Alliance honouring their deal, and as head of the Horde armies, would’ve halted any attempt at igniting conflict.
Acknowledging that both sides still have lingering grudges against the others, is something everyone involved in the truce did.
The Horde also had several of its members forced to rein their willingness to repay Alliance transgressions.
Still, these are all irrelevant. But if either side gives in to said emotion, and kickstarts the aggressions again (without being formally and publicly rebuked by those that declare their commitment to said truce), then this will obviously be seen as a casus belli.
And fact is, that the highest responsible of the Horde military, decided that said event granted the Horde a blank check to do whatever they deemed necessary to ensure their own protection.
As we already established.
This incident was a doubt in Saurfangs head. Period. Not any other commander had it.
Which is half of the truth though. And waging an open war on 6 nations on that doubt and not a solid fact seems rather shaky for me. No sane military leader starts the war on whispers and doubts.
Had they known the full story of the event that outcome might have changed.
Sylvanas manipulated that info and very cleverly so. Yes butchering info can be good to boil new hatreds.
Funny enough Saurfang was proven wrong on his doubt before his death. Worgen won’t always push for war.
What full story? Genn attacked her with the reason that he has a grudge using Alliance-Resources. He didn’t know about her plans.
So: An enemy leader attacks your Warchief during peacetime, and doesn’t get punished for it.
What would you make of that? 
We didn’t have the point of view of any other commander.
And fact is, that even if we did, Saurfang was the highest ranking officer at that moment. Second only to the Warchief herself.
And it wasn’t a “doubt”. It was a concern that signalled all sorts of warning regarding the Alliance stance regarding the truce.
Signals such as the Alliance not caring about it when they felt that they had the upper hand and an opening that allowed them to strike at the Horde unhindered.
Or how said attempts weren’t rebuked by those that signalled their apparent support for said peace.
Genn strike in Stormheim showed the top Horde general that the Alliance had the willingness to attack the Horde if they had the occasion. And Anduins lack of reaction, evidenced that said attempts weren’t even condemned by those that declared to speak in the name of peace.
The conclusion was obvious: given how unreliable said truce is for the Horde security, then Saurfang had to support the strike against Alliance openings, and mirror Genns action, when he detected such in the Horde army and took advantage of it in Stormheim.
It wasn’t a doubt. The Alliance elite had tried to kill the Horde leader as well as most of the Horde army that was being sent to deal with a demonic invasion.
Having Horde segments viewing this as enough reason to do likewise with another Alliance segment, is the logical answer to it.
What would the alternative be? Ignore said events? Gamble on the fact that the next attack would be equally unsuccessful?
What sort of truce is to live on edge not knowing whether the Alliance will honour or not their part of the deal?
I might add that night elves were never happy to be part of an alliance. They were against it in first place, they only changed their mind after Horde turned to Ashenvale for wood resources. Which night elves obviously did not want to lose.
They had their share of wars, so they are not really all nature loving pacifists and never were that way.
Most of the Horde Army? I saw that as a “surgical strike to kill the Banshee”. And as a retaliation after the “betrayal on the Broken Shore”. I know it was not a betrayal, but nobody on Alliance side didn’t know that.
I can agree that Saurfang, as an orc who lived to fight, found it enough evidence. But I don’t understand why the other races were ok with that.
And the replay was genocide.
Actually, they are nature loving, but not pacifists.
It was a whole Fleet of Ships. So if you call that a surgical strike to take out Sylvanas, you could call the War of Thornes a surgical Strike to take out Malfurion.
…that was being sent to deal with the demonic invasion.
The fleet sent to Stormheim was the biggest one deployed by the Horde in the Broken Isles since the failed attempt at the Broken Shore.
It wasn’t. Rogers and Genn were simply itching for an excuse to attack Sylvanas. The former because of Gilneas and Liam, and the latter because of Southshore.
You don’t see why an assassination attempt against a faction leader during a truce, constitutes an act of war?
Or why would that signal unreliability regarding the person involved and any truce made with him?
We have to remember that the Legion was attacking all of Azeroth. As far as I recall the fleet contained an expedition force of mainly Forsaken, probably not much larger than Greymane’s forces.
Most of the Horde Army would have probably been stationed in the homelands, to defend them.
Comparing the Stormheim events to the War of Thorns is weird though. The scales and implications are vastly different.