Oh my bad if he is a well known troll
1 Like
I am aware of the awful double standards the Blizzard writers have regarding the alliance so yes I am very serious with this. Jaina, Tyrande, Gelbin, Velen, all must die otherwise the story remains unfair for every Horde player who suffered during MOP and BFA.
wont happen, since first, the usal faction war wont happen. agaign.
seconsd, blizzard will never let one side win, again that was discudes multiplke times.
Third: I and other knows youit, its not about fairness, what you want is remove the alliance entirley, because mimimi, after we started multiple wars to be genocidial agaig we got beaten and lsoe- mimimi how unfair.
no, its not if you want the same Treatment for the otherr side which you implied as unfair , just to have them suffer, is just egoistic.
âdo not do to others what you would not want done to yourselfâ
1 Like
BFA. Alliance won. Half the Horde leadership was deleted and replaced with awful one liners.
Doesnât need to happen for this scenario.
No. Just hurt them hard enough so they experience first hadn what the Horde community 6 years ago.
This is a compromise you need to do if you have an MMO with TWO factions my dude. Every other game does it but we all know Blizzard is full on the alliance bias train.
Itâs funny you tell us this, when we have âCataclysm classicâ, where Horde conquered all and did all. I remember the time when Blizzard told us" Sorry, we didnât have time to make Alliance content". Of course that is Alliance bias.
I know, usually I go with âdonât feed the trollâ.
3 Likes
ANd the next expansion they went with âwe run into technical difficulties making Alliance contentâ, after they told that they realized the mistaked they made with Cata.
1 Like
not relay, did the alliance conquer Og or eliminate the ledership, no
Its was a stalemate, heck, eben with thge chonicle the horde was allowd to hold the areas theyy conquerd, Horde wasnt evend disablemd or the army disamedâŚ
Calling that a alloiance vicory 
and BFa beginning was in strong favor of the horde: ashenvale and dakrshore counquerd, teldrasil burned, beaten the allinace at UC, raid stormwind and free talanji and zul
That was 14 years ago my dude. We are talking current events.
Yes standing in the capital of the enemy, making a hard speech and morality and being responsible that all culprits of the war was punished sounds like victory to every sane person. Also the alliance fortress in Durotar is still intact.
But the Alliance won in books and mission table blurb, you know, where nobody can see it, so woe is the Horde, or something like that.
Really, donât try to reason with Erevien, heâll ignore stuff he doesnât want to read and just keep rambling his âTwo wrongs make a rightâ / âEye for an eyeâ schtick some moreâŚ
1 Like
Yes the poor alliance who ever gets scott free without suffering any real damage since Stormwind never became a raid nor did 99% of their leaders get removed and they get featured in every cinematic that matters. No one is more orpressed then the poor poor alliance fans /S
The Alliance isnât oppressed, that would be a silly thing to claim (Dare i say âA strawman argumentâ?), but claiming the Horde has it oh so tough when by rights they should have been dismantled as a faction (Or rather, threat to everybody else) two wars ago is even more ludicrous.
2 Likes
I see it as a trade-off! Alliance gets the âMoral Good Guysâ Point - but gets to feel incompetent and loses cities in game (which might get compensated as neutral hubs for both factions later), while the âChampionsâ get to feel useless too . Ex. - Rescue 1000 Civilians from Teldrassil in 3 mins and run or run away from Gilneas because you failed. Horde gets to successfully destroy Gilneas, Teldrassil and even with Lordaeron - all civilians are evacuated and the city is lost on Sylvanasâs terms with max Alliance casualties (Gas masks for Horde, why did no one in Alliance think of that when invading the Blight Factory of Azeroth).
Horde meanwhile gets to feel evil but scarily competent in all Faction War Expansions - but they lose at the end, because the Horde winning is the complete destruction of the Alliance - which the gameplay wonât allow. So they lose the leaders, with both Alliance and Rebel Horde help, and leaders are scapegoated, and Alliance gets a victory in a book later (Nothing in-game and no consequences).
Either ways - no one is happy. Alliance donât like to feel incompetent. WC3 Horde fans, who saw the actual, real Thrallâs, Cairneâs and Volâjinâs Horde arenât happy because Horde are a Family and survivalists and not mindlessly evil and neither are the Evil Horde Fans happy, because game will always follow the formula above and gameplay will not allow an absolute victory. Itâs why faction War story expansion is a failure, because they always go back to status quo and they are unable to tell a truly competent political manipulation story that will make both factions sympathetic.
2 Likes
It doesnât help that WoW hasnât exhibited politics of even as much depth as a puddle in years and years. It doesnât matter it it is Horde and Alliance, magic elves, afterlife-dwellers, spider-people or some other âflavour of the current patchâ faction. Thereâll always be the good guys we work with, the good guys that need some convincing, and the bad guys, and the story is about convincing the convincable, defeating the bad guys, and leaving peace and prosperity behind or something. Politics isnât a real thing, itâs just a minor problem to be solved by hitting the right people and maybe getting some uniting evidence.
The faction war was just using the formula with factions that some people somehow cared about, with desastrous results.
Thatâs my biggest beef with the faction war as it has been done: The Horde gets to play through their early victories (And the Alliance through losing, yay, what funâŚ) and those victories affect the world, but Alliance victories are only in the books, with hardly any in-game representation at all.
Itâs all evens out lorewise, but feels lopsided because most Alliance victories happen off-screen.
1 Like
Siege of Orgrimmar
What exactly did the Alliance win there that the Horde didnât get as well?
I get that the Horde lost, because in a civil war both sides always lose, because they are fighting against their own ressources (though they still kept conquered Alliance territoriesâŚ). And I get that the Alliance chose sides and maybe chose the winner of the civil war. Is that what you mean, when you talk about winning a war? If you do, you probably have a broader definition of âwinningâ than the players you are talking to.
1 Like
Broke down the walls, got rid of thr warchief and threatened the new one with death.
The Horde wanted and got all that as well. The Alliance assisted the Horde in achieving its objectives against the âTrue Hordeâ. Well, except for the empty threat to Volâjin, I guess, but⌠come on, really? Thatâs winning a war for you?
1 Like
Garrosh was as big a threat to the Horde (The non-Orcs, anyway) as anything else ever was, so much so that a big part (Bigger than the faction against Sylvanas, anyway) rebelled against him, if anything, we did the Horde a favour by removing him.
And then, after cleaning up the Hordeâs mess, we left with nothing more than an empty threat, wow, such a victoryâŚ
1 Like