When you post on your Arlessa character you also show succumbing to tribal mentality and culture as well.
Given how quick people will lump even me in with other “Kill Horde” Night Elf fans, you can tell yourself that, but I don’t think it will encourage anyone in any way.
Uh, so can allowing Fantasy Ghengis to roam free after she basically burned ~80% of your citizens to death. She wants Sylvanas dead and, while it may change later, from what we’ve seen not the entire Horde. Genn’s dialogue indicates the same.
Sure, you CAN interpret that as madness, but only in the same way as, two minutes after you hit your head on a low shelf, you can interpret a headache as a warning sign of cancer. Sure, you might be right, but that’s rather ignoring the more prominent explanation at the moment.
She isn’t going free, though. She’s the target of a worldwide manhunt. Wanting to continue conflict with the Horde while the armies’re nearing complete fatigue, that’s the point of concern. Logistically, it is a bad move. Emotionally, it might seem sound.
Except she specifically said she was after Sylvanas. She did not say she was going to war with all of the Forsaken, let alone entire Horde. You are inserting dialogue that does not exist. They could change her aim quite easily to warring with the Horde itself, but as of right now, she is not.
If she was going crazy and overly emotional, she’d have a lot more threatening dialogue than “What the hell kind of armistice is this? Sylvanas and her toadies just get away after she barbecued most of my country? Screw that, I’m not signing this rubbish unless I get to use her spine as my inkwell.”
The only question is if she and Genn can hunt down Sylvanas, not war with the Horde, without sustaining casualties, because they’re not going to regroup until that task is over with. That’s what their message implies, not “I’m attacking the Horde anyway.”
Sylvanas is being hunted by both Alliance and Horde Forces we all know this. But Tyrande is right it was just not Sylvanas who burn the tree the Horde burn the tree it even shown with how small the Rebels forces were that most of the Horde did not care overall about the tree being burn. Even the boy king makes a comment on how small the rebels forces were. From the way the NPCs act i would say the only reason Sylvanas is not Warchief still is cause of what she said not what she did.
The current peace between the Horde and Alliance both sets of NPC have no faith that the other side will keep to the peace and why should they think that. No matter how good realtions are between the leader of Nations does not change the fact that the common people of any nation can hate another nation without it really effecting the Leadership.
Haven’t you heard the cycle has been broken because Saurfang said so?
Saurfang did nothing without Alliance help, he was let go Alliance Si 7 help him get out of Alliance lands. He basically wanted the Alliance to get rid of Sylvanas for him so why should i care what he says. Now true after he was let go he started to try to build a Rebel force but we see how that really work out when the Boy King says “So Few” That makes me think that his forces were much smaller then the last time the Horde was spilit in two.
Not signing the armistice implies continued hostile intent with the opposing party (the Horde). That’s still game on for military efforts.
I wish they would close this thread already. The horse is dead and doesn’t feel a thing from the constant beating
If we contain it here, with any luck people won’t start new threads again for the same topic.
The opposing party is Sylvanas, and she said as much. Sylvanas is her target, and her loyalists as well. The only thing that stops me from saying you’re wrong outright is that it’s an ambiguous as opposed to unambiguous manner of attack.
The difference is she did say she’d attack Sylvanas, but didn’t say she wouldn’t attack the horde, BUT that doesn’t say she WOULD either. They wrote her aim as “I’m not standing down and licking my wounds, human, I’m hunting down Sylvanas come hell or high water.” The only question is what that entails.
She did not insert intention to attack the whole Horde, even if they can easily write her doing so without any sort of dishonesty on her part or plot holes on Blizzard’s.
Stop putting in dialogue that does not exist.
she pretty much says that she signed no treaty, so the nelfs are still currently at open war with the horde.
The Horde that signed the treaty, the rebels, were already in a cease fire with the Alliance before the siege, the only parties that were still in conflict were the Sylvanas loyalists, who are indeed still on her hit (optional s on that word) list.
Yes, Tyrande is definitely in full on rage mode, but how narrow the scope on the target of that rage is is ambiguous, and her sanity is so far not in question by any honest reading of the material, though again, avenues to portray her as crazy are there.
The only solid indication we have of her target is Sylvanas herself, as neither the Horde nor the Forsaken nor even her loyalists are mentioned directly by her, though I’d be stunned if “Sylvanas” doesn’t include those who still side with her.
What she did say is that she would not make any peace with the Horde entire while Sylvannas lived. That is not a trivial statement.
Anduin’s third lie: “I WANT THAT TREATY SIGNED.”
Anduin is Palpatine confirmed.
Oh they are being silly kins Amadis! Of course you’re not one of them kill all horde people!
You’re in the horde should feel bad and shameful for the night elvs and lick their boots for all eternity camp!
That’s why Lor’themar’s my favorite.
Shandris Feathermoon says: The sentinels have made use of that terrain for millennia. Our knowledge of the land was old when the Farstriders were young.
Lor’themar Theron says: Yes, of course.
He leaves the shiniest boots. And at least actually mentions Teldrassil, even if not by enough.
Which means she’s gunning for Sylvanas, won’t stop if the Horde stands in her way, and after the banshee is dead-dead she _____.
Not hard to puzzle out, fill in the blank.
And also since when is not signing a treaty you disagree with a rare practice in war? The USA refused Japan’s surrender until it was unconditional. Heck, Vicksburg’s surrender was refused just to delay the date of the acceptance of surrender until July 4, the American independence day, just to flip the confederacy the bird. Refusing to sign a treaty until Fantasy Ghengis is dead and then doing so is hardly a case of madness.
Again, they could very easily write in her going insane, but they could also very easily write in her not doing so, it is ambiguous, it is too early to make such a declaration in either direction with any measure of honesty in the reading of the material we have.
Actually we intentionally worded our terms to make sure Japan would not accept until we got a couple of tests of our new toy. We knew that the Emperor would not accept any terms that did not provide for the preservation of his own precious hide. And we needed the opportunity to show the Russians our promised “big surprise”. After all people frown on burning cities full of civilians after a peace is declared. The biggest fear of the Manhattan Project was that Japan would surrender before we got to use the Bomb on a live target.
Morale of the story… if you’re going to use history to make an argument, make sure you have all of the details in mind.
A game she’s shown no indication of being played. Someone having season tickets doesn’t ensure they’ll ever actually go to the stadium.