What next? Are they going to pull a Thacher and say Pol Pot was just misunderstood?
Trying to explain Teldrassil as morally grey is just as far fetched.
2 Likes
Actually, at this point I’m convinced that the mutually beneficial situation is that the Alliance and Horde will kill off enough of each other for her to raise into a willing Army that neither weakened side can contest.
Throughout this War Campaign and the entire expansion, she has shown little, if any regard for the lives of Horde soldiers. They’re more useful to her dead, as willing and loyal subjects.
2 Likes
Maliciously killing and resurrecting all the Horde soldiers as loyal subjects is definitely an option, but something tells me that isn’t the route she’s taking.
1 Like
I’m sorry, but how is that an option? Even she’s not powerful enough to kill and resurrect the entirety of the Horde forces in one fell swoop, and if she started slaughtering and raising large portions of her army en masse, all of the rest of the Horde would immediately rebel against her due to their understandable desire to not become rotting zombies.
That will kick-start the civil war conflict, and even if she wins, it will make her army immeasurably weaker than the Alliance, who has pretty much only ever stood united and strong.
Now, if there was some sort of magical MacGuffin device that allowed her to turn all of the Horde into undead immediately, I have little doubt that she would take that route, with little to no hesitation.
I didn’t say it would work or if that’s even her goal.
I understood your post. You were saying it was an ‘option’, but you didn’t think it was something Sylvanas would truly consider.
I argued that something completely nonviable, that is destined to fail, can’t really be considered an actual ‘option’. I also argued by saying that if it was viable, then I believe Sylvanas would in fact do it, because even if you don’t think that’s her goal, I choose to believe otherwise.
This has been my point of view as well.
I don’t think Sylvanas just wants to take over the world for the lulz. I believe she thinks what she’s doing is a “good thing”. But that’s about it.
Sylvanas has always had an odd sort of ethics. I’ve always considered her (and the Forsaken) to be a sort of Utilitarians. In that, if they believe it’s for the “greater good”, they’ll do anything. ANYTHING…
Combine that with Sylvanas’ stubbornness, in that she often believes she knows what the “greater good” for her people are, and it leads to many questionable actions.
So, to answer the main question, No. I don’t believe they’ve done a successful job in selling this, mainly because they keep dancing around Sylvanas’ “super secret hidden agenda”. As long as they do that, it’s difficult to put any genuine trust in her.
9 Likes
Unless the Alliance countered either with sappers, their own shamans, or just discovered the tunnels and guarded them.
I mean, I think Stormwind is a good example in that it has a very defensible internal harbor. You can’t really get at it much by land. So you require a good naval defeat and blockade to keep it neutralized. And even then, there is almost a second tier of defenses with the ramps and gates.
Which is why he focused on the idea of a protracted siege.
Yeah, I assume this was another minor writer flub.
Some folks are slow on the uptake that Blizzard wants Horde players to dislike her. The more they resist, the more cartoonish evil Blizzard has to make her.
You may well be right, but if that’s the case, why did Afrasiabi claim the opposite in that interview? He could just as easily have said something like “We want players to make up their own minds about characters, which is why we have to be very clear about their intentions, so the players don’t get the wrong idea.” Instead, he said that they want to keep the players divided because they feel like that’s good writing.
On that same note, they’re doing a bad job at keeping the players divided in the way he says is good. I mean, they’re setting up the story so that opposing Sylvanas is “clearly the right direction,” and they’re not even being subtle about it.
1 Like
Not slow on the uptake. Aware and actively resisting their telegraphed desires. You may disagree with the efficacy of this form of protest.
7 Likes
I doubt our reactions will effect the story they already have in mind. But its possible
As the OP stated, many support Sylvanas to troll Blizzard into painting itself into a corner. I am not among those - but it is amusing to watch it play out.
I can see Sylvanas destroying the Sunwell, killing the Vulpera, making profit illegal to anger the Goblins, burning the Arcandor, unleashing termites upon the wood holding up Thunder Bluff and Thunder Totem, and slaying all the High Elves to raise them as Forsaken (just to get the Alliance players a bit more riled).
And when she is done, Blizzard will be sobbing in their corner, muttering:
“Look what you made us do!”
Such a scenario is doubtful, but amusing.
3 Likes
Kind of like Kerrigan in SC2! Until suddenly she saved the universe because she was the only one immune to Mcguffin corruption…
1 Like
If they wanted me to dislike Sylvanas all they had to do was have her be like:
“SAURFANG, wtf bro, YOU STOLE MY KILL!!” after Saurfang axed Malfurion.
2 Likes
You run risks like that regardless. The objective is to bring in supplies into the city.
Portals, tunnels, airship are all great ways to do that.
These weaknesses he speaks of could be applied to pretty much any city (except Ironforge).
Yep. Hence my comment on why harbors always have a secondary set of defenses. What is interesting with Stormwinds defenses is that the Harbor seems more heavily defended than their main gate.
So Saurfang complaining about not having an internal port is silly when he doesnt have naval advantage otherwise he would have to fortify his port like he would a fourth gate to orgrimmar.
1 Like
The Goblins have shown expertise in forming the land to their design.
Why not tear down some mountains, blow up some land, create some water ways, and make a harbor closer to Org to match Stormwind.
It is certainly a little late now.
But if he was working to fortify Orgrimmar since Garrosh’s defeat, he had time. Especially if it is such a huge concern to him.
Yes and No. So, there is a scenario where she absolutely could do it (not one that Blizzard would do). So, think of it this way: If the Horde and Alliance decimate each other, say losing 80% of their forces. Sylvanas could start raising Alliance as her minions. Even if she only got half of them raised she would have the remaining Horde forces outnumbered and could start raising them and put down any attempt to stop her. So, technically it could be a option she is considering. Like I said, wont happen. But it could believably be a goal.
(Note, I don’t think there is evidence of that theory. It would be a little extreme for her. After all, she already leads the Horde. Now putting down Horde who rebel or leave is 100% in line with her character.)
I think you may be reading a bit much into that comment. Was he more referring to her development up to a point? Think about it, during Cata there was some question where she came down. Some of us took her as already stepping down the evil path. Others disagreed. But there was enough question that it made it hard to know just how far she would go. His description absolutely fit. But at a point, to finish the arc they have to let people in on the truth.
Tyrande could be smothering newborn Horde babies in their sleep and the only reasonable response would still just be “Ohhh, it’s about time a night elf did something.”
You’re one of them “Drown the orcphans” types ain’t ya?
This is how I see Sylvanas as well. I’m in the minority here, but it’s why I don’t mind her character in BtS. I don’t see it as her being mustache twirly evil. Just her doing what she genuinely thinks is best for the Forsaken (and best for her, but of course what’s best for her is what’s best for the Forsaken too).