(Introduction)
As mentioned in the “What went wrong”-thread from Reallyhappy I’m opening up a separate thread talking about my personal speculations. The general premise of this thread is the idea that “Battle for Azeroth” was indeed rewritten at some point in its development cycle. I’m thinking about the timeframe around Blizzcon 2017, where the cinematic was shown to the public alongside the feature-trailer.
Before we dive in deeper and I try to gather some evidence supporting the idea, I want to a give a general idea how the original story was probably supposed to play out. Or at least the beginning and maybe the first few patches.
(General storyline)
Now the idea is that originally it was indeed the Alliance which was the initial aggressor in the war between the factions with the Alliance indeed attacking Lordaeron before anything else happens. The attack on Lordaeron being the initial strike which officially started the war. Now, while you say, “Yeah but that would simply flip it around” it wouldn’t do it much justice. The story of the Alliance in BfA would have been a story about two different roads and perspectives in the future:
One being a militaristic and aggressive approach advocated mainly by people like Greymane, Tyrande, Admiral Rogers etc (but also many other Alliance leaders potentially Turalyon, Muradin, Trollbane and maybe even Shaw), while the other one being a more peaceful and understanding way. Anduin, Velen, and highly likely Moira of all people would be the advocates. (Sounds weird but we get into this.)
Meanwhile the Horde would indeed rally under Sylvanas, after the initial aggressions of the Alliance. Now the Horde would find itself in a defensive war, defending their very way of life and their right to exist in this world.
The Horde storyline can play out in several different ways. If we presume that Shadowlands was already pre-planned, then the storyline would become one where the Horde questions itself if the “any means necessary” approach would be the right one.
Any “any means necessary” would indeed become an important question during the pre-rewrite-storyline (and now we’re getting into the evidence gathering).
(Evidence)
During the datamining of the early BfA-days, we found several strings and even entire maps referring to several warfronts. The Barrens, Azshara and Quel’Thalas. We even had a certain string in the alpha, which would, when typed in, print out these:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/461543895185096725/489860332295159840/thonk.png
These are essentially short descriptions of the warfronts. Other evidence supporting these ideas is music. Even nowadays you can still hear Horde-warfront-music playing in the Southern Barrens.
What we do see from these warfronts however is the fact that all of them play in Horde-territory. Which supports the idea of an hyper-aggressive approach by the Alliance. The description of Quel’Thalas especially is extreme, when it comes to the Alliance. Purging the filth? Not something you’ll find in your usual Alliance questtext. We could argue that the military within the Alliance would have become a “state in a state”, maybe even overruling Anduin and his peaceful ways to launch their offensives.
Another small detail, which supports the idea that the Alliance would have become extremely militaristic during BfA and struggle with its original ideals, and yes it is somewhat fringe but still: The Stormwind Infantry soldiers around the city. While the Horde also got a few soldiers added to the blockade before Orgrimmar, within the city itself nothing else changed. The new Stormwind soldiers meanwhile can be found all other the Valley of Heroes, the harbor and even the castle.
Let’s also take a look at the BfA-cinematic. The only reason why we even have this cinematic was probably because it was already finished, by the time Blizzcon came up and before the rewriting started. As such it was pushed out to the public. Even though it doesn’t reflect the actual situation. The ingame events to not line up at all with the cinematic (especially when compared to Legion. When we find Varian at the Broken Shore he has indeed no longer his shoulder pads for example and you can even find his dropped amulet).
Outside of this is Greymane. “Close ranks! Advance as one!” sounds like your typical Alliance orders, but, “Lordaeron will be ours! My king…we have her cornered.” It does not sound like the Alliance is here for justice for Teldrassil. It sounds like they are here to conquer Lordaeron, while also hunting a dangerous animal.
Supporting this is a statement before release. I don’t have the exact quote at hand right now, but it was essentially that Anduin wants to prove himself by attacking Lordaeron. In the current iteration, there’s literally no reason for Anduin to prove himself, because everyone will agree that trying to kill Sylvanas after she had send a few thousand souls into the shadowrealm is a pretty neat idea.
However: If the militarists started to gain power in Stormwind and the Alliance, then obviously Anduin would try to impress and prove himself to them. All the while trying to live up to the legacy of his father. (A small detail in the cinematic is Anduins facial expression throughout the battle. He looks extremely distressed when Saurfang knocks him out, he lashes out in anger when Genn is sapped. And when he sees the wounded and dying soldiers around him, he only see the brutal reality of war. It fits the idea that he wants to prove himself, but in reality he really, really does not want to be there. But, he has to because he ordered the attack and he is the king.)
Now we can go back even further and find more evidence to support the idea, that it was originally indeed the Alliance which would make the first move.
Legion. Who shoot first in Stormheim? Who striked first in Silithus (before the book-retcon)? Both times it was the Alliance, who uncharacteristically made a pro-active-move against the Horde.
(Summary)
So to summarize: The original storyline of BfA would have been a storyline about Alliance aggression, and about the ideals of the Alliance as it stood on a crossroad: Militarism or pacifism? The Horde meanwhile would struggle with the very same thing. Is “any means necessary” a valid ideal in order to survive? Don’t we become the very same thing we tried to avoid (the Old Horde/Servants of the Burning Legion)? Do we value our honor higher even if it would cost our lives?
“Battle for Azeroth” would have indeed been a battle: A battle about the very idenity of what it means to be Horde or Alliance.
Alas this is speculation or maybe a bit of wishful thinking. I don’t know why Battle for Azeroth became a rehash of MoP, and I doubt that anyone of the story writers at Blizzard is really 100% happy about this development. Because we cannot deny that, while the lore might not always have been top-notch, each expansion was different. We always have some basic themes (especially against neutral threats), but overall each expansion was unique. Only BfA was a complete rehash, with some tacked on Old God stuff.