But, think about it logically. Does Tyrande really have a reason to believe or trust the Horde. They willingly followed Sylvanas. And there is plenty of reason for her to think Sylvanas could still have influence among the Horde. A treaty is worth nothing with that threat.
But, is Sylvanas really a priority for the Horde. She did not really do anything all that bad to them. The Alliance has a lot of reason to want to put her down. But the Horde in general really doesn’t. From Tyrande’s perspective, maybe the current Horde leaders will go after Sylvanas, maybe. And even if they do, is there really any reason to think they will put that much effort into it? And then there is the little question of trusting them not to put a knife in your back while you hunt Sylvanas. And we KNOW Sylvanas still has support among the Horde, we just don’t know how much. So, Tyrande does have reason to not want to work with the Horde.
And there is:
Which is the reason I firmly believe we need to see the Horde give up territory and SHOW us them trying to make up for their crimes.
This presupposes that they want to have conflict. There was a Blizzcon interview a few years back where they said it was time to “resolve” the conflict. I don’t think they intend for there to be war between them anymore.
That sounds nice and all but when the Horde took your race’s future what are you to do? Tyrande is entirely right about them being a rabid beast. They were given chance after chance to do better and this is where we are now.
Why? The story has to progress. You can only manufacture so much conflict for the sake of having conflict before it gets tired (and I would argue it already is). At this point for the story to have any semblance of logic we only have two choices. One, one side just straight wins and destroys the other. And we know that can’t happen. Or two, peace. We need the Horde to not just be called different, but be different. Show them trying to atone. Give a good reason for the Alliance to not burn them all. And if the Horde really is different, then the peace has to be more than just an intermission until some new manufactured and forced conflict is created.
I’ll state this. The way in which they have presented it more recently has been more similar to what has been in the past, more than any other expansion. They took MoP’s concept essentially. However, they’ve shown many ways of presenting and creating new conflicts between them that has really compelled us as fans. That has created great story lines.
Point being. They’ve failed at presenting the faction conflict more recently than have ever before.
I’ll spitball this idea. I’d rather have Anduin and Thrall, or whoever’s leading the Horde, trying to keep the peace but have people like Genn/Tyrande/Zandalari threatening that. Resulting in tensions rising within the factions themselves and in small pockets against each other. I wouldn’t have an expansion based off that, but rather have it as a side story while we deal with Sylvanas/Bwonsondi’s boss, Void or whatever. That to me would be a lot more compelling than us all being friends and just go and fight the bad guy
You might not agree with that but I hope you can understand my POV.
i think that blizzard failed to present us azshara or n’zoth as bigger threats that we should be worry about.
They just show up and we just… kill them.
like they barely manage to do anything.
Now the horde, in the other hand is a playable faction, so of course they have the same plot armor as the alliance and that is also a problem.
because they present to you the horde as a bigger threat than the “big bads” and we can’t respond in kind. so trying to get to peace with them may feel… even more stupid than simply uniting to defeat the generic world threat that show up.
in the end it at all goes back to teldrassil and how insanely stupid was for blizzard to do it like that.
unless they have something prepared in blizzcon that can surprise us and use teldrassil as a interesting plot point to follow.
They are not, no one is innocent. Almost every race in WoW’s lore has world-ending atrocities to account for but that’s the whole point of signing cease fires and peace treaties. To stop the nonsense and you’re making it look like everyone supported Sylvannas when even Nathanos was hesitant to follow the path she took on behalf of the horde.
But it’s whatever, I’m just thinking logically. If Tyrande is in for blood, then good, it’s more content for an xpack, it just makes very little sense to wage war against the entire horde without the alliance’s support when you have limited resources, no base of operations and have far fewer people to recruit for an army. If I was Anduin I probably would’ve just ejected them from the alliance and watch then get crushed by the horde and Sylvannas separately.
I don’t disagree. They didn’t execute this story very well.
Yeah, if they wanted to nuke Teldrassil and screw over NEs they could have had N’Zoth do it. It would have made him a more credible threat to us, the players. But most Alliance players have been fighting the Horde this expansion. So, you’re right, this peace may seem stupid to us.
I was speaking more to the characters in game. N’Zoth is a very immediate threat to them, and thus focusing on him and letting the Horde go for now is the most reasonable path.
Don’t hold your breath (I would love to see a cinematic trailer featuring Tyrande though).
Why they’re going to give her to the Lightbound of course.
I’d bet more then a few of those zealots managed to leak their way from alternate Draenor, infiltrate the Alliance and poisoned the mind of the young foolish King.
Genn: There is truth in her words, Anduin. Peace may be on the table today, but soon enough the Horde will sound their drums and march for war. Genn: When that day comes, no scrap of parchment will hold them back.
Aww hell, I just realized something that might have been a cooler outcome, since it seems Saurfang was destined to die anyway.
What would you guys think if, instead of Saurfang dying at Sylvanas’s hands, she had her outburst and flew off without killing him? Then as he prepares to give a speech to the Horde at the gates, Tyrande bursts in and kills him for orchestrating the War of Thorns, screaming about how the Horde doesn’t deserve peace for what they’ve done. Then all the Sentinels attack Orgrimmar, triggering the Horde to defend the city and forcing the rest of the Alliance forces to rally and fight, or else die in the chaos.
Would that be better or worse? Actually eager to hear some thoughts on the hypothetical. I think that would have been a way better way to remind players of the horror of Teldrassil and the fury of the night elves in a way that wouldn’t undermine the stupid crap the Horde was already given in this current story anyway.
EDIT: Since Blizzard handwaves military resources very liberally, assume Jaina comes to her senses and acts like a consistent character for once, immediately portaling in additional Alliance firepower/forces in order to make the assault on Orgrimmar a more fair Red vs. Blue fight rather than a 1/4 Red + 1/4 Blue vs. 3/4 Red fight like it might have been if magic insta-peace DRAENOR IS FREE “THE HORDE IS NOTHING” hadn’t happened.
I think the problem with continued conflict is stakes. In a vacuum, what you are describing could be good. It could have some interesting story arcs. But, we aren’t in a vacuum. Theramore happened. Teldrassil happened. The stakes are very high for the Alliance. If conflict continues there wont really be an argument for the Alliance not ending the Horde threat once and for all. As long as the Horde is still in conflict with the Alliance, there is one lingering question: ‘Which Alliance city is the next to be wiped out?’ As long as that question is out there, it makes zero sense for the Alliance not to prosecute the war to end the Horde threat once and for all. And as long as that is the case, there will be this huge hole in the lore and issue with logical consistency. Remember, the Horde has done more damage to the Alliance than basically all the other threats. Think about it from the Alliance perspective. Imagine the next conflict starts up. The immediate response is: ‘Oh, here we go again. They are no different than Garrosh’s or Sylvanas Hordes. We need to end them before another city gets wiped out.’ The only logically consistent choice for the Alliance would be all out, destroy the Horde war.
The only way to address that is, in the vein of actions being louder then words, is for the Horde to show us it is different. And the Horde being, and showing itself, different means that there is not really a way to logically continue the conflict.
Ultimately the stakes for the Alliance is survival. Conflicts have lead to two major Alliance cities being wiped out (including massive civilian casualties). If more conflict start, the only option is full war for survival.
Interesting line of thought, I reckon this would have been better than the one we got if it was done well, would have made a surprise twist thats for sure. Plus it would make it look like that they are pinning the blame on more than Sylvanas.