Don’t feel guilty for killing alliance scum. They had it coming.
The dwarves are still slain. People associated with Taurajo have been killed. The purge of Dalaran and Genn’s attack in Stormheim are not counted.
The Alliance has … Garrosh killed, but not by them. The Tal’dara School Demoman is slain by Garrosh. Sylvanas escaped. Saurfang is killed by Sylvanas.
The Horde solves its own problems on a small scale or gets rid of those responsible for presenting the Horde in a bad light. The Alliance … what is the Alliance doing? Tolerates and overcomes “small” problems, except in cases of “big” problems, when the Alliance is portrayed as deeply wrong and “needlessly offended the Horde.”
There should have been some thought, but I could not formulate it.
Low key
I can’t help but feel they nuked the Old Forums for that precise reason.
Because the entire expansion was predicted:
- corny rushed Old God plot twist
- MoP Garrosh 2.0
15 Likes
Okay. Nobody punishes you.
Different parts of the Alliance do not count on repairs, because Blizzard only destroys. Revenge is prohibited. Seeking revenge (mistreating the Horde player in “neutral” quests) is prohibited “because the player is unpleasant”. Right?
Devs promising that Sylvanas was not Garrosh 2.0 and then turning around and doing it anyway was just… The words I want to use would be filtered out.
Bruh. BRUH. In the two expansions before BFA, there were fully voice acted quests involving alliance characters telling Horde PCs what horrible piles of crap they were and that they’re a hair’s breadth away from killing the PC. When the PC is openly working for their side, and not directly during a major factional conflict.
You don’t think the game ever shames the Horde PC? Have you ever actually played Hordeside?
14 Likes
There is no way… more likely due to some web security or switching third party service providers.
Our nerd rages aren’t that strong.
What is Hordeside? Side stories of the Horde?
How about a deal like this: Alliance characters don’t offend you, but you lose cities, populations, and characters at the hands of the Alliance.
Since I know you are prone to exaggerations.
Can you post the quests in question?
I am bored with the current expansion anyway, I won’t mind dusting off some old content.
1 Like
Famous last words:
- “Teldrassil isn’t what it seems” -Ion, 2018
- “BFA will not be Garrosh 2.0” - Ion, 2018
- “Shadowlands will not be WoD 2.0” - Ion, 2020
16 Likes
The Val’shara Questline with Tyrande in Legion, and the Apexis ring quest with Jaina (that one’s not in the game anymore since it was a legendary item quest)
Why would it be WoD 2.0? WoD was an expansion with good levelling that stopped abruptly with very little and sparse endgame content and…
…oh no.
3 Likes
Eh, I think programming a new forum is too much effort for that sort of thing when all they would have needed to do was have a site-wide thread purge instead.
Anything else? Seems on the low end.
I did the Valshara one already.
Btw only Hearthstone understands faction identities.
I just love this. Speaking as a super Alliance fan.
Too bad Hearthstone is too expensive to play competitively.
3 Likes
Ain’t that the truth.
Hearthstone is amazing because it can focus on giving one particular area of the lore love and focus without having to spread it out or try to tie it into a greater storyline.
I think Blizzard does too much to have “big sweeping” questlines that are constrained by expansion restrictions and needing to set up the next big enemy to ever really be nearly as fun. And half of the interesting story threads end up being one patch wonders at best.
4 Likes
No, what is really not fair is to imply my comment addressed Kyalin alone -as a matter of fact it doesn´t adress her at all, it DOES address the posters that have come here to say: “I don´t care for the rest, gimme what I want cause muh expectations!!”; and no one else.-
Tl;dr: IF she actually cares to listen to us, then me thinks is quite obvious that particular remark is NOT addresed to her. As I pointed to in that very same post.
Next time, read the whole freaking comment.
An apparent improvement regarding your usual modus operandi, now act like a rational adult and apply this to YOUR proposal we discarded instead of channeling it as a proof we “don´t compromise”.
Tl;dr: don´t accuse people of not compromising when you literally go as far as trying to gaslight people in the “defense” of your suggestions to rest credibility to the other poster´s arguments.
LEARN to compromise first, as a matter of fact. LEARN to actually listen, not to only pick the parts that are convenient for your own agenda.
My mind is irrelevant dude, your words and the message you send us ALL is what matters.
And those are NOT the words of someone that actually stops and considers the ramifications their petitions have not only on him/herself, but on other posters that maybe don´t even post in these forums bur would feel bad regardless.
That´s the thing, this isn´t a “players win/lose” issue dude… the very fact you reduce to those words says everything we need to know in regards to your stance and the stuff that motivates you, period.
4 Likes
Curious. Isn’t the main motivation of any person “victory” and the prize due for it?
Ariel, your version of compromise is rolling over and accepting everything that happened, while agreeing wholesale to what Horde posters want.
That is not compromise, in any respect. Nor is it in the spirit of compromise to toss out suggestions on the basis of aspects of them that aren’t actually there. In a similar spirit to my comments to Baal, if your feedback is predicated on the use of a logical fallacy, I’m tossing it out until you correct said fallacy. I otherwise do not have to uncritically accept your feedback as reasonable.
Because often times, it isn’t.
1 Like
I felt like this discussion has been done to death, but didn’t we kind of discuss how part of this losses and gains issue is largely “emotion” driven? Like, in BfA the Horde was forced to take something of emotional value of the NEs and Alliance. So because something of theirs they valued was stolen … its hard for them to accept or concieve that the side that took it (and caused them so much pain) got nothing of value from it. And in fact, ALSO lost many things in that compelled “theft”. Its just the things the thieves lost the victims don’t have any emotional investment in … so they don’t consider them to be of equal value … and demand restitution?
In short, “I lost something I care about, which means they HAVE to have gained something from that loss”.
12 Likes
The main motivation of playing a game is to have fun. There is no fun in being shamed for a ‘victory’ that was handed to you under circumstances you hated to begin with.
Likewise it’s not fun to be told that you haven’t suffered enough for those ‘victories’ and that the only way things will be fair is if you are at best shamed and humiliated (more than you already routinely are) or at worst forced to lose the few things you still have (that have not already been taken away).
8 Likes
What’s also not fun is having the things that your role established that you were supposed to protect destroyed by the other faction by way of narrative fiat, who you now can’t hit back against because those same writers won’t let you.
But you only care about one of these problems enough that you want them to be solved. Problems experienced by other people don’t evidently matter to you.
1 Like