Oh get absolutely fuarked. B-b-but taurajo. The only freaking example you horde apologists pull up whenever the alliance has something to say about the thousands of innocent civilians that got nuked by an unstable maniac whose original objective was to capture and hold the city and its people as insurance against alliance invasion.
As for taurajo, all the civvies were free to leave and we got to kill the general in charge of that operation who showed remorse over the fact that he took the camp anyway. Its not anywhere near the level of teladrassil.
5 Likes
And heaven help us that the horde actually face consequences for the BS we pull over and over again, but aw nah it was just one bloke or she devil, the horde as a whole aren’t the problem. Meanwhile they facilitate the rise of the Lich Queen. Hell at least the leaders found a line they didn’t want to cross, sending an undead, mind controlled dude to kill his family.
1 Like
Really? Because I don’t recall a single person predicting it would be a spontaneous act in reaction to a PTSD trigger.
NOT from the Horde side, each faction specific quest has a different perspective… DOPE! redo the horde side of those quests and see if it isn’t a different story.
Once again, I play BOTH sides and have for a while. I am able to be objective, you cannot. Teldrassil was a valid military target, IF you try to be objective and apply the SAME logic as was used to justify the attack on a tiny village with limited military value AND the political and military Capital of an enemy race, you will see that the destruction of Darnassus was far more legitimate than the destruction of Camp Taurajo.
To simplify , IF Camp Taurajo was a valid target, then Darnassus was definitely a valid target. You cannot argue otherwise and be intellectual honest.
The destruction of darn was levels of magnitude above burning a few unmanned tents, especially when the original plan was to hold an alliance stronghold and its people as insurance against alliance invasion. Hell the original plan was to hold darn so the alliance couldn’t get azerite, but afterwards azerite showed up everywhere so it didn’t matter.
I was okay with syl holding that city. Not genociding an ancient race and their last bastion on azeroth because she had a hissy fit because she had flashbacks of her yeeting herself into arthas’ sword. Then doing the same thing to delaryn that Arthas did to her
6 Likes
AGREED , the difference in magnitude are BUT the principal is the same. The question is “Was Darnassus a valid military target ?” The answer is a resounding yes! We all accept that Camp Taurajo was a valid military target, thus Darnassus must be as well.
War is inherently unjust and immoral because the victims never got a choice. EVERYTHING that happens in war will usually be unjust as well, but viewed through the prism of “war fighting”, it was a good call to burn it down.
Why didn’t she occupy Darnassus? Did her plan evolve or did she throw a hissy fit? The story shows us the latter but it could be both. Occupation would have forced her to keep her army there, effectively pinning it in a hostile environment when it needed to move to Lordaeron, to counter Anduin’s next logical move.
Could Sylvanas have repel a counter attack on Teldrassil by the Alliance? I would say no, considering how the Alliance was able to attack Undercity and the NELFs were then still able to attack Darkshore in numbers.
War stories are typically tragic, normally good and decent beings start doing increasingly horrible things trying to win the war, . Everyday a war goes on, the harder it becomes to end. Fear, anger and mistrust only grow with time. They are doing a good job at depicting this so far.
1 Like
Eleves killed almost every orc in the city to get to garrosh so they are no better and should have expected payback one day. Fruit vendors, women, children were all killed just to get to one guy.
2 Likes
While im pretty satisfied with the Alliance story so far, im pretty dissappinted with the Horde one. Regardless of how it ends, its just Garrosh 2.0. They already tried the whole warchief gone bad thing, so no idea why they are doing it again. Tbh they made a mistake as soon as Sylvanas was made warchief. Its hard to sympothize with an undead war mongerer, why didnt they just keep Voljin? The Horde should be a bunch of outcasts that band together to survive, not bloodthirsty murderers.
3 Likes
No. Were just not stupid.
Last expac we all held hands to defeat the legion, horde worked with alliance. The only people who did not play ball were the Horde leaders because of Sylvanas.
Now the writers think it’s a perfect time to create a war between the two factions? After we came together, made class orders, and proved the two can work together? The only thing I’m sorry for is playing a game written by inept writers.
11 Likes
If the ss deus ex machina hadn’t shown up, the alliance would have lost at lorderon. Sylv knew she was going to lose that battle so she wanted it to be as pyrrhic a victory for the alliance as possible.
Again though losing a bunch of tents has no comparison to their world tree, especially when the tree was devoid of military targets. The entire night elven army was headed for silithus, all that was left were civilians who had no chance of defending themselves or escape. That’s the stickler, taurajo’s civvies got away, darns didn’t. Burn the tree if you must, get rid of the last alliance stronghold on kalimdor but incinerating innocent civilians and almost wiping out the entire night elven race has no comparison
1 Like
All good points, I think alot of the anger about the story is more from “bad” writing. Confusing and contradictory motivations from signature characters isn’t particularly helpful.
I had hoped that the “warfronts” would be more like the original Alterac valley instead of the boring mess they are now.
1 Like
Yup bad writing, used to explain warfronts and pvp gameplay that’s half baked.
I guess Japan invading China in the 2nd WW and murdering everyone they found was ok because it was a valid military target. Very valid, they dominated the Korean peninsula. I won’t even start on Germany since their strategy was nearly flawless. All justified because they hit valid military targets.
But the funny thing about your argument is that you are wrong, Sylvanas torching the tree and everyone on it was NOT a military strategy. The video was very clear on showing she only did it because she got triggered by what the nelf said.
It was meant for alliance AND horde players alike to be mad at her. The fact that you are trying to justify it baffles me. If only you played forsaken, but a Tauren paladin? lol That’s the reason the horde should have never got paladins.
6 Likes
This isn’t an RP forum so I am not in “character”. Secondly being a Paladin doesn’t require anything in game, for love of pete, demons are allowed in the Cathedral of light you freaking dope!
The destruction of Teldrassil is more akin to the incendiary bombing of Dresden or Tokyo or the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. None of these events were/are considered atrocities even by modern judeo-christian morality (which doesn’t exist in Azeroth) You could say it was equivalent to the Blitz of London, but even that is a stretch as the Blitz actually hurt the effort to break GB’s ability to defend itself, which was the expressed goal of the SUCCESSFUL campaign. Also a state of war has existed between the parties LONG before the attack, unlike the Germans and Japanese, that wage aggressive war without warning.
Except that they had all the equipment to do an incendiary attack on the tree. They took great pains to bring it though a particularly treacherous path. What other purpose did they bring it all then? A fireworks display to honor the Nelfs? Sylvanas’ intention was to break the nelfs will, also shown in the video and clearly stated by the character. Wouldn’t it make more sense that the plan evolved after Saurfang failed to kill Malfurion? She may have been “triggered” but it was a solid plan. There was NO way they were going to be able to take and hold Teldrassil from an Alliance counter attack, the only winning move was “terrain denial”. Sylvanas played both battles the same.
Darnassus was a VALID military target, period. It was the military and political capital of the Nelfs, a long time belligerent. Like Berlin or Tokyo.
What would you have had done? Seriously? Surrender? Fight a war in a way that can only lead to defeat? It is easy to justify, logic does that by itself. The problem is that people like you confuse justifying it with condoning it. If you want to WIN a war, you fight it to win. Good thing Illidan didn’t think like that.
Give me one military justification for burning any part of that tree outside of Darnassus and the port at the base. There is no significant military presence outside of the city walls. There’s like, one pack of sentinels spread out across the whole tree to patrol the roads. They can’t even get grell under control.
Also the Alliance side of Cata Barrens tells you civilians were allowed to leave by the officer in charge. The slaughter and looting was orchestrated behind his back by a rogue subordinate, and while you’re away fighting the looters he ends up killing his superior to cover it up.
Yeah, and the NPCs give you nervous lines when you walk in with them. You’re “allowed” because they don’t want you to sic any on them.
I’m really holding out on the hope that the writers are going to throw in a huge curve ball towards the end of the expansion that explains all of this because there is no way in their right minds that they are going to do a literal repeat of Mists of Pandaria… I know (I hope) they’re better than that.
Darnassus/Teldrassil was THE Nelf capital,the political heart of the enemy. In military terms it is the pinnacle of “Command and Control” of the Nelf military. Military Strategy 101 says attack that!!! It is where the Nelf military recruits from and it produces supplies to support the military. Many of Alexander’s victories against vastly numerical superior armies was due to a direct attacks on the enemies “command and control” element. This isn’t a moral defense of the attack it is a logical defence of it.
The Horde side of the quests ALSO put most of the blame for the atrocity part of Camp Taurajo on “mercenaries” working for the Alliance, but this isn’t being brought up to establish some moral equivalence, it is to determine “WHAT” makes a valid military target.
The Tauren accepted that because Camp Taurajo had soldiers and was used to train and supply military personnel that it was a legitimate military target, NOT an atrocity. Using that same logic, Teldrassil would ALSO be a valid target. The scale is irrelevant because the importance of Teldrassil to the alliance war effort far outweighs the greater potential of “collateral damage”. I think we can all agree that Darnassus being destroyed is a huge deal, definitely a “high value target”. Once again, I am not defending the morality of it, just logic of the attack, it’s sound strategy and tactics.
Sylvanas is definitely “Evil” by our shared judeo-christian belief structure even though her expressed goals are “Good” ( for the Horde races anyway), BUT she is no more evil than Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar or Napoleon.
1 Like
Well, you are defending your faction by discussing videogame lore on the internet but are saying you don’t identify with your character class and race? I stand my point.
Are you nuts? The US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki because Japan just wouldn’t surrender. I’m pretty sure the american soldiers didn’t want to kill all the innocent men, women or children there but it was the only way they found to end the war. This is very, very, different from what Sylvanas did, the night elves were not even attacking the horde.
Omg you are still clinging on that strawman. Are you talking about the catapults? It’s very clear they used to beat the night elf army that happened to be AWAY from the tree since the terrain is all catching fire. Here let me link the video for you.
The first thing Sylvanas says is to prepare to invade the tree, so no, she didn’t plan to torch the tree, otherwise she would just do it from the start and the conversation with the female night elf wouldn’t even happen. After the chat with the nelf she orders Nathanos to burn it, and of all people, Nathanos hesitates, and she has to shout at him. That’s how twisted her decision was.
It’s funny because you are not getting the purpose of the video, which is exactly the opposite of what you are defending. The video was not to show Sylvanas’ military prowess, but how out of control she can be. It’s crystal clear she already won, even the night elf says these exact words. There were only civillians on the tree, but she had to go further and kill everybody because she hates life, not because it was good for the horde.
2 Likes
Because you are dumb, you are unable to discuss an imaginary faction war objectively, because you are dumb. I also discuss other things as ME, a long time consumer of science fiction and fantasy work and military history buff. I play and have played MANY characters in many games.
The Nelfs and the Horde have ALWAYS been at war, because the point of the conflict CANNOT be resolved and have expanded since the “discovery” of Azerite. The Nelfs weren’t passively minding their own business and are known to be a tenacious enemy.
You OBVIOUSLY understand nothing of strategy and tactics of warfare itself, all you have is an emotional attachment to one side of an imaginary conflict.
OMG look up the definition of strawman before you use it. It just makes you look dumber.
You made very little in the way of refutation, just displaying more of your emotional connection.
IF she is so unstable, how is she able to run a successful military campaign over two continents, all while personally directing troops and showing extreme levels of personal bravery throughout the campaign? Some of her outward actions do seem emotional BUT that would be a huge paradox when taken in the context of the REST of the story. The one emotional event is the outlier…RIGHT?
This is your unhinged emotional opinion and is completely unsupported by any events I have witnessed in doing the story lines, Three time alliance, thee times horde. If anything Sylvanas is the only one who has put the Hordes long term survival as their number one priority. All the while the Saurfang, Alliance collaborator is only concerned with his own emotional state.
“Ask yourself this…DEMON HUNTER, what would Illidan have done? Would HE have killed his enemies, given the prospect of a lasting peace?!? He would have sacrificed EVERYTHING for peace! Some must be sacrificed, so the rest can be saved!”
I know you don’t want it, but let me give you a tip. When you start calling names when arguing with someone it just shows you are mad and make you look like you are wrong.
The conflict can’t be resolved because Sylvanas doesn’t want it to. Please don’t say Saurfang would have done the same thing. And again, there were only civillians on the tree, torching it or not wouldn’t have changed the war a bit.
That’s what I wanted to get into. My friend, you could be General Patton himself for all I care, this is not a military simulation. The people writing the story do not have a military background or are trying to look like they do. Your reasoning is wrong from the start because you are assuming plot devices are based on warfare strategy.
But the funny thing is, even on the warfare part you are wrong because it was not a good strategy by Sylvanas. You said the event was akin to the bombing of Hiroshima, but that happened in order to end a war. Sylvanas didn’t end it, far from that. What happened was much closer to the attack on Pearl Harbor by Japan, in which it was a good result at first but only rallied their opponent and ultimately ended in Japan’s defeat. Sylvanas angried not only the whole of the alliance but even her own troops. Her second in command (Saurfang) and the enemy leader are now practically pals. Great strategy.
Sylvanas going too far is THE WHOLE POINT OF THE EXPANSION. In fact, the expansion could have been called “WoW - SYLVANAS WENT TOO FAR”. No one cares if she is a good military leader, the story being told is that her death affected her in a way she doesn’t have any compassion. And worse, she has hatred for life itself.
hahahah those are not my words, nor my opinion. This is what the female night elf tells Sylvanas and what makes her angry because it’s the truth. Do you understand this is what Blizzard is telling us? That it’s not open to interpretation?
That’s what you don’t get, Illidan does wrong things for the right reasons. Sylvanas uses the horde for her own goals. I’m sorry, but it’s very naive of you to think she seeks peace, like Illidan did. In fact the whole forsaken race is on the horde just for convenience, they have no true loyalty to their faction.
And before you say this is my opinion, watch the original forsaken intro:
3 Likes