Was Alliance Losing the War?

[Korzuk-moon-guard (Korzuk)]

I feel like Blizzard could easily do a whole lot more to make the World feel more alive than they do.

The World Quest system is incredibly flexible, and as seen in BFA they are open to adding it to old zones / revamped zones. They do not have to revamp every zone / city, but adding World Quests that could add context / development to the world could really go a long way to making it feel like things ‘are’ happening, just off screen. Quests such as protecting a Caravan going from Crossroads to the border of Durotar (The Southfury River), or helping some Druids regrow a few trees in Ashenvale. They could add as many quests as they could think of all over Kalimdor and the Eastern Kingdoms to help introduce new NPCs, hint at larger stories happening behind the scenes, and more.

As to Aviala’s post, I love all of it. Blizzard even showed they were willing to add a large amount of flavor text and chats happening over the Capitol cities… surely it would not be hard to add few more every patch, with ambassadors talking, citizens gossiping, and more.

Literally lines like:
Excited Night Elf Citizen: “Did you hear about the regrowth of Darkshore? I heard entire groves are being mended over night.”
Night Elf Citizen: “I heard Malfurion himself leads the efforts. It will not be long until we return to our homelands.”

Worried Orgrimmar Citizen: In a Hushed tone “There are less and less Forsaken in Orgrimmar every day. What could they be plotting?”
Orgrimmar Citizen: “The Council announced they will be helping to move them to a new city.”

If Blizzard ‘doesn’t have the resources’ for the full zone revamps we all want, they can at least put in the bare minimum effort of things like that. At this point, my expectations are so low that just about any positive development would be enough to soar over them.

[Pheandra-emerald-dream]

Because you claim to want a thing, then do everything you can to ensure you don’t get that thing. What, suddenly you’ve done a full 180 and want constructive debate? When an hour ago, you were doing everything you could to tear down actual debate?

No. Not working.

Then don’t reply to me. It’s that simple,

Regardless, I think I’m done with you for this thread. Either you’ll get it or you won’t. I’m done derailing.

Good. How about now you engage Aviala’s post about a middle ground.

[Pheandra-emerald-dream]

A lot of people have mentioned that the conflict ended too suddenly.

I don’t see how they could extend it without bringing up Horde’s crimes and its consequences.
Brooding in a corner with some NPC dialogues you could easily miss is nowhere near enough.

But at the same time I am going to gst accused of trying to punish the Horde player by shaming them.

[Gorge-the-venture-co]

0_0 nail meet hammer, very well done! Admiral Rogers being the Horde’s villain is a good choice. Especially in the event of let’s say she has to die, it wouldn’t hurt the Alliance as badly as a leader. Having said that, hopefully she wouldn’t, she’s the only eligible Horde villain.

To add to that, maybe have a Horde event with Ashenvale, a sort of prove we are more for peace than war. After the Alliance events of pushing put the Horde responsible for Teldrassil out, Horde should have events to help rebuild Ashenvale. Have Tauren Druids, Orcs SHAMANS, and dare I say Darkspear Trolls and possibly Dark Trolls druids and shamans.

It may have been me, but I think a small part of the problem that made Horde going metal is the fact that really 95% of the Orcs or even more are warriors. If you’d remove all non-warrior Orcs, not much would change other than Thrall and Drek’thar, Drek’thar is old, and Thrall is even a warrior right now! Ugh! Orcs need to return to their shamanistic roots, for real in game. Horde help rebuilding and giving Ashenvale and Darkshore to the Night Elves would be a good start of attempting to mend fences.

It’s been said before, but we really need a sort of “calm down and help rebuild” expansion. If a big bad status quo has to show up, then at least it would feel somewhat personal. “Hey this big bad wants to undo both of our entire work?! NO!”

[Jellex-wyrmrest-accord (Jellex)]

Hrmmnnghhhhrhhhh.

I guess this isn’t the worst thing in the world.

I do think the faction ambassadors is a good idea, because giving them new text bubbles/gossip options is a pretty easy and cheap thing for blizz to do and they can come in fairly frequently (if they care to). Hell they can probably just scan this forum for random stupid fight #17781931 to drop in there if there’s no big lore issue to discuss at the moment.

Points 2, 3, and 4 all share the same problem from my point of view: these are very long on “The Horde should do this for the Alliance/the Alliance should get to do this to the Horde” and you have “Horde players can get a Horde-focused questline instead”. Obviously, as you are not a Horde player, I understand coming up with specifics for the Horde is probably not easy. It’s just a little hard to go with full agreement towards this scenario when we don’t see what the Horde gets - I think I speak for a lot of Horde players when I say that having to play through an apology/walk of shame questline is far from fun. The Horde is already pretty short on things to feel proud of.

Not to dismiss the idea out of hand, I just think it needs a little bit more in the way of concrete details for both sides, because it still kind of feels like an Alliance wish list with a few vague bones tossed in for the Horde. One specific point:

As part of this, reveal that the Horde/ex-Horde slain in the scenario were the ones who were eager to invade and unapologetic about the Burning, so they’re crossed off the revenge list.

One thing I would really like Blizzard to stop doing is making the Horde player’s Horde so drastically different from the Alliance player’s Horde. I know what you’re going for with this idea, but I think it would be helpful in the long run if the Horde was the Horde and didn’t need two separate representations in the story.

Yes, the Horde does need an Alliance villain to root against, and no, I don’t think it should be Jaina, the character has been too whiplashed to serve a consistent role in that vein anymore. My main concern here is whether or not Blizzard can reliably write a character that is hated by one side but loved by the other - that’s on them and out of our control, so I won’t dwell on it.

Obviously yes to the rebuilding of capital cities, this is a no-brainer. Your plan is fairly ambitious, but I think that even if we just got a return to the status quo that would probably suffice. (More is better, but again, Blizz hates world-building.)

I think number seven is probably the keystone of many Horde complaints and, in this case, I think would go a long way towards helping a lot of different problems with the story in general. It is probably the most important point in my view, enough that if this was handled well, I could probably accept some short-term pain if this could reliably be counted on to follow.

I think a lot of my objections stem not exactly from the things you prescribe per se (with the exception as noted above) but rather that I have very little faith in Blizzard to write a mutually satisfying narrative. To summarize the specific points of argument I have:

1. I’d like to know a little bit more about what the Horde gets to do while the Alliance gets to faceroll in your scenario. This might be easier to take if I knew specifically what was going to happen instead of “We’ll do all this stuff and look really cool! …and you can do something else over there.”

2. I really, really, really think that there should be a singular representation of the Horde, and that Blizzard should stop bloodying up the Horde NPCs that the Alliance encounters, because that leads to the massive incongruities like the debacle with Brennadam or otherwise undermining your goal in point 7 that Alliance players need to be shown that the Horde has value.

[Alynsa-wyrmrest-accord]

So, ahem. Back to relevant things.

If Blizzard ‘doesn’t have the resources’ for the full zone revamps we all want, they can at least put in the bare minimum effort of things like that.

When I logged into Orgrimmar a month or so back and noticed a bunch of Sylvanas loyalists being led away in chains, I was honestly shocked and impressed. Not because it’s a huge deal, but because I didn’t think they’d bother to do even that much.

But they should, and they should do it a lot more often. A whole world revamp isn’t needed (and frankly, given how some of the Cata zone revamps went, and how the Cata endgame zones were the most hit-or-miss zones ever, I’m not sure I want that); NPC gossip text, emotes and other thingers can do a whole lot of world-building on their own.

Instead of the “stuck in the past expac” approach, have neutral NPCs in neutral quest hubs like Val’sharah respond to events. When a Horde PC goes to the night elf vendors, have them emote something. Make them mention they’re only working with/selling to the Horde PC because they think there might still be some trace of the hero that helped them fight off the Legion left within them (What have you done to Teldrassil, ! You’re acting more like a demon than a hero!). Have them ask night elf players if there’s any word about survivors. It can’t take up that many resources.

And then after the armistice is signed? Have them comment on that. Show these neutral night elves react with trepidation still to the Horde. Have neutral orc NPCs react to Alliance PCs uncomfortably, maybe have them remind the player that “hey, I stayed out of it. #NotAllOrcs!” Have the Cenarion tauren and night elves in Moonglade comment on the war, and how the Cenarion Circle has agreed to help heal Teldrassil. But also have the night elf druids unsure if they should let the tauren help, because of the optics. Have the tauren druids comment that they’re not comfortable working so closely with the night elves, because they feel guilty about their people’s involvement in the war (tauren seem to have a thing for feeling guilty and waiting too long to do anything. Shots fired at you, Baine!).

The armistice works better when we see people unsure if it’ll work at all, and we see that old wounds don’t heal because Anduin said it’s all over. He can’t mass-bubble-heal emotional pain.

[Alynsa-wyrmrest-accord]

Rogers, however, is perfectly primed to be a villain to the Horde, without the undertones of guilt that using Jaina as a villain to them would cause.

So… Hot take here, but… I don’t think it’s possible any longer to showcase an Alliance character as an unsympathetic Horde villain. Not even Rogers. Not with Blizzard’s current trend for storytelling.

Rogers came about during Mists, when Garrosh was going full tilt supervillain. Her rabid hate for the Horde was quickly justified before even landing in Pandaville, where the Horde attacks the base camp the Alliance made, just because it was there. She shows up later in Legion, still wanting to slaughter everything Horde and backing Genn’s plan to strike first at Sylvy… But at that point, both were convinced Sylvanas had intentionally left Varian’s forced undefended, just so they’d die. Which later was retconned to be true. And later on, there’s Sylvy trying to make val’kyr slaves.

Rogers has been right every single time, because every single time she’s reacting with open hatred, the Horde is there giving her all the reason in the world to hate them. And from the character’s POV, every time she sees someone trying to give them a chance to not be evil, the Horde decides to find new and more impressive ways to fulfill her every expectation.

So Rogers saying, for instance, that regardless of what Anduin might want, she’s going to take her sky ship and every other sky ship who’ll follow her in mutiny and pilot them right into Orgrimmar? It doesn’t come across as unjustified. It doesn’t come across as irrational. It doesn’t come across as unsympathetic.

At this point, for the Horde to have an Alliance villain, the Horde first needs a few expansions to grow into becoming Horde heroes. Because villains don’t get to have their own villains.

[Pheandra-emerald-dream]

Roger is also from South Shore where the Horde blighted her home and killed everyone she loved.

[Aviala-wyrmrest-accord (Aviala)]

Horde should have events to help rebuild Ashenvale.

I think this could be nice, but the Horde player shouldn’t have to do it. It would be an interesting option, or maybe a world quest that the player doesn’t have to even go near if they don’t want to.

I’d like to know a little bit more about what the Horde gets to do while the Alliance gets to faceroll in your scenario. This might be easier to take if I knew specifically what was going to happen instead of “We’ll do all this stuff and look really cool! …and you can do something else over there.”

Do you have a suggestion?

I tried coming up with a scenario that I felt the Alliance really needed to set it back on its feet after BfA, but I don’t know what the equivalent would be that the Horde needs. As the night elves would be fighting Sylvanas’ holdouts, the Horde could get a scenario where they get to track down some Sylvanas loyalists (or are they the traitors now?).

If the Horde got a scenario to track down some Sylvanas loyalist - say, one where the player, Velonara, Apothecary Lydon (or another Forsaken rep, I just like Lydon) got to out-Dark Ranger and out-Apothecary some of Sylvanas’ devotees (perhaps one where the player uncovers more information on Sylvanas’ plot to get as many Horde killed as possible before the confrontation) while reaffirming their loyalty to the Forsaken and the Horde - would you find that cathartic or annoying?

I really, really, really think that there should be a singular representation of the Horde, and that Blizzard should stop bloodying up the Horde NPCs that the Alliance encounters

My intention was for the ‘Horde’ that the night elves defeat in Ashenvale to be Sylvanas’ loyalists - ones that would rather stick with her than the player’s Horde. It’s a bit of a flimsy narrative divide, but I wanted a scenario where the night elves could righteously strike down the ones who gleefully killed their civilians, while the Horde player doesn’t have to feel like these were NPCs they should be aiding or that their Horde has lost something to the night elves even after the armistice.

I guess it’s as flimsy as, to reference a completely different faction debate, having Southshore be destroyed by a tidal wave and then the Forsaken take it over vs having Southshore get raided by the Forsaken. It’s still a loss, but just one little step removed from having it be a loss at the hands of the other faction. I’m not sure how much it helps or not.

[Jellex-wyrmrest-accord (Jellex)]

would you find that cathartic or annoying?

Extremely annoying. I guess I should say - if you keep bringing up the Sylvanas divide in the Horde, you’re going to deepen wounds, not help them heal. The Horde needs to basically just… not deal with her. At all. The longer she’s in the picture, the longer those wounds are going to stay open, because of how Blizzard used her to divide the Horde playerbase against itself.

To answer your question, what the Horde really needs is two things. One is a sense of pride in themselves and in their institution, but the other is that the two sides of the Horde civil war desperately need to reconcile. “Hunting down Sylvanas loyalists” just embitters those people who sided with her and reinforces that there was a “wrong” choice in Horde questing. This might not sound that good to Alliance players, but it’s the literal definition of an internal Horde issue that needs to be addressed by them, without Alliance input.

Unfortunately, I suspect we’re going to see more of what you suggested and less any attempt at acknowledging that there are people upset with the direction the story went Hordeside - we’re all going to be treated as if killing Sylvanas fixes all of our issues 100%.

[Aviala-wyrmrest-accord (Aviala)]

How about a scenario dealing with clearing up the worst of the blight around Lordaeron, then? I’m not sure what options there are that are both relevant to BfA and don’t involve fighting either the Alliance or Sylvanas.

Would finding evidence of Sylvanas’ ulterior plans and using it to talk some of her loyalists back into the Horde be any better?

Edit: I don’t think there’s any way to salvage Sylvanas herself, since she’s playing a big villain role in Shadowlands, so I’m trying to find the second-best thing to that.

[Alynsa-wyrmrest-accord]

If the Horde got a scenario to track down some Sylvanas loyalist - say, one where the player, Velonara, Apothecary Lydon (or another Forsaken rep, I just like Lydon) got to out-Dark Ranger and out-Apothecary some of Sylvanas’ devotees (perhaps one where the player uncovers more information on Sylvanas’ plot to get as many Horde killed as possible before the confrontation) while reaffirming their loyalty to the Forsaken and the Horde - would you find that cathartic or annoying?

Aviala, I <3 you but… Nope to this.

The best road forward, in my honest opinion, is to treat Sylvanas as a raid boss with Shadowlands NPCs as the trash mobs.

I’ve done enough questlines to fight the Horde. I’ve done enough questlines to kill Sylvanas loyalists. I’ve done enough things to say “no, I’m the real Horde!” It needs to just end. And frankly, it needs to end at the hands of Tyrande in a raid ending cinematic. Preferably in Shadowlands’ first raid tier.

Have an Alliance questline where you kill her remaining followers and acolytes and adherents. I don’t need a parity questline to match it. I’ll take one where I escort Zappy through Nagrand to put Saurfang’s remains with his ancestors or something. It can start at the Dark Portal and make me RP walk all the way for all I care. He can even stop for a rest every minute, making me splash him with water to get him moving again. It can last all the way from the portal to Nagrand. I’ll take that hit.

I’ve had enough questlines as a Horde player where I kill Horde NPCs to last for the rest of my life. I gladly give them all to you.

[Pheandra-emerald-dream]

So is it fair to say that the compromise is reduced to what Blizzard originally intended?

Blame everything on Sylvanas.
No consequence on the Horde or what they did.
Use Shadowlands to wrap up the conflict just like we did in WoD?

Is that fair to say or am I trolling again?

[Karserd-ragnaros (Karserd)]

Have an Alliance questline where you kill her remaining followers and acolytes and adherents. I don’t need a parity questline to match it. I’ll take one where I escort Zappy through Nagrand to put Saurfang’s remains with his ancestors or something. It can start at the Dark Portal and make me RP walk all the way for all I care. He can even stop for a rest every minute, making me splash him with water to get him moving again. It can last all the way from the portal to Nagrand. I’ll take that hit.

I’ve had enough questlines as a Horde player where I kill Horde NPCs to last for the rest of my life. I gladly give them all to you.

To answer your question, what the Horde really needs is two things. One is a sense of pride in themselves and in their institution, but the other is that the two sides of the Horde civil war desperately need to reconcile. “Hunting down Sylvanas loyalists” just embitters those people who sided with her and reinforces that there was a “wrong” choice in Horde questing. This might not sound that good to Alliance players, but it’s the literal definition of an internal Horde issue that needs to be addressed by them, without Alliance input.

wooow, interesting, now how do we compromise these two views?

[Alynsa-wyrmrest-accord]

wooow, interesting, now how do we compromise these two views?

They aren’t mutually exclusive, so it’s easy.

Alliance can have all the quests to kill Sylvy loyalists. Horde can have a quest to reunify the remaining loyalists with the rest of the Horde. Reunification does not demand killing.

[Jellex-wyrmrest-accord (Jellex)]

I was going to say, it sounds like mostly the same thing? “Don’t make Horde players kill more Horde.” Just phrased differently.

[Karserd-ragnaros (Karserd)]

I was going to say, it sounds like mostly the same thing? “Don’t make Horde players kill more Horde.” Just phrased differently.

My point is you said you didnt wanted any alliance help

This might not sound that good to Alliance players, but it’s the literal definition of an internal Horde issue that needs to be addressed by them, without Alliance input.

Killing loyalists is alliance input, thats why i pointed this out both statements are in conflict, if you however didnt meant that and like what Alynsa said about talking down loyalists then there is no conflict and i have nothing else to say about it.

[Alynsa-wyrmrest-accord]

Killing loyalists is alliance input

It’s… Not? I’m honestly confused how you come to that conclusion.

[Bronnix-bleeding-hollow (Bronnix)]

Zuldazar was before Lost Honor it was a disastrous attack even though it succeeded the Alliance lost a lot of troops and ships. Still they managed to push the Horde back significantly in the aftermath.

In Nazjatar the war turned hard against the Alliance. Sylvanas’ ploy destroyed the Alliances navy. Coupled with prior the troop losses the Alliance was losing up until the duel at the gates of Org.

As it stands now the Alliance is divided and has lost its military power. The Horde now stands united stronger than ever before but like the Alliance it has no real navy.

[Azighan-moon-guard (Azighan)]

Faction ambassadors at the other faction’s embassies

I love this. i want this. I don’t think it will ever happen, but I still want it.

Night elves retake Ashenvale from Sylvanas loyalists in a playable scenario.

This is acceptable as long as the Horde PC has no idea it even exists. Give it the Brennadamm treatment and give the Night Elves a chance to show their fangs.

Horde side, I’d like to see the Forsaken get attention instead, maybe in Hillsbrad, where they are cleaning up any leftover Alliance forces themselves. Have these victories be portrayed in a positive light and not a negative one to show the Forsaken aren’t willing to give up Lordaeron. Perhaps they could stumble on a quest which ties the remaining Alliance forces to an anonymous commander of high command in the Alliance military to keep tensions up and establish a potential villain (Surprise, it’d be Rogers.)

Have the Horde ambassadors tell/show the Alliance that the Horde is rounding up Sylvanas loyalists. Have the Horde turn over at least one character who’s confirmed (by SI:7 or so, not just taking the Horde’s word, and also giving some more successes to Alliance spy agencies to counter their Worf effect) to be someone who participated in the Burning.

This is probably the only point I’d really contest. While I agree that the Horde should refuse to turn over some, I’d go further to say all. Thrall made a big stink about this before and I’d prefer the Horde handle their own prisoners to make them face justice. Make it apparent the Horde is cleaning up their own mess on their own. I feel this is something the Horde needs to see more than the Alliance this time.

Show that the Alliance isn’t toothless.

This is all fine and good and can be tied into pvp and faction storylines down the line. Alliance NPC’s definitely need to be shown to be more threatening. Horde ones almost need to be toned down. Looking at you Brennadam.

Let Rogers be a villain to the Horde.

Absolutely. On all accounts, yes. The Horde needs someone to hate and Rogers can fit that bill, but I do worry that her station does not protect her from Anduin. Hence why I incorporated her into the Horde questline where she would be directing troops from afar and anonymously, so she cannot be proven involved until the next faction conflict. Also, stop making Horde leaders villains. Please.

Rebuild a capital city for the night elves and Forsaken

Yep. Don’t care where, just make it happen.

Let the Horde visibly participate in neutral world-saving events in a major way.

Yes. Please. We just want to be included. It absolutely baffles me that they cut Baine from Highmountain for the sake of Alliance questers, but kept Tyrande during Legion. Also no Saurfang/Orcs on Argus. That was dumb. More inclusion is never a bad thing.