and kultirans. and im talking new horde thralls horde.
To be fair, it’s probably not the lack of conflict between the Alliance and Horde so much as ‘once burned, twice shy’ after the double whack of #### writing from BFA and SL (‘twice burned, thrice shy’?), or other possible game system changes that have occurred.
But… The Alliance… Only formed… Because the Horde attacked in WC1 and 2.
Hey, remember in MoP that whole bit about the senseless cycle? Y’know, the one that damns Azeroth in the end?
Why can’t we just listen to the panda?
1 Like
Yeah, expansion implementation had a lot of influence on the results too. The Anti-climatic defeat of Arthas kinda threw me for a loop and had me on a permanent Hiatus up until S3 BFA.
Just a reminder … During the (real life) cold war we went through Korea, Vietnam, the Cuban missile crisis, Iran seizure of the US Embassy and hostage taking, Afghanistan (the first one, where we supported the Mujahideen against the Soviets), Arab-Israeli wars from 1948 - Present, revolutions in numerous countries (Middle East, Asia, Central and South America) … Proxy wars and civil wars, all over the place.
It would be the same on Azeroth, the Outlands, Northrend, Pandaria, etc.
1 Like
wanna know what was a good story the wod leveling zone stories. whats great about them is we didnt have to share places with the oposite factions and there was still some distain for the other faction. heck because the more peacelike attitude lorewise is how the inteligence agencies between the factions got so easily infiltrated by the dreadlords. and the factions were slaughtered at the broken shore and the only hope to keep the alliances worst traits of making enemies was gone and pushing people like sylvanas who doesnt deseculate to get into power specially with voljins death.
Peace is fleeting; but war is everlasting.
I only question the implementation of the narrative more than the consequences. If it meant they’d bring purpose back to the rest of Azeroth, that would be great. After being stuck at the oribos airport for years, it’d be nice to see things spruced up a bit.
When it comes to population disparity that can be solved with normalizing the data (basically just scaling things such that the population difference doesn’t influence the results, though I’m not sure how to explain it exactly).
As for the metric, I’m not sure exactly what it could be but probably it should be done as the result of doing some sort of weekly quest (something like completing the weekly quest contributes to your faction’s progress, but your contributions are account wide per faction (so if you wanted to be completely neutral you could just complete the quest on characters from both factions)). Or maybe a combination of that and completing the campaign (or maybe the weekly only becomes available after completing the campaign, but part of the campaign counts towards your faction’s progress).
1 Like
IRL peace has only existed for less than 50 years total in recored history and this includes every time period in that 50 years worth of peace. no peace isnt a thing that is the norm no do people like it in video games. our natural nature is conflict and chaos.
1 Like
A cold war where there are smaller proxies would be fine. Hell it’d even do a good job fleshing some smaller factions out.
But a massive world war where thousands of Horde and Alliance forces fighting each other is…beyond stupid at this point.
Like criminally stupid. In a way to drive a narrative, there are so many other things we can fight and actually beat. Why everyone wants to constantly fight a war they know they won’t win only to come to these very boards and cry about dev bias?
There is no drama with a Faction War, because they have to end with both sides decided “Ooooo next time!” before going home, teaming up to fight the next crisis that will destroy the world, before starting the cycle all over again. It’s why I’ve taken to think people who like this cyclical storytelling to liking young children stories; the stories are simple and don’t require much thought. Stuff just happens because it has to happen and you just kinda roll with it.
3 Likes
Constant, unending war does nothing but become background noise, meaning it may as well not exist in the first place.
Except the problem becomes once one side starts to gain an advantage people will start to switch, which skews the scales even harder, which causes more people to switch, etc, etc. It’s the Snowball Effect, and it would get out of control fast with something like this. And once there’s a population imbalance, there’s literally no way back to parity.
Yielding control of a game’s story narrative to PvP is the literal worst thing you could do for it.
2 Likes
id love if they did a timeskip again a decade or 2.
1 Like
I have no issues with war, and yes it will never truly yield a victory, as both sides need to perpetually exist. But it does make the game interesting in a PvP perspective and does encourage that narrative. I’m tired of the never ending existential threats from Deities and somehow being able to kill Nzoth, C’thun, literally Gods of the dead, the Legion (Sargeras), and everyone being a superhero. Maybe its just me.
2 Likes
This is basically taking the stupid subplot from Ashran and basing an entire expansion around it. Hard pass.
2 Likes
Oh you mean Goblin rocket jump? Yeah that was PvE , not so much war influenced.
At this point I can’t even say I disagree. It’s not like our characters are characters at this point.
If they just did a massive timeskip, they could completely remake the board. I’d still say a faction war storyline would likely be stupid, but there’s ways to have a war story without it being a Red vs Blue tale.
I have no problem with wars either. It’s why I’m always advocating using the many many random factions that exist to perpetuate war instead of the ol Red vs Blue from a narrative standpoint. PVP can exist because, as mentioned, as proxy wars. Those would be fine.
But if you want to try and make the narrative around a war, then we need to have a war with adversary that we have an actual risk being destroyed by. Red vs Blue can’t end with either side being destroyed, it has to end with “Next time Gadget!”
3 Likes
My point is, once people see which faction wins, they’re going to want to join it. Which makes the next conflict that much more lopsided, leading to more wins for that faction. Unless you’re a masochist that just has to play the underdog, why would anyone join a faction of losers?
1 Like
Essentially you mean to say that it needs gray lines, nuance, and not be blind conflict without justification. If I interpreted that correctly (do correct me if i didn’t), I agree on that point. I want a more meaningful fleshed out story that continues rather than a perpetual God slaying expansion so to speak. It really removes the human/mortal element to our characters.
3 Likes
I wish BFA had that influence. I saw more people change factions off of racials than over a war in the game. Arcane Torrent, Rocket jump, etc. Even orcs stun resist.
Humans had unique benefits with dwarves as priests and gnomes. But since racials have been less impactful a decade and a half later, its very hard to convince them to spend hundreds of dollars to go back and transfer individual toons or guilds over. Its way to costly.