“Your father used to say that a wolf decides whether to come when called or to turn on its master. There is no fault, only nature taking its course.”
A wolf does not have the same intellect or sense of morality as a person, so I’m not sure of Durotan’s/Draka’s analogy.
That logic actually implicates Sylvanas. Zovaal set her on the path as of the latest retcons, but she chose to walk it (the soul split didn’t take away her free will, and even Uther rejected that the “Banshee Queen” and “Ranger General” were two different people).
Stromgarde was held by undead independent of the Scourge or the Forsaken; they weren’t part of the Horde. Plus, the Ebon Blade softened them up a bit first when they went to reanimate Thoras Trollbane was one of the Four Horsemen.
I don’t think so, I think you are twisting the meaning of that analogy. At any time, Sylvanas could have chosen to step off the path, and she did when she shot the arrow at Zorvaal and said she would not serve. A pet turning on it’s master. Arthas never turned from the path, Garrosh never turned from the path, but Sylvanas did, she’s the only one deserving of a shot at redemption because she is choosing to help us stop Zorvaal.
You mean in tweets. There’s nothing to indicate that either of those are won by Alliance in game. Horde can still control either Darkshore or Arathi because that’s part of the Warfront system. If they designed it with that in mind, why didn’t they design it in a way that would show unequivocally, in game, that the Alliance won those? They didn’t, they thought it up on the spot and tweeted it out. It means nothing.
That’s told not shown. Just like when Nathanos told Sylvanas that the Alliance was on the brink of victory after the raid on Dazar’alor, it certainly didn’t feel that way as either Alliance or Horde.
That’s ludonarrative dissonance. They do plenty of telling that the Alliance is super cool and is winning all over the place but certainly do not expend any energy in making you feel that is the case at all. As either Horde or Alliance.
Most things indicated that the Alliance won the Darkshore Warfront from the very beginning. Narratively Nathanos was no longer at Darkshore (having headed back to Zandalar before the Battle of Dazar’alor, and then we see him for Nazjatar before he goes back to Orgrimmar) and he doesn’t show up in the Alliance version of the Darkshore Warfront at all. The Horde’s version of the warfront is set right after the Alliance intro questing since the Horde has to save Belmont, and since that’s always the case and generals don’t change like at Arathi it would seem this is a gameplay mechanic like repeating dungeons rather than battlegrounds (Belmont also doesn’t show up in the Alliance version of the Darkshore Warfront, so it’s not like the Alliance players recapture him every time, either).
And even outside the Darkshore Warfront proper we had support that the Alliance won:
And then obviously they did finally make the Alliance’s victory quest accessible in-game as well.
I murdered droves, and I mean droves of elves to get the darkshore warfront set because it looks baller as hell. I never once felt like I was losing anything. I never felt intimidated by this lame “army of the black moon” that is totally doing things right now, totally. Really epic things. No, you can’t see them.
To be fair I do think they probably intended Night elves to win Darkshore too, because I think Blizzard sensed that they couldn’t kick the beaten dog too much. It just doesn’t feel like a victory for Alliance. At all. The Stromgarde thing was 100% just made up on the spot though.
I drove through as many Forsaken and Bilgewater, to the point that the Horde’s forces were depleted so much that Sylvanas had to recruit a civilian militia to defend her at Orgrimmar. On top of that the Undead Night Elves that the Horde raised to fight their fight for them fled to Tirisfal, or left off with Sylvanas in Sira’s case.
But repeating content isn’t an indication of lore or how one should feel about the state of the setting, no more than killing the same Mythic+ bosses week after week should make you feel like it’s an ongoing situation.
It’s not repeating the content with which I am referring to. That’s one thing. It’s another thing entirely to frame content that you clearly win and then the devs later say “btw you lost”. The warfront is not framed as though the Horde are on the back foot, at all. If it’s the case that it’s designed with this “The Alliance were winning all along” why even frame it like the Horde wins the warfront by defeating Maeiv and the army of the black moon? I don’t think that was their intention from the start, I think they wanted it to remain ambiguous as to who wins or loses at first then decided later that they wanted to straighten things out narratively.
It’d be like killing Kil’jaedin and the devs saying, “btw Kil’jaedin never died. Don’t believe your lying eyes that showed you him blowing up. Actually he lived.”
Basically the entire Horde War Campaign was set up so that the Horde accomplished something, only for whatever they worked for immediately taken away.
Marshal M. Valentine? Sacrificed by Nathanos.
Thomas Zelling? Executed in front of all of the Horde’s leaders.
Abyssal Scepter? Stolen back by the Alliance, used against the Horde, then destroyed by Talanji.
The Zandalari fleet? Blown up by the Alliance.
Derek Proudmoore? Saved by Baine.
Priscilla Ashvane? Immediately betrayed them.
Same for the Darkshore Warfront.
Having defeated Maiev was no indication that you killed any named characters at the Darkshore Warfront. Alliance defeated Liadrin, Eitrigg, Rokhan, Delaryn, and Sira in the Warfronts, and they were all alive after.
Also not what I’m referring to though. Because the Warfront isn’t gaining something only for it to be immediately undone. I think Blizzard wanted to set it up in a way so that both sides could feel like they’re winning something there, that’s why it’s ambiguous and you don’t actually kill any named characters, you just knock them out. So Warfronts aren’t even a good measure of won battles.
Regardless, I’m done arguing about Warfronts. As usual, Cursewords didn’t even make a good argument. Oh man, I feel so intimidated by the Alliance who totally won those two Warfronts. I really felt like I was being defeated as I stomp out scores of elves and also Maeiv and can just go and do that any time I can find 5 people that want to do warfronts for some reason, which is probably never now that I think about it.
Cursewords? I’ve had Cursewords on ignore since 2018, so I wouldn’t have any idea of what Cursewords has said.
But the best way to see how things went with the Darkshore Warfront would be to look at the holding of Bashal’Aran and the following order of events:
The Alliance introductory quests from “On Whispered Winds” to up to Stage 8: The Night Warrior in “In Darkest Night” where the Alliance claims Bashal’Aran for Tyrande’s Night Warrior ritual.
Malfurion’s assault on the Horde caravan during the flashback in “Terror of Darkshore” before Malfurion meets up with Tyrande and the Alliance player during Stage 9: Nowhere to Run of “In Darkest Night” where Belmont gets paralyzed.
Then the Horde introductory quests from “Trouble in Darkshore” up to “Where Hope Dies”, which would run concurrently with the Alliance questing from Stage 9: Nowhere to Run in “In Darkest Night” to Stage 11: The Queen’s Pawn.
Then the remaining Alliance questing in “In Darkest Night” to “We Are Coming” matches up with the Horde questing from “The Dead of Night” to “Warfront Preparations”, with the ending of “Terror of Darkshore” taking its place in the timeline here as well.
Then the Horde warfront, where the Horde saves Belmont and takes Bashal’Aran from the Alliance forces.
Then the Alliance warfront, taking Bashal’Aran and Darkshore back from the Horde again.
Good, you were looking more desperate than usual by denying in game evidence of Alliance victory.
How ever you feel means nothing. Your value judgments of me do not erase the truth.
I made a factually correct statement.
Warfronts were content in BfA that were both won by the Alliance. There is in game expression of this - not just in some tweet or in some book.
That simply is.
I mean, it isn’t just “my argument” - you were discussing the same points with someone who has me on ignore, who happened to agree with me that it is expressed in game. So it isn’t just me saying it.
Because it didn’t benefit her, Sylvanas, like the Horde (with a handful of exceptions like Baine and Saurfang) only do what’s ‘right’ if it benefits them and is far too late to count.
Anyone saying Sylvanas deserves redemption is a moron.
At this point I don’t know and I simply do not care. The Argus reveal (w.r.t the arbiter blue screening) really annoys me since they are saying it happened without actually explaining HOW it happened. Other than, “dreadlords did something and deal with it”. Like how did they even get close to Argus when you had Aggramar ready to destroy anyone who wasn’t part of starcloud satan’s inner circle? So anything they do with Sylvanas will most likely be just as contrived and just as stupid.
I’m probably gonna quit WoW if 9.2 or 10.0 doesn’t get me back in. Which lets face it. It will never happen. No doubt Blizzard will create a few bigger than big evildoer and ham-fist more stupid retcons to explain their role in the story.
While I think Argus’ introduction in Legion was decent - the “closely guarded secret of the Burning Legion” part of the story helped ease the retcon - I agree that Argus’ soul crippling the Arbiter was slapped on.
As you said, how did the Nathrezim get to Argus when only Sargeras’ inner circle were there, and corrupted Titan keepers plus Aggramar himself were there to beat down anyone without his seals of approval?
I’ll see how 9.2 pans out… but I share your skepticism where Sylvanas’ story is concerned.
