Yeah, and nobody’s happy. You want your NEs fixed and BfA undone, I want Horde fixed and BfA undone.
You said yourself you don’t want Horde to be villains. Neither do most people here.
This is so weird, I feel like we are on the same page but we also aren’t. Wack.
Yes sure I understand that.
I would be on the boat doing just a rewind and start again before BFA. But we all know that will not happen and that both you and me have to live with the story.
And this I want it to at least continue in a way that makes sense. And not in a way where you basically forgive a faction genociding a race and building concentration camps for no reason and just forget about it.
This is even WORSE than the burning in first place.
No I don’t but they are now.
And thus as I said want to have the story to reflect that because damage has been done on my side, now switch over. I’m tired of allways get the foot into the face and have to say thank you for it. I want to bite it off now.
Wrong. Simpyl Wrong on so malny levels.
There is warfare and there are atrocities.
There are necessary battles and there is unnecessary slaughter.
There is running prisoners of war camps and respect the inmates and there are concentration and death camps.
THERE ARE DIFFERENCES and there is right and wrong even in warefare. Thus the geneve convention has been helt.
Blizz won’t even commit to that. I commented about the emotional jerking already. You’re not sure how you’re even supposed to feel, because you have Sylvanas being evil, but then immediately you get Saurfang who feels bad and then you’re helping him and then there’s a rebellion, etc. What’s arguably worse is that players were given a choice to rp a Sylvanas loyalist, which I found pretty neat, but apparently in SL those players get a slap in the fa e because “everyone is against Sylvanas now”. The illusion of choice was an illusion itself.
Who defines what an “atrocity” is? When an “atrocity” is defined, why do groups still commit them?
Again who defines what is “necessary” in warfare? The ONLY goal in warfare is to ensure YOUR culture… YOUR nation… YOUR children… YOUR way of life continues. At what point do a people decide their children are not worth a fight because it would be deemed “unnecessary”? Morality has NO place in warfare, and is the EXACT reason wars over the ages have become more frequent. Utterly crushing an enemy without mercy makes further warfare non-existent. It also sends a message to any other would be enemies what fate awaits them. Trying to conduct “civil warfare” with morality has led to half measures where no enemies ever go away or gain deterrence.
Perfect example- the rise of ISIS. They held ONE city at their birth. Carpet bombing that city would’ve destroyed them at the start… yet it would’ve killed around 80,000 innocent civilians. Of course with our modern civilities and “civilized warfare” America chose not to do so. That compassion led to the mass torture, starvation, and outright genocide of at least 2 million souls, none will ever know the total lost. It led to the mass displacement of over ten million in a bitter war that lasted 6 years.
Try to remember that what YOU view as morally wrong another culture does not- learned as Japanese troops would kill any they came across- even in hospitals and would treat any POWs with great disdain, for you held no honor, and were no longer even considered a human being.
The Geneva Convention DID place forward a set of rules how humans should murder one another in warfare. A very small number of nations made these rules, even fewer agreed to them, and very little has ever been done to uphold the rules within.
People aren’t getting it.
Historically reparations are something you FORCE from a defeated country.
That didn’t happen in the Fourth War. No one got beaten, no one surrendered.
100%.
Perhaps a better way to phrase the question would be “Should the Horde make amends?”
As in, “What wrongdoings does the Horde feel like it should make up for, and what compensation might they offer to do so?” Not, “What can the Alliance force them to do?”
Because the answer to the latter is just…nothing.
I mean, the answer will still be nothing because I’m not making amends for something I was forced to do.
You all know who the real people to blame are, it’s blizzard for forcing this story on all of us.
“the Horde” in this instance refers to the in-game organization, not the players.
So to FURTHER clarify the question:
“What wrongdoings does Thrall, Baine, Lorthemar and the other Horde leaders feel like they should make up for, and what compensation might they offer to do so?”
It’s not necessary for the overall story. Horde doesn’t even see Brennadam in their leveling. They do see several people getting raised into undeath during the war campaign though, so your theory is wrong.
You see them in Orgrimmar. But by that time Garrosh had gone his own way. That is why you also see Horde races being killed.
But, in any case, that wasn’t Therefore and says nothing about the morality of that attack.
The conventions on war. The Geneva convention is the best known.
Also, in contradiction of logic.
The Geneva Convention isn’t a part of WoW lore.
Given that the Civilian NPCs that are in SoO are still seen post SoO. They are saved but the nameless Theramore NPCs are simple NPC fodder speak otherwise. We hear nothing about those who survived beyond that scene, while the Horde can take leisure they rescued some recognizable faces.
Sigh … its beyond frustrating.
The buildup for this supposed 4th war was essentially having the Alliance repeatedly taking very clear aggressive actions against the Horde, but all of it being weakly justified, invalidated, or just swept under a rug so the Horde could be the aggressor in this conflict. Its the exact same thing that happened with the start of the Garrosh war. The attack on Stormheim alone was such a massive Declaration of War by the Alliance its rediculous, but Shaw’s attack on Bilgewater Civilians and Anduin’s response to the Gathering just reinforced that.
But … the Allliance are the Good Guys … and the WoT was totally unjustified. Why would Saurfang ever come to believe Sylvie that it was only a matter of time before the Alliance would attack the Horde?! Or that the Anduin would buckle under the pressure of Tyrande and Genn to pre-emptively attack them? When the Alliance had already repeatedly attacked the Horde and made aggressive moves, and Anduin’s response to it either proved him a weak leader at best; or complicit at worst? No basis for his choice at all. Classic stupid, savage, primitive Orc.
Yeah, its like Blizzard actually named a “War Crimes”.
The fact is that Blizzard draws from modern morality, including such conventions. After all, the Romans would have called the Burning of Tedlrasil “victory”.
Hell, they’d come back to salt the land to make sure nothing could ever grow again.
Every Issue comes down to the Fact blizzard changed the script coming out of WOD to make the Horde the aggressor. It was clear their were plans to make the Alliance attack first and for characters like Genn and Jaina spearheading these attacks. Even lines complaining about how Jaina had killed to many coming from Rexxar were accidentally left in the game.
As soon as Golden joined the writing staff(i beleive it was at the beginning of legion) it seemed like the whole story shifted to be about Anduin. They made him “high King” yet never explained why. They made Jaina lose her anger at the Horde for unexplained reasons and fall in line with Anduin way of thinking(again). They made Anduin lecture Saurfang about Honor and reasons to fight inspiring him to take up arms. They even made Baine the only good guy character in the Horde.
Golden is so focused on making Anduin the center of the story that she had the whole of BFA re written to make the Horde the aggressor just so the character that she has written to be a role model for her son doesn’t ever get construed as ever doing anything wrong.
Even if they always had planned to have Sylvanas be the Villain at the end of BFA. I could see them revealing that she manipulated the Alliance into starting the wars. Yet it feels like Golden just didn’t want anduin to be manipulated or fall for something like that as he can do no wrong.
OK, you have deleted that none of this has anything to do with the bombing of Theramore. The civilians were already removed and sent to Orgrimmar to wait for whatever fate awaited them.
You can actually see Horde civilians in the raid. Nor does a lack of reference to Theramore civilians mean they all died. Even if this all didn’t matter because this still doesn’t link it to the bombing of Theramore.
Honestly, considering when she got her current position I highly doubt that she had much say in the course of BfA. It was way too far into development…
As stated before, Blizzard has been very wishy washy and noncommittal in Alliance aggression at least since Cata. Since Sylvie truly could have just the used excuse of finding a means to provide her people a healthier and more secure future in Stormheim, the attack on Sylvie by Genn and Rogers was no less an Act of War than Varian’s declaration of it in WotLK. However, in both instances, plot convenience was eventually used to invalidate or justify Alliance aggression, to portray the Horde as the aggressor when they finally responded to Alliance provocation. Hell, in both instances Blizz makes sure the Horde commits some form of flashy atrocity that completely overshadows and wipes away any Alliance participation in starting the conflict.
While yes, Golden clearly does have a preference for characters like Baine and Anduin, honestly I kind of want to see what she’s capable of in Shadowlands b4 I start throwing blame at her for BfA. If I’m going to point to names I’d probably throw more shade at Danuser than anyone. He is the lead narrative designer after all, and seems to have a weird Sylvanas fixation.