Had Zandalari Trolls been unlockable in 8.0, then I think the story as to Why the Alliance was attacking would be different (with the added bonus of actually making sense).
Had Zandalari been available PRIOR to the battle then the Alliance would be attacking to:
Cripple or outright Destroy the Zandalari Navy (Thus ensuring Alliance Naval Dominance…until Azshara comes anyway).
Take punitive action for the Zandalari Empire’s Actions (Both in Cataclysm - MoP and by Joining the Horde)
Kill the leader of an Enemy Nation, thus delivering a good kick the Morale (especially since the Zandalari had just narrowly avoided a Civil War and being consumed by a Pseudo Old God).
As it stands (with Zandalari being delayed), only the first point remains true and the reason of “Attack to drive a wedge between the Zandalari and the Horde” makes no sense as attacking them would, and does, only succeed in bringing the two closer.
Plus y’know, chronologically the only time the player finds out that Rastakhan DIDN’T sanction all the crap that Zul did was halfway through the Zuldazar questline.
Which if people are keeping track, happens AFTER Zul almost burns down Stormwind.
And like you said, it’s not like the Zandalari are exactly keen to clear their names and make peace with the Alliance.
Rastakhan dies because that’s the only way Talanji takes her rightful place as leader of the Zandalari.
Anyone whose done the Horde questline would know that with the sheer amount of times Rastakhan was wrong and Talanji right knew that his days were numbered, even if he didn’t get shanked by Zul.
Rastakhan is pretty much the most blatant use of the “Good King” that we’ve seen in WoW.
because they need someone to die to make this a “war”. If everyone survived in this war, it would be bad writing on topic of war. Someone always dies, alliance have lost some important people too.
By that logic, wasn’t the burning of teldrassil a smart move, too? Eliminate a problem before it becomes one.
Also, my point was the writing is very obvious. It’s like someone standing in front of you with their right hand raised to slap you, they are yelling “I’m going to slap you,” for 60 seconds, then they slap you with their raised hand. I keep hoping for more, but Blizzard’s writing has been painfully blatant since, at very least, D3 was written. The only thing that has surprised me was when sargeras stabbed the planet, and that was because I had no idea why they would even write that in (obvious lead in, now).
As far as military tactic, i agree it was smart, but this game needs deep, and clever writing.
Wow… if this is truly what Alliance High command thinks - ESPECIALLY after the horde JUST demonstrated the failure of this logic to spectacularly dramatic effect by the galvanizing-force of Teldrassil’s fall - what a joke.
Only asking as this is my answer to all these questions really on both this and the horde DH. They’d be the mains for each side.
Its all I got. As I am not sure why the hell I signed up to join either sides army tbh. I keep hoping in my mission briefings 7th commander and Nathanos will say oh demons will be there too.
Oh, cool. I was beginning to wonder why the hell I am here. Demon hunter…what I do is kind of in the name.
The thing about sylvies move on the tree was after she already shot first both at sithilus and the ceasefire meeting with anduin.
Sylvie started a conflict when it didnt need to happen and the planet is literally bleeding to death. Magni told her not to mine azerite she does anyway.
When she launches her attack on the tree most of its inhabitants are civilians. And she knows it. During the new raid your keeping civilian deaths to a minmal.
Now if say jaina had carpet bombed the entire city and killed all the civilains then it would be as bad as the tree.
The alliance really are not the side constantly ready to jump at war. As sylvie and saurfang state we could have had 50 years of peace. At best. Yes confluct will always break out to some extent. But its not generally started by the alliance.
And given the dire circumstances of the planet a faction conflict is not a good thing.
And yes i do wish we could get worth while writing. But seems bfa will not generally have it. There are a few gems scattered about. But the overarking story of bfa and the faction conflict falls flat.
Back in the day you would have to complete epic quest lines to get attunement/keys, which explained all the lore behind the raid. But now the players are lazy and the devs are just mailing it in.
Tbh, it’s a tactical decision, the zandalari would of eventually join the horde in time, and they would cause more trouble than they would have.
and we couldn’t toss in the info that the horde was secretly stealing from them (Gallywix’s random pillaging of tombs)
they’d hate the horde, but not enough to do anything about it, so our best bet is to weaken them, but we needed the king alive, with the death god by his side, he literally had nothing to lose…
and just like a rat when cornered… he attacks and is dangerous.
plus not to mention we have more of a reason to hate the zandalari than too have them as an ally.
they did use us after all for there troll only empire!
and the other things as well, such as cata, pandaria, and now…
Smart orc here!
she is clearly raising the dead, for that warden and the nelfs there, should of just become like sylvanas herself and demanding revenge and all the while an try killing her…
thus could of started the sylvanas - arthas thing all over again but with nelf and high elf undead.
wow good job some sharp fellow in your raid group noticed a blatant and humorous pop culture reference to one of the highest grossing superhero movies of all time
I mean, you DID blow up his fleet and kill hundreds of his people.
I believe Rastakhan’s death completed his character arc (one I also think ended too quickly). Rastakhan’s story was about him going from a apathetic king, to then a leader who would lay down their life and suffer for eternity as long as their people were safe.
And in the end, Rastakhan refused to surrender because he was not going to kneel before someone who committed such a crime against his people.