Featured stories Feed
- Know Your Lore: Gul'dan, Doomhammer, and the nature of the Horde
- Totem Talk: Restoration and the Throne of Thunder, Part 4
- The Queue: No sleep till Orgrimmar
- Around Azeroth: Close encounters of the blurry kind
- Breakfast Topic: Should Blizzard brake base XP while preserving boosts for experienced players?
Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-19-2012 @ 4:16AM
arrowrest said...
You mean where the Alliance is again being used as a plot foil to the Horde-centric storyline? You mean where the focus of this new expansion will be all about the removal of Garrosh so Thrall can return as warchief? An expansion that starts with the destruction of the second largest Alliance settlement and ends with the Alliance "joining" the Horde in the removal of its leader? How exactly is that an Alliance-centric storyline where the faction can't even accomplish the main goal of retribution on its own?
Will Orgrimmar be destroyed by the Alliance in retaliation for Theramore? Of course not. It needs to remain as the Horde's capital city for gameplay purposes. And why would the Alliance not completely burn it down? Because Thrall will return to the mantle of warchief and reinstate the peace between the two factions.
It's always going to be about Thrall.