Apr 26th 2009 8:50PM @ Drae:
This.. most important point in all of this. Alliance has always been good. Blizz retconed a few things to make them less good. People don't care and will root for their own side. Others won't care if they're good or bad and will root for their own side. Personally, I like playing the good guys and I like definite lines in between. I would rather have played good guys or bad guys, not morally ambiguous guys (sorry for the possibly inferred sexist language of 'guys').
Apr 26th 2009 8:46PM @ slimj091:
While Thrall is ruled by fear and inaction, I think Saurfang could kick some butt. He might be eventually killed, but he supposed to be one of the greatest Orc warriors and I think he'd like last longer than Thrall doing the same thing.
You're right, less people fighting back in Azeroth.
Apr 26th 2009 8:42PM @ Tinsoldier:
Wow, more fail by including politics. Perhaps you could list one of these 'Alliance atrocities"
Apr 26th 2009 8:41PM @ Zumacrume:
Wrynn has some anger, but is it unjust anger? Seriously, whats worse; a genocidal race or an angry leader?
Seriously, how can you justify the horde by using the excuse of "Horde almost wiped out 13 or so nations".
Apr 26th 2009 8:29PM @ Karilyn:
So.. you like the horde's genocide of others? Perhaps you could actually list an example of the Alliance's 'genocide.' Please have a legitimate example. Not one that included the Alliance civilian's being slaughtered by Horde.
Wow, with that example we should rename nazis to "happy go-fun people" They wouldn't be the same nazis! We swear!
That being said, how about an example? Or maybe a counter-point?
Apr 26th 2009 8:17PM @ Keyleth:
How is anything you said a legitimate counter point to the article? Perhaps if they didn't tolerate traitors in their midst (like thrall does with the shadow council and others) they wouldn't have these problems.
Apr 26th 2009 8:12PM @ Thrashnak:
Wow, you really fail. Not only do you bring in american politics but you also don't bother listing any evidence making you worse than any stereotype of Fox news.
Apr 26th 2009 7:06PM Why does WoW insider right these lore articles in such a bias manner? Wrynn does not exist in a WoW vacuum. Take a look at the entire lore in general and write from that perspective. There is absolutely no way that one could consider Wrynn as being the bad guy or the alliance as the bad guys or even morally gray. Sure, neither side sticks to their evil or good actions (which is ridiculous to expect) but as far as their respective faction's direction goes, its pretty plain to see.
Apr 26th 2009 7:01PM You guys are ridonculous. slimj091 has got it right. As for the defias and kul tiras, they're not technically part of the alliance. The alliance actually fights the Defias who attempted to destroy Stormwind and saying Kul Tiras is part of the alliance is like saying Gilneas is part of the alliance. Also any comparisons to the Scarlet crusade is ridiculous too. The main flaw in your logic is while you are defining race (actually species and death status). The grand apothacary was apart of the forsaken and worked closely with Sylvanis (who knew about the plague). In fact both her and Thrall knowingly tolerate traitors in their midst. How can another leader trust them when they do so? I mean, in a way, Wrynn knows the horde better than Thrall does.
Nov 15th 2008 10:22PM *entry*