This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
PC's good or bad guys
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
389990
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Kristopher
PVP: Enemies battling enemies for glory, honor, to test their prowess in battle, and to beat the crap out of the opposite faction.
Good or bad is not the main reason for PvP, as the Horde are the bad guys from the Alliance standpoint, and vice versa.
Think of PvP as a not so friendly competition.
Post by
Shiverlynn
The Horde cannot be "good guys" in Warsong Gulch. They're overtly provoking the elves by cutting trees to trick them into fighting.
But it is generally admitted that neither side is really good or bad, they simple happen to have conflicting political views over a certain number of territories.
Post by
389990
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Shiverlynn
What I can say is that it seems the Horde are more aggressive while the Alliance tend to defend quite a bit.
Warsong Gulch: The Horde is ripping the forest apart, the Elves are trying to protect their lands. Aggressor: Horde, defender: Alliance.
Arathi Basin: Humans had been living there litterally for millenia, now it is under Forsaken attack because they seek to cut Southshore and Dalaran (well what remains of it now) from their supplies from the south. Aggressor: Horde, defender: Alliance.
Alterac Valley: Dwarves came there to dig treasures and relics from the past, unfortunately the valley is also home to the Frostwolf clan who don't like outsiders on their territory. There it is a bit more ambiguous, because technically the dwarves are invading the Horde territory; however they came peacefully while the orcs retaliated militarily. So I'd say the aggressor here is still the Horde.
The three other battlegrounds are even, there was no initial settlement of either the Horde or the Alliance and both factions arrive at the same time to claim a stategically important land/artifact which causes the conflict.
That doesn't make the Horde evil but it seems most of these conflicts wouldn't have existed if the Horde didn't start them.
Post by
255458
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Shiverlynn
Heh almost true except for one detail, the Warsong Gulch has existed since Warcraft 3. At first the Horde were cutting trees to construct a settlement if I remember correctly, that was okay since they didn't know about the elves. The elves come and make it clear they don't appreciate the orcs' actions. Still the Horde did continue, does that not make it an aggression?
Also no, they don't cut trees for their war effort. Not in WSG anymore. It's made clear in
both Horde and
(well don't remember about Horde quests but it definitely is in >) Alliance quests from there, they cut trees and
leave the lumber to rot
.
Post by
389990
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
255458
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
jerms2k3
No side of the conflict is wholly either good or bad. They can be either, depending on whatever your point of view happens to be.
Post by
Aikidude
true but if we look at the the reasons the horde and the alliance are battling each other who would be (seen completely ojectively) the good and bad guys?
ps. the quotes i'm looking for are what the battlemasters have to say about the battle.
good and bad can't be seen objectively, because they are moral issues, and morals are relative to the observer.
Also,
That doesn't make the Horde evil but it seems most of these conflicts wouldn't have existed if the Horde didn't start them.
The Horde wouldn't be on Azeroth if it weren't for the Night Elves. Does that mean the Night Elves are the root of all conflict on Azeroth?
Post by
Cambo
.........
I thought this was another PC vs Mac debate.
/leaves.
Post by
Shiverlynn
Does that mean the Night Elves are the root of all conflict on Azeroth?
No, actually the root of all conflicts on Azeroth are the Titans if we are to play that game.
And Hospy, yeah I'll agree. I also was fully aware while posting of the fact that the Alliance point of view on WSG isn't really unbiased, but you can't say there's no truth in it. But I see how WSG and AV can be similar.
Post by
Kibbles
WSG: Horde is destroying the environment, Alliance is protecting it. +1 alliance
AB: Alliance and Horde are vying for control of a pathway. Neutral
AV: Horde has a clan there, Alliance is mining for riches. +1 horde
EotS: Little to no lore, neutral.
IoC: Both are vying for resources. Neutral.
WG: Are you kidding me?
All in all: +1 Horde +1 Alliance, 1:1, or even.
Post by
166665
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
451227
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
481452
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
206732
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
383613
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.