So I agree with RandomShell on the disappointing perspective as an Alliance-identifying player. I also agree with Menedude that attempts to "balance" can handcuff game/story development in annoying ways. I think the problem is that the game/story is positioned as if there was balance when there isn't. If the game and story would just embrace the imbalance instead of the condescending "there's no imbalance, look at and be happy" party line we get right now.Honestly, I've played Alliance exclusively for YEARS but this expansion I'm actually enjoying playing my new Horde-alts significantly more since that's where the people/raiding is and the story feels more meaningful and cohesive so far.
"There is a conscious effort to balance "bad" events for factions in WoW's storytelling. Battle of Dazar'alor is the "response" to Burning of Teldrassil when it comes to the balance of power between the factions."Teldrassil is gone forever. Dazar'alor will survive the raid. You can count the fleet or army of course, but the Alliance must keep this "victory". It is still a long way to 8.2, but they said that the Horde and Alliance are both crippled. If this is true, then it is no victory here after all.I am not that surprised though. I played both factions and I never felt bias so much. But here we have BfA. I am not sure why they are doing this, but they are paying the price in subscriptions. While I enjoyed certain things like questline in Nazmir or Jaina one, I can't stand for this terrible story.Two more things. Firstly, I am disgusted with Horde players saying that Sylvanas is the best warchief. There is a reason why she has a title of Queen. She is no warchief.Secondly, justice for Teldrassil should involve major Night elves characters. If you are going to put both Malfurion and Tyrande in Warfront, I will be utterly dissapointed. Especially about Tyrande and all her new cool night warrior stuff.Good that they are preparing Warcraft 3 Reforged. It seems that this will be my only connection to Warcraft franchise after BfA.
Someone is going to have to explain this outrage to me. People in the comments whining about it not being 1 to 1. Of course the teldrassil thing was more intense, it was supposed to be. Now, I do get being upset. Teldrassil was my favorite city on both factions, it was just so unique and relaxing. I still hang out there thanks to that bronze-dragon npc. But from the story perspective, the whole purpose of the teldrassil assault was supposed to be a surprise attack against an unprepared army. Of course it'd get hit with the worst of it, the war hadn't even started at that point for both sides to be prepared. Even more confusing are the players whining that silvermoon should've been destroyed too...because...they're both elves or something? Makes no sense, that's utterly missing the point. It's the narrative of the story. Teldrassil went down because it was an alliance stronghold on kalimdor. UC went down because it was the current horde leader's seat of power. Horde leader, having started the whole war to begin with, was prepared. It wasn't a surprise attack. She let the city go on her terms. So what happens now? Alliance focus on the zandalar capital, the faction that gives the horde access to the seas. You're right, it's not a 1-to-1 equal balance. If it were, that would be incredibly bad storytelling, even by wow's standards. it's a response. How do we keep the horde from gaining power? Attempt to shatter their control of the seas. It's not complicated, hitting the zandalari capital is, quite literally, the response to teldrassil. it's not supposed to be 1-to-1, it's a tactical response. What would hitting silvermoon do? Other than move an army up north while the horde continues to do their own thing and gain more power. But let's be honest here. Players don't care about 1-to-1. People are upset because this isn't a one faction game where you can pretend people on the other side are scripted npcs and nothing ever changes because change is scary. You just want to win all of the time and forget the other side is also made up of players. Like a single player game. This is the same outrage that happened during cata (which, admittedly, I didn't like because those changes didn't really do much. These changes, two capital cities being lost, do affect the story. From the alliance side, it's an emotional loss. From the horde side, it's a blow against their pride. and from the player's side, two cities lost unless one uses the dragon npcs).Thankfully, the entire alliance playerbase doesn't have this whining "horde bias" mentality. Otherwise I'd feel forced to faction change my main just to avoid them. Where was this horde bias whining when we've had our human army outside of the thunder bluff gates since cata? It's just part of the story to go back and forth. Let your characters be outraged, but if you as the player are genuinely angry...you probably need to take a break.
Blizzards idea of balance is using sharding to make it not appear to be (10,000 to 1) but rather (10 to one-every-few-minutes)