Talk:Alliance

Template:Analysis

Population

"FYI, The Alliance players typically outnumber the horde 2:1 or greater on most servers. (player population: two thirds Alliance, 1 third Horde)WoW Census -- Tach"

This is not necessarily true - Blizzard has repeatedly said that the way the Census takes information is not correct and that the split is much closer to 50/50. -- Hortnon

Source of your claim? Because I highly doubt that. I'm sure lots of Alliance have believed the grass is greener because of shamans and WotF in the earlier parts of the game and many supposed Horde characters are just dead alts. On an active play basis I think it's easy to say Alliance players outnumber Horde. Whenever I meet someone who plays WoW they always say Alliance.--Grid 19:12, 9 December 2006 (EST)

Kael'thas

I'm a bit puzzled about this picture-text:

"As an interesting aside, the only surviving Hero of this image (Kael'Thas) has betrayed the Alliance by siding with Illidan."

- Kael'thas betrayed the Alliance? So the Alliance didn't betray him when they sentenced him and his people to execution without reason?!

I think it's quite clear who betrayed who.--Odolwa 14:18, 9 December 2006 (EST)

Very few people are pleased with Garithos's... how shall I put this... stupidity? Idiocy? crass incompetence worthy of a transfer? The enitre continent had a small cheer when Varmathras ran him through.--Ragestorm 10:58, 9 December 2006 (EST)

It's all debatable. The naga were tied to Illidan, so by accepting his help and ultimately joining Illidan Kael'Thas committed an obvious act of treason. This was why he was court-martialed and jailed, not because Garithos simply didn't like him. To keep it NPOV I propose it be reworded as "withdrew from the Alliance".--Grid 19:16, 9 December 2006 (EST)

Kael'thas didn't want to accept the Naga's help from the start since they cooperated with Illidan (the Night Elves gave a very evil image of Illidan when they met Kael, so he obviously believed he was evil), but Vashj told Kael'thas that they were on their own now, and simply wanted to help against the Scourge. She also told Kael about their peoples common Highborne ancestry. It would be idiotic not to accept their aid.

(On a side-note, I still don't understand whats so horrible about Illidan. In my book he fulfills every criterion a true hero should have.) --Odolwa 13:21, 10 December 2006 (EST)

While joining with Illidan may have been treason, accepting Naga boats to help kill Dalvengyr was not. Technically, it was an Alliance race accepting aid from a neutral one, the same thing that Kael did with the Night elves, and not worthy of being jailed. If the matter had come up at any sort of trial or council meeting, Kael would not have been found guilty.

What's so horrible (ok, too strong a word) about Illidan is that he sold out both his masters for the sake of magic, jeopardized the survival of Azeroth, unleashed the Naga on innocent Night elves, and I'm fairly certain I'm missing some details from WotA, but those are the major ones. He's the guy we love to hate.--Ragestorm 10:39, 10 December 2006 (EST)

Speak for yourself, Illidan has many fans around the world. And you're missing all the good deeds he's done. He may have risked Azeroth's future during the War of the Ancients and when he tried to rip that spell on Northrend, but he did it for a good sake. If it wouldn't had been for Illidan, neither the Undead or Blood Elves would even exist as playable races in WoW. It was because of Illidan's attack on the Lich King that weakened him enough to enable Sylvanas and her kin to break free of his control. And without Illidan's guidance, the Blood Elves would never had been able to rose to such power and being able to re-taking their homeland. If you want an example of evil, look at Arthas. Illidan is far from that. Despite everything he's been though, he has always been able to keep his mercy.

Anyway, I guess we have gone a bit off-topic, but it's not good for the health to keep things for yourself. I think Illidan is the guy we love to love.--Odolwa 21:16, 10 December 2006 (EST)

You cannot compare Arthas and Illidan. Illidan is an ambitionist, always planning his revenge, and how he will take power. He is extremely intelligent. Arthas is an opertunist, always taking things as they come. He is hard-headed, and very foolish. He only wants power, but only takes it if the moment comes to him. Now I would say you can't say he tried to destroy the Lich King just so he could save the day. Remember, he had an oath to Kil'jaeden, he was like a "hitman", his purpose was to destroy the Lich King for the good of Burning Legion. I would say that is pretty evil, yet even though he had a "contract" without a pay, he was not alligned to the Burning Legion. I wouldn't call him evil, more of an power-hungry, misunderstood, gone-insane antagonist, who only wanted someone to listen. And you forget, no one of the Blood Elves on Azeroth know of Kael'thas treachary. So, what done is done, the past is over, lets just say Illidan is misunderstood, and Kael is that teenager on the block who took too much drugs. Acjpb 06:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and I understand I am bit late, but when I read this, I just wanted to put my input in, lol. Acjpb 06:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Leader

The info box mentions that the human highlord is the leader of the Alliance, um... can I get a source for that? I always thought Jaina or Tyrande was the leader. Hordesupporter 18:32, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

See Jaina's article for an explanation of that; Tyrande is only the leader of the Night elves. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 18:37, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

According to the lore in Alliance Player's Guide, the list of "Main" Alliance "leaders" include Bolvar, Tyrande, Jaina, Staghelm, Mekkatorque, Magni Bronzebeard, and even Falstad Wildhammer (although he's more of an ally than actually part of the Alliance). Even the young boy "Anduin Wrynn" is considered a leader, and "officially in charge". Basically covering, the "leaders" mentioned in the original Word of Warcraft Manual, more or less. Of course there is also discussion of "two alliances", the one in Eastern Kingdoms and the one in Kalimdor (of which Jaina is in command). In the lore the leadership is quite a bit more complicated than "gameplay" leaders allow. There isn't exactly a "main leader".Baggins 19:12, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

OK. What's your idea for who goes in that field (any critique of the box itself can be addressed to me, not this page)? Bolvar, Anduin, and Jaina? I admit that the Alliance's situation is more complex than other factions, so a compromise is needed.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 21:31, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

I thought the Night Elves were getting more and more control over the Alliance, which made me think Tyrande might of been the leader of the Alliance. Hordesupporter 00:08, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

I doubt it. Even with their somewhat more progressive mindset, the night elves (apart from Staghelm and his most zealous supporters) probably don't desire control of the Alliance. Tyrande will definetly be referenced in the "secondary leaders" field, but I think that the "main leader" field should be reserved for the major figureheads. ie, Sargeras, Archimonde and Kiljaeden are "main leaders" of the Burning Legion, while Mephistroth, Tichondrius, Mannoroth and Azgalor are "secondary leaders." --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 00:12, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

The main reason i objected was because it seemed like Bolvar was named the leader just because he was the human's faction leader. (Although technically the leader of the humans in Stormwind is the little kid) Hordesupporter 14:37, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Humans are (almost) to the Alliance as the orcs are to the Horde: founders, and the major core members. Thrall is also the leader of the orc faction, and the Horde. Bolvar, whether de facto or de jure is the main leader of the Alliance. Given the nature of the Alliance, of course, for the purposes of the infobox, other characters can be named in the field. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:47, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, I couldn't post what the Alliance Guide says, yesterday, due to being quite busy.

In anycase like I said yesterday there is no "main leader" but here is what it states;

"The alliance has its fair share of leaders. Some of them are good, others are aren't. How unlikely as it sounds, humans aren't the ones in charge as much as they used to be. Yes they have cities on cites on both continents, but there is one problem - the eastern side has no distinct leader."Template:Cite

"There is no alliance hierarchy. Its a mess. Many people have ranks, but they have no one assigned underneath them. Each race has its own leaders (or lack thereof), and they haven't worked together to assemble an extensive leadership system yet. The various races do not acknowledge each others authority."Template:Cite

The book discusses Anduin, and his advisors Bolvar Fordragon and "Lady Katrana Prestor" who are calling the shots. It mentions Bolvar is not one to question her authority, he does everything she tells him to. It says because of Lady Prestor's intervention proper human leadership has become impossible.

The book also states that the Eastern Kingdoms does not have any control with what goes on in the west, where the Theramore alliance, night elves, etc are working together.

In the west,

"the night elves are leading the Alliance and keeping it together politically (with noteable help from Jaina),

It then mentions that in both sides there is no one really leading in the battlefield. The main way humans...

"are still contributing to the the alliance, is with the active "junior" officers, who are willing to do things on their own without orders from higher up."

Yes, the book confirms that Tyrande calls the shots in the Eastern Kingdoms, just above Fandral Staghelm. Luckily Fandral only controls a small percentage of the elven population the druids, Tyrande rules the rest.

Then it goes onto to talk about the leadership of dwarven lands, where Mekkatorque rules the gnomes, and Magni rules the dwarves. Humans are not involved.

Unfortunately,

"...the gnomes and dwarves are almost as bad as sitting around Ironforge as humans are in Stormwind.",

that is they aren't waging any strong wars against the forces invading their territories.

"The end result is that essentially no high -ranking dwarf or human officer is on the battlefield actually leading a large group."

The Wildhammer clan while not officially part of the Alliance, does have an active leader, Falstad Wildhammer who is busy battling the trolls living in his lands. They also actively offer gryphon riders to help the alliance.

The book also discusses Theramore, where it states that;

"Jaina is the strongest human leader that the Alliance has left, but she can't handle everything by herself. She has problems with Onyxia threatening to burn down her city. She has help from a scary night elf girl with a big hammer and a human archmage."Template:Cite

So, yes, calling Bolvar the only main leader is completely and utterly incorrect...Baggins 15:29, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Correction: calling Bolvar the sole main leader is utterly incorrect. Any suggestions for other secondaries? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 17:18, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe Kurdran Wildhammer? Of course, Benedictus. "Anduin", is a "main leader" of the humans in stormwind in name (even if he is only a puppet Katrana so to speak). Oh, ya Ansirem Runeweaver, who currently controls what's left of Dalaran, as well as perhaps Galen Trollbane.Baggins 17:23, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Yeah we should put the leaders of all the human nations (minus Alterac and Gilneas), but would not that make it cluttered? make 'Human leaders" and "Other leaders"? BTW who is this 'scary night elf girl with a big hammer'? Pained?

Indeed.Baggins 17:53, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

I not sure how much personalizing can be done, given that this is the standard factionbox, also used on Horde and Burning Legion (no anayses of those until we've finished this one, please!). Pained is the one with the hammer, I'd guess. Yes to all those secondaries, but Anduin Wrynn is already mentioned, no need to go into more detail than that. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 17:54, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Here's a question: how does this impact capitals? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 19:28, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Not too much imo. Since there are "metropolis" capitals and lesser capitals according to lore. Theramore is a capital as well. Although I'd probably put main "metropolis" cities as "main capitals", and something like "Theramore' probably secondary.Baggins 19:32, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Good point, the Alliance is very loosely allied as far as official organization and structure goes, even though they get along fairly well. Well... The humans are the race that tends to hold things together... Ironforge is important too... Umm... It is not Darnassus or The Exodar... Jaina is sort of leadery... Theramore? --SWM2448 19:34, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Theramore isn't a metropolis? Was it before Thrall's attack? --SWM2448 19:36, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Well its said that Tyrande is the leader of western Alliance, although Jaina essentially co-leads. So that would make Darnassus very important, and one of the "main capitols". We don't know nearly as much about the draenei as there aren't any books released covering their modern involvement with the Alliance. However, since it is one of the "main capitols" as far as gameplay, it should at least get that designation in Wowwiki. It falls under one of the "metropolis" i'm sure.

As for Theramore, its not a metropolis as shown in game, but it certainly was one during Warcraft III, which showed it having huge harbor system. Sadly this is one of those in-game WoW scale issues. In anycase in-game its not considered a "main capitol", which is reserved to severa racial starting cities".Baggins 19:41, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

As a side note if you want to go with population numbers, Darnassus is 15,000 people (and one of the most populated cities on Azeroth), and Theramore only 9500. Also if I go through the RPG, I could list any number of "capitals", although majority of them would likely fall under "secondary".Baggins 19:49, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Darnassus wasn't in WCIII RoC or TFT if you mean what the Naga were attacking in the first bit of the Terror of the tides campain, that was Nendis. --SWM2448 19:53, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Uh I was speaking of Darnassus in Wow, and Theramore in TFT/WoW. Baggins 19:57, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

All right then; I'm going to upgrade Darnassus to "main," joining Ironforge and Stormwind, and leave Exodar and Theramore as "secondary." I'd like to expand the secondary category, but, short of Dalaran, don't think anything else is quite that important. Shall we rip apart the Horde factionbox next? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 20:02, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Sorry sir. I started wrighting that before you switched out the two names. --SWM2448 20:02, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

I agree, leaving Exodar as "secondary" for now, not until we learn more about it, its status, and population. I may add a list of "capitals" according to the RPG, to this discussion later though. We can rip apart Horde article, just as soon as I have time to read the Horde leadership section and transcribe it for you Ragestorm. Baggins 20:04, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

The Alliance doesn't have a main leader who everyone in the alliance will answer too, in the Horde if Thrall gives an order to Cairne he would have no choice to follow that order, in the Alliance on the other hand, if Tyrande tried to do something to the Draenei Velen could challenge her over it if he disagreed with what she was doing. Hordesupporter 20:27, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Thrall's power isn't entirely absolute, though. There is a Horde council that can make decisions despite his disagreement. Cairne and Thrall didn't want the Forsaken to join the Horde, and don't trust them, but he was forced to consent because of the council and Magatha Grimtotem. Its also said that Forsaken have no loyalty to the rest of the horde, according to the WoW manual for example, and would likely not listen to Horde if if doesn't benefit them.Baggins 20:37, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

True, but the final word is Thrall's, his council, The Earthen Ring, managed to convince him that the Forsaken were acceptable allies also note that the Forsaken, as members of the Horde, do answer to Thrall and Thrall's authority, altohugh the Forsaken probably believe an order from Sylvanas would overpower an order from Thrall. Hordesupporter 20:58, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

"managed to convince him that the Forsaken were acceptable allies also note that the Forsaken"

I wouldn't say he was "convinced", he still harbors much distrust for them, and has agents secretly infiltrating them in order to try to find any example of traitorous actions. This also ties to the reasoning as to why "Forsaken" start out as "neutral" to the Horde, rather than "Friendly" or better.Baggins 21:28, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Also the World of WArcraft manual also calls the Horde, "a loose coalition", pg 166.Baggins 21:32, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes, but accoridng to Rise of the Horde the relationship between the Forsaken and the rest of the Horde is not as tense as it was originally. Hordesupporter 22:55, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

IMO, that's somewhat debateable. While I think Sylvanas' heart is softening a bit thanks to the blood elves, neither blood elves or the forsaken are still trusted very well by majority of the horde.Baggins 23:14, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

You wanna discuss the Horde? Talk:Horde. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 01:13, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

I'd like to also add that in Theramore's page, there is a part that mentions that the city houses the Alliance Assembly and that Stormwind was challenging Theramore's "new role as the Alliance's capital". This more or less indicates that Theramore is one of the main capitals of the Alliance, at least politically. Mr. peasant 03:21, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

Good point.Baggins 11:57, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

Bolvar couuld not have been the ultimate leader of the Alliance, sure he is the human faction leader, however the actual leader of Stormwind is currently the brat Bolvar is standing next to. Hordesupporter 14:15, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

True, but actually although Anduin Wrynn is considered "King of Stormwind" Varian Wrynn is actually still King but he is "Away" Thus I think the Highlord deals with things while the King is away. I beleive calling Anduin the "King of Stormwind" is somewhat inaccurate because Varian Wrynn is still considered to be alive and so back to my point, Anduin Wrynn is of royal blood but he should really be called Prince, so, Bolvar is the true leader... or at least he is the Highest person there until Varian comes back. Evaristo 03:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually most of the alliance thinks Varian is dead, thus the reason why Anduin is hte new king. Only those at the top know the actual truth, and its classified information, but they have made Anduin king while they tried to figure out what happened to Varian, to keep morale up and the people at peace.Baggins 03:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I know I am a little late, but if we try to compare the politics between Horde and Alliance, we will have a huge migrain. The names obviously define the government. It's kinda like World War Two. The Axis is like the Horde(not saying the horde are evil, just saying the organization are alike) in which Thrall(which in political power is like Hitler, but not in morals) controls the other Powers(Trolls and Tauren), and although Japan is highly thought of as an ally of the Axis, it had it's own soverignty, very much similar to the Forsaken. The Alliance(in organization) is like the Allies because each nation was separate and had no central leader, but they worked together. The Alliance is the same way, they are simply under a "treaty", if you will, and not a supreme Monarch like the Horde. And again, I am not saying that eithier faction is good or evil, just comparing their politics. Acjpb 19:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Alliance as a whole is very unforgiving in comparison to the Horde.

• Humans,Dwarves and gnomes still despise orcs and encourage attacks on them.

• Draenei despite the efforts of Velens,many Draenei desire vengance on the orcs,forgetting that the orcs were manipulated,suffered greatly and repented. Aldors hate blood elves because of their origins forgetting about their own origins.

Zarnks 02:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you can't just be discussing this for the sake of discussion, as this is not a forum.

And I know for a fact that you're not intending to somehow put that in the article.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you want me to move this? Zarnks 02:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, this can stay if you want, but heed well my warning: we've been through this several times before. I've faced down far more long-winded Horde loyalists; users who were convinced the draenei were evil hypocrites, that the blood elves meant the complete ruination of everything Blizzard stood for, that Thrall was about to start eating babies, and that the Alliance was completely amoral comveniently brushing the Horde's failings off as a result of the Forsaken.

Where are those users now? Do you see their propaganda in the articles?

If you want to start another heated argument, go ahead. Just be aware that your opponents (and there will be many of them) have done this before. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay fine I'll delete,just expressing my opinion. I just sick of Alliance players saying the Horde is evil. Zarnks 02:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

No reason to delete. I can assure you that they ever seek to do this in the Horde articles, I will deal with them just as vehemently as I have dealt with you. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

So this stays? Alright. Zarnks 03:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Since this is going to stay,I guess I'll say something. When the Kul'tiras marines went to Echo Isles,they started attacking the Darkspears for no reason. In contrast when the Horde went to Echo Isles they imediately made friends with the Darkspears.

Thats not mentioning the Alliance view of mercy for the forsaken[1]. Theres few factions as charitable as the Horde Zarnks 23:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

That's an example of Admiral Proudmoore's "shoot first, ask questions later, if at all, 'cause they're barbarians." I'm not defending the Alliance here, but that's not an example of the Alliance's unforgiving nature. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying the Alliance is evil. I'm just saying they aren't as forgiving as the Horde. Zarnks 02:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

<shrug> Are the Forsaken forgiving of the Humans for their abandonment? Are the Blood elves forgiving the humans for being slaughtered when they should have sent aid to Quel'thalas (which the elves would ahve proudly refused, likely)? Are the orcs forgiving of the humans and the dwarves for the internment? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

If you tally up all the pros and cons of each faction, you'd find they're both about equal. Horde began the conflict; Alliance was innocent. Alliance refused to end the conflict; Horde was innocent. The Horde were the initiation, and the Alliance were the continuation. Horde is more forgiving, but Horde is also more barbaric. So, basically, Horde kills people, and is extremely polite about apologizing for it later, while Alliance is reluctant to initiate bloodshed without due cause (Proudmoore excluded, of course), but when they begin, they'll swear at you and call you lilly-livered dogs the whole time. ~ Peregrine

"Are the orcs forgiving of the humans and the dwarves for the internment?" It was the humans of Lordaron (Forsaken) that put them in the internment camps. The Horde is helping in their time of need. The orcs had no grudge against dwarves,some maybe even part of the Horde. You see Alliance races for pvped for the Horde but you never find Horde races pvped for the Alliance. Zarnks 02:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Just the humans of Lordaeron? The dwarves fought the orcs as part of the Alliance, why would they not hold a grudge? User:Kirkburn/Sig3 02:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Orcs really have no opinion on dwarven race. They'll fight them when they need to but they don't have any strong feelings for or against them. Thrall gives you a quest to rescue the Moria Bronzebeard. Zarnks 02:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

EXCUSE ME? Kul'tiras and Stormwind were part of the push for internment, too. Also Forsaken ≠ Lordaeron humans. A number of Forsaken aren't Lordaeron humans, and many Lordaeron humans aren't Forsaken. Also, the Horde is helping the Forsaken "deal with their own demons"- which doesn't actually mean they've forgiven them for anything.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 03:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Most Forsaken are from Lordaron. That was the place,the plague hit the hardest. Most people that lived in Lordaron became undead or fled.

"Kul'tiras and Stormwind were part of the push for internment, too." Never said they weren't. But it was Lordaron that ran them. The orcs are helping the humans of Lordaron when their down Zarnks 04:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Stretching it a bit, but neither of us are going to concede the point. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Most humans in the Alliance do express a desire to destroy orcs for no reason. Even people in Theramore despite Jaina's and Thrall's partnership.

Although most in the city agree with the forces who attacked Durotar, they do not appreciate the newcomers goading the orcs into attacking their new home.Template:Cite Zarnks 05:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

How can you possibly support the statement "a desire to destroy orcs for no reason"? They killed their families, friends and countrymen. The reason may not seem fair to us, given the orcs are no longer corrupted, but that's from our hindsight and greater knowledge. Many humans won't believe it, or will at least be distrusting of this idea that the orcs are now 'good'. They fought them in two major wars that devestated everything they held dear. Very few can forgive that easily. So please, stop telling up there's not reason for humans to dislike orcs. It's wrong. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 15:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

They fought alongside them in the battle of Hyjal. How can they support the complete destruction of the orcish race after they fought alongside them? Most orcs from the second war are old and even the night elves have killed their country men. Zarnks 18:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I;m forced to point out that things go both ways: In spite of what you think, orcs do still hold humans in contempt. As for Hyjal, it was originally scripted as the end of the orcs vs. humans animosity- but then someone decided that the faction dichotomy would work in WoW. Look at the trouble that caused. I also point out that the number of humans who support "the complete destruction of the orcish race" is extremely small. Most simply don't want anything to do with them, which is a far cry from seeking their destruction. -_Ragestorm (talk · contr) 21:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The quote says they supported Daelin's attack(intended to kill them all) on the orcs. The Draenei used Sedais death as an excuse to mass slaughter the Mag'har even though it was Fel-orcs that killed him. Zarnks 22:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Grr. No, a BROKEN thought that, and the draenei guy next to him told him off harshly for it. Nevermind that they at first didn't know who did it :/ In any case, individual cases can't be generalised to an entire population. In addition, nowhere near all humans fought alongside the orcs - thus may not have had the experience of 'redeemed' orcs. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 00:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Amaan the Wise did live up to his name and I agree with you that individual can't be genralised into an entire rce. Zarnks 00:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Europe

I am sure it is evident that the Alliance is obviously the "European"-like faction. The Horde is kinda like a mixture of the famous peoples Europeans "raped and/or destroyed" the culture of. Trolls are like a mix of Southern-African, Carribean, and some moderate polynesian culture. The Orcs are like Western and Eastern Africans. The Taurens are primarily the binding of Native American culture. So I am speaking in pure culture wise, and I expect this to be removed, but I really want to spread word of an obvious yet diffucult reference of cultures. To continue, I would say that the Ironforge dwarves are like a mix of Scottish and Scandinavian, with some hints of Irish. The Night Elfs are like old Celtic/Gaelic. I see Humans almost like an English mixed with Itialian based culture. I think the Gnomes are highly influenced by Americans. The Forsaken and Blood Elves I see are like altered states of the Human Culture. I would say the Drainei are like a Greko-Persian culture. So in pure deep perspectives, I am talking in full philosophical ideas, yet I think sterotypical judging of historical culture can be used to determine the cultures of the peoples of Azeroth. So yes, take it down if you truly wish it is unworthy of discussion, but at least I have the approval of some. And yes, I see the Alliance as the Europeans, yet just as Blizzard always does, they altered so that their isn't so much a religious lust for purgery, only a guidence and wanting for revenge upon the Horde. I see it not so much a disaccepting, but more of a one chance only ideaolgy. So to those who think the Alliance is racist, and wish to only accept those who dont look like "monstors", I say to ye, they Alliance may(although maybe not) have embraced any member in the Alliance, yet the Horde members at some point in time showed the races of the Grand Alliance their many aspects of violence through first hand "showing". Acjpb 00:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)