Talk:Alliance-Horde war

Purpose
This article has been separated from the Elemental War because, it is the War happening in Mist of Pandaria. Every events between Horde and Alliance that happened during Cataclysm have been integrated to Elemental War.

06:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * But isn't it the same War between the Horde and the Alliance since around the time of WOTLK? Unless they made peace it is the same war...--LemonBaby (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you're right hasn't this been called the 4th war?--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The term "the 4th war" is a fan-term and has as far as i know, it has never been used officialy by blizzard.
 * - Aedror (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "4th War" is a fictionnal term.
 * The battles of Wotlk and Cata seem (imo) to be an "introduction" to the MoP Global War said to be the main focus of the expansion.
 * 20:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok but the time Varian Wrynn declared war in undercity against the horde is still the same war that is going to happen in Pandaria, also i don't understand this elemental war thing... it lists 2 separate wars as the same just because they happen at the same time.--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The Elemental thing wasn't realy a war... Deathwing tried to destroyed the world. It wasn't about conquering or enslave someone... just destroying everything. And the Alliance-Horde conflict happened also during that time. I think it started in Vanilla with all those little conflicts, but the real war began in Undercity and will not be over in Cata as far as we knwo...--LemonBaby (talk) 18:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Still it's 2 different wars one between the alliance and the horde and the other between azeroth and the old god servants, also why is the battle for undercity part of the war against the lich king? there's not even a scourge unit in that battle it's alliance and horde vs the burning legion.--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * War as war... You are saying that there are 2 wars, but... Is there open Ali vs. Horde war during Cata? No, there are just conflicts between them, but their main goal is Deathwing and his minions. And about the battle for Undercity... is a result of a conflict against the Lich King so that's why it is part of war against LK. --Mordecay (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes there is, invasion of gilneas is purely alliance vs horde, so is the battle of andorhal and the second battle of hillsbrad, there are no old gods servants in that fight, so no it's not a conflict in the war against the deathwing, so is the battle in swamp of sorrows, southern barrens and stonetalon among others.
 * Still there are no lich king or scourge in it, it's the start of the alliance vs horde war, just because that battle is the consequence of another battle in another war doesn't mean it's part of the same war.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I think these articles suffer from trying to categorise by expansion rather than wars.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, maybe preWar battles? I am really exited about how exactly will Alli-Horde war look like.--Mordecay (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Pre-war? Varian declared the beginning of the war in the battle of undercity, the rest is just the same war happening over various expansion, AvsH war is just going to be the main focus of the MoP--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, the Elemental War article pretty much summs up the events during Cataclysm. In a very good way, but it should not be confused with a single war... And the destruction of Ashenvale, the invasion of Gilneas, the battle of andorhal are much much more than little conflicts between the Horde and the Alliance. They are at war. The pre-war would be Vanilla and BC...--LemonBaby (talk) 11:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Then it shouldn't be called elemental wars, maybe "Wars during the Cataclysm" But the introduction of the article already refutes the notion of the alliance and horde war being that article, i cite
 * "The Elemental War is the destructive conflict between the forces of the Old Gods led by Deathwing the Destroyer and the other citizens of Azeroth"
 * Either the article needs to be renamed, or divided, or rewritten.--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Also the Ashenvale offensive happens way before the firelands invasion...--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:37, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, work up the article then (chronology, etc...), and voice your ideas for the name of the article in Talk:Elemental War: Naming
 * 12:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I think this article should be for the entire Alliance-Horde war that started in battle of undercity and then make different section for each expansion?--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with that. --Sairez (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * As do I. [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]][[Image:inv_helmet_119.png|22px]] (talk contribs) 01:36, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I disagree; the fact of the matter is, there was another peace after the War against the Lich King, as described in the Shattering. The war is reignited by the Horde refusing to assist the Alliance in routing out the culprits who brutally butchered a convoy of Sentinels with trade goods. While tensions heated up over the Battle for the Undercity, Blizzard hasn't said the war started then. As well, in Wolfheart, it's stated that Garrosh starts the war by invading Ashenvale. This is backed up by in game sources, as you all know. Crazyterran (talk) 21:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Lost Isles
I think the conflict of the lost isles (Horde+GoblinsvsAlliance) should be here and have it's own article like Battle of Andorhal--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:20, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point. I never played the goblin starting experience so I can't write it. But I support your suggestion. --LemonBaby (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I wrote a small section of those events on the goblin article. I could take care of it for the most part. [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]][[Image:inv_helmet_119.png|22px]] (talk contribs) 19:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Playerbase reaction
I get the feeling this section could be abused.  (talk contribs) 01:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * This whole article is abused as it is with faction bickering. I think that pointing this out might be a better idea for now.-- 03:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Im still dreading this section. Remeber "Horde and Alliance Bias"? I could see it already "Some players think Tyrande's new accent makes the Alliance inferior, Blizzard loves horde and they dont care Alliance at all bcuz Banshee Lady concured Lordaeron omg" And so forth. [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]][[Image:inv_helmet_119.png|22px]]  (talk contribs) 08:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the section because the playerbase reaction is such a huge part of WoW that even a whole Watercooler was about this issue. It is a topic often discussed on various forums and people should remember the controversial elemental of WoW 10 years or 15 years from now. If you don't think so feel free to remove the section.--LemonBaby (talk) 08:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Despite my better judgement I'll let it stay unless it's abused and it's been ok so far. But if it happens frequently... [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]][[Image:inv_helmet_119.png|22px]]  (talk contribs) 08:27, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Fourth War
Shouldn't this really be called the Fourth War? I mean the First and Second Wars were both conflicts between the Alliance and Horde (granted different incarnations of those factions, but those factions nonetheless), and this is another one, so shouldn't it be called the Fourth War? Meganerd18 (talk) 22:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Not unless Blizzard calls it the Fourth War, no. And personally, I doubt we'll have an official Fourth War until we get a Warcraft IV. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed.--Mordecay (talk) 15:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Fourth War is ugly! And I don't believe in a Warcraft IV by the way ^^
 * 17:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * https://twitter.com/ChrisMetzen/status/284385452511858689 What do you guys think of this? Kookamooka (talk) 21:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * He said "thematically". At the MoP launch event (I think) he said something like that MoP contains what would be in Warcraft IV if one came out at that point.-- 21:42, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

The "Right Way"
So what exactly is the right way to clean up this article.  (talk contribs) 17:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but considering the Horde has every little insignificant clan listed, we should probably list the Furbolg factions in Darkshore, Azuremyst/Bloodmyst, and the Children of Cenarius (who have been fighting the Horde) as combatants on the Alliance's side. The fact that they where removed is just silly. Crazyterran (talk) 21:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Except that the furbolg aren't fighting the Horde that I've ever noticed. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Stay on the topic or go away. [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]]  (talk contribs) 22:42, 7 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree in the fact that thre is too much in the lists here, i think we should only use the different nations and not militar groups inside it since that'ss already implied. using the alliance as an example


 * Kingdom of Stormwind
 * Survivors of Lordaeron
 * Kingdom of Ironforge
 * Gnomeregan
 * Darnassus
 * Exodar
 * Kingdom of Gilneas
 * Bloodfang pack
 * Silvermoon exiles
 * League of Arathor
 * Nation of Theramore
 * Nation of Kul Tiras
 * Baradin's Wardens


 * These would be the absolute minimun needed to list everything fighting this war in the alliance currently--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

In a non-hostile manner, a midpoint between mostly empty and completely unwieldy must be found.-- 00:36, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Isn't that what i just suggested?Maybe remove Kul'tiras because i don't remeber any example of kultiras actions in this war yet--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You could probably list the Orcs as "Orgrimmar", since, all of the Orcish clans that are part of the Horde are based there. No need to list the Shattered Hand, etc. Especially when it's only a small contingent; the Fel Horde, for example, has a Shattered Hand clan. The Forsaken could be listed as "Undercity" or simply "Forsaken" as well.

Example for the Horde:


 * Horde Orcs
 * Darkspear Tribe
 * Revenatusk Tribe
 * Shatterspear Tribe
 * The Forsaken
 * Tauren (make a note to sans Grimtotems, since the ones loyal to TB has been absorbed into the Bloodhoofs)
 * Kingdom of Quel'thalas
 * Bilgewater Cartel
 * Boulderslide Kobolds

The Alliance


 * Kingdom of Stormwind
 * Kingdom of Theramore
 * Kingdom of Stromgarde
 * Kingdom of Kul'tiras
 * Baradin's Wardens
 * Ironforge
 * Wildhammers
 * Moira's Dark Irons
 * Night Elves
 * Night Elves Auxilaries
 * Gnomergan
 * Exodar Draenei
 * Gilneas
 * Gilneas Liberation Front

notes: Baradin's Wardens are not aligned with any of the current nations, and as such, need their own. On the other hand, Hellscream's Reach is part of the Horde Orcs, and don't. We know that the Orcs are fighting the Baradins Wardens Tol Barad, so, the organization involved only really matters if you can't put them in a larger category. Heck, you can probably put the Night Elves auxilaries in the Night Elves section, but I wasn't sure if it would warrant it's own part due to the fact that the Mountain Giants, Hippogryphs, Cenarius' Children, and Faerie Dragons aren't really listed on the Night Elves' page. Same for the GLF, except for that we aren't sure if they are in the same organization anymore, since I doubt Crowley and co. answer to the crown of Gilneas atm. Perhaps you can even take out hte Dark Iron and shorten it to "United Dwarf Clans" and have it on one line.

Lordaeron's Survivors, outside of Theramore, is minute. They have been either subsumed into Stormwind or Theramore at this point, and aren't worth noting seperately. Neither is every Orc Clan or Tauren Tribe in the Horde, since the ones that aren't with the Blackrock or Fel Horde are with the Horde.

The Same can be done for the leaders section, you can chop it down to the faction leaders, and maybe soon to be important leaders like Jes-Tereth, Admiral Taylor, Nazgrim. We don't need High Executor Crenshaw, who appears in one scene, for example. (Varian, Council of Three Hammers, Velen, Tyrande, Mekkatorque, Greymane, Crowley, Jaina, Halford Wyrmbane as the Alliance example.)

Just some thoughts, to get the ball rolling. The more condensed we can make the info box, the better, or through out MoP we are just going to have a Info Box that's longer than the rest of the page. Crazyterran (talk) 07:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Darnassus could replace both, and you need to replace Exodar Draenei with just exodar to include thing like the broken, and by including the kingdom of ironforge you are already including the 3 dwarf clans so it's redudant too.--Ashbear160 (talk) 09:18, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Concurrent
When the Invasion of Gilneas is the beginning, then the War against the Lich King, Northgate rebellion, Operation: Gnomeregan, Zalazane's Fall are already over, and not concurrent,or? DeSatyr (talk) 12:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I believe this whole next/previous/concurent wars should be held aside in a table chart to be easier to understand.
 * 15:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd like to implement this chart or something better designed to the template so that we stop adding next/previous/concurent ourselves
 * 05:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Updated Jade Forest?
First off sorry, new to these talk pages if I make a mistake please tell me. Okay on topic, should we edit out the current as the zone is being remade also can someone add Sky Admiral Rogers to the Alliance commanders list as she is Admiral of the Skyfire which is rebuilt or something. Also audio suggests Alliance during Jade forest takes out a portion of the Horde Navy. Also could be added That Sky admiral also ordered the deaths unarmed Horde soldiers who were swimming to avoid drowning. Also that in two months the Alliance navy would arrive in full force. --Eillas (talk) 02:53, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It will be updated when the new version appears in the beta, not based off of datamined audio that really doesn't tell the whole story. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 05:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Name
It seems like the name given to all the events that happened in Pandaria is "The Pandaren Campaign". source : The_Coming_Storm

And again here : The Codex of Ra

See Pandaren Campaign. It is fine. Cite it if you want.-- 21:53, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Heeeere we go again!
Looks like the Alliance-Horde War is starting up once again in BfA, which means all the stuff about it being over and the Darkspear Rebellion-Alliance Victory over Garrosh in the side-bar will end up being irrelevant. Should we start treating this page like the conflict never actually ended and just kept going from them until now? -- User:Malcior 8:57, 5 Feb 2017.
 * War, war never changes Xporc (talk) 14:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Then what about the Second War? Because that war ended way long ago compared to now while this one ended with the events of the Siege of Orgrimmar. Battle for Azeroth seems to be a new war igniting, but in a very dratastic way (the burning of Teldrassil and the Ruins of Lordaeron). If this where to be an on going event, then technically the Second War and the first war would be too just without the extra races. 14:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm, probably keep expanding Blood War rather than this page (a mention that there's still a war happening, but with a link to the BfA page, can probably be placed here). --Mordecay (talk) 14:20, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * This. Xporc (talk) 14:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I also support this. Hopefully Chronicle 3 will give us a canon name for the Alliance-Horde war. And if not maybe someone from Blizzard will tweet one soon. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 17:17, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * At Blizzcon they kept saying that technically the war never stopped, we band together when the world is about to get annihilated but that doesn't mean our conflicts are over, stuff like that (just paraphrasing, would have to check the exact wording). -- MyMindWontQuiet 19:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It may become something like how the War of the Three Hammers is, divided in two phases. --Ryon21 (talk) 20:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I think the name of this article should be changed slightly to denote that it's the previous "part" of a currently-ongoing conflict. For all intents and purposes, this war ended. Battle for Azeroth really is a new (albeit deeply connected) conflict. A bit like the World Wars from real life. --Qintus (talk) 22:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As I said on Talk:The Azeroth Campaign, the war will have ended retroactively when it needs to start up again. This is not a new thing.-- 00:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)