Talk:Siege of Orgrimmar (instance)

Raid

Where is stated that it is actually a raid? (Luxor(^t/_c) 15:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC))

It's not!

It is an event like the phased Orgrimmar for Death Knight or Battle for Undercity

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 17:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I haven´t seen this comfirmed as a raid nor an event like you have given. I think that they have not said what type of game mechanic it will be, or? --Mordecay (talk) 18:17, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

But. I liked Garrosh...  The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 18:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Given that they were talking about it in terms of the final villain for the expansion, it seems like it's a raid. They said "the final patch is the Siege of Orgrimmar," and generally they use that wording to describe the featured raid of that patch. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:48, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Wait & See!

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 19:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

This sounds like a fun raid or event. This expansion is gonna MoP the floor with Cataclysm? GET IT?!  The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 19:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Your services are not needed anymore Moneygruber. Close the door when leaving.

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 19:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Ray Cobo refers to it as "the raid on Orgrimmar" in BlizzPlanet's interview with him: [1] -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like "raid" as an "assault" no?

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 06:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I think the likelihood that it's NOT a raid is pretty much slim to nil, even if they've not explicitly said, "Siege of Ogrimmar is a raid." The implication is there with it being described as "the final patch," and Garrosh is referred to as the final boss in at least a few places, including this blue post. Chris Metzen refers to it as "the conclusion" in this interview.-- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 06:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

J. Allen Brack: "I'm really excited about it from a player perspective, because I think if you're an Alliance player, the idea about doing a raid into the heart of your enemies capital is really satisfying, and deposing the enemy leader is super gratifying. On the Horde side, it's going to be super cool to have a raid in your own home town..." [2] -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:55, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

lmfao!

the first "raid" looks like "assault" and the second one like "instance"

we're lost!

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 08:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Presumably it's an instance that is an assault, in much the same way that the early parts of Dragon Soul are an assault on Wyrmrest Temple. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 08:56, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

New capital?

Since Orgrimmar will be sieged, what will be the new Horde capital? I mean, the orcs need a new capital if Orgrimmar's getting sieged. -- Legendary Cat

Laying siege to Orgrimmar doesn't mean it's getting destroyed, just that we're going to go in there to take out Garrosh. In all likelihood, the city itself will still be standing afterwards. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, okay. -- Legendary Cat

Editing before confirmation

Guys, don't play around with the "Siege of Orgrimmar" page right now, Blizzard will have all the info when that time comes. We maybe wrong of what we put on the page. So wait till it comes out please. We got plenty of time to figure out what's the conclusion of MoP. Thanks. -- Darksora110 (talk) 10:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Nazgrim

I think Nazgrim will not be on if Garrosh Loyalist I would classify him already as Malkoroks good counterpart because he has never appeared to me so radically

sorry if my english is bad

LordDarionMograine (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know... it's possible that whole group that Horde players have been working with and bonding together throughout MoP, might turn into our enemies. Thus making us feel bad for killing our friends in our goal to rid ourselves of Garrosh. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 21:45, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Maybe a 'could go either way' section could be in order. Garrosh would be too polarising for 'split loyalty' or 'declared neutral'. Deepred (talk) 04:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Too late, Nazgrim is a boss in there. Darksora110 (talk) 8:42, 12 June 2013

Trade Prince Jastor Gallywix

i found something interesting about Gallywix's opinion on Garrosh Hellscream http://www.wowhead.com/object=216460/bilgewater-cartel-contract what do you think about that? I believe Slowly that Gallywix turns away from Garrosh's side --LordDarionMograine (talk) 17:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Seems all the Horde leaders have been slowly turning from him... some quicker than others. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 00:50, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought it was clear that Gallywix will turn his back on Garrosh as soon as Garrosh starts losing :) -- Forco sussura agli abissi 22:17, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed

The bosses are up ready to be added in this raids tab if need. Otherwise, this is going to be an interesting concept.

I've made a page for the raid, too. We need to see how this develops in the coming days. If any admin/mod decides it's better to merge it, then do it as you wish. User:Matix/sign 20:45, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

The instance takes precedence over the 'battle.' The instance gets the main name unless it is a winged instance (then the complex gets the main page), and even then it might get switched around. I have no idea why this page became about the 'battle.'--SWM2448 00:46, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Merged them together. Nothing on the "conflict" article other than possible allies and enemies, which no longer matter... I see no reason for separate pages at this time. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 02:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC)