Talk:Gilneas City

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


do we git to keep Greymane City or do the worgin have to move in to SW. IloveWhitemane (talk · contr)

The the xpak goes into alpha/beta, we'll find out. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 05:09, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

Greymane as capital

There is no evidence to date that the city will be used as the Worgen capital, so that line was removed for accuracy. Frejya (talk) 20:58, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Actually the worgens do get this as a capital after during a phased quest, It from PC Gamer Magazine. The goblins get a city too. Hallowseve15 (talk) 11:06, May 29, 2010 (UTC)


It is an official worgen city right!?? Hallowseve15 (talk) 11:47, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

My understanding is no. It's there for the worgen start quests, and will be there for the Battle for Gilneas battleground, but it will not be the worgen capital city. As I understand it, the "worgen district" (long thought to be in Stormwind and I'm not entirely sure why) will be in Darnassus...hell of a long way to go from southern Lordaeron, but alas. --Joshmaul (talk) 15:51, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
Blizzard said it would be Stormwind at Blizzcon. Evidently they changed their minds. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:15, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
I think that has something to do with the fact that the night elves were the ones who came to the aid of the Gilneans during the siege, like the orcs aided the goblins on the Lost Isles. --Joshmaul (talk) 17:15, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Rename to Gilneas City

I think this should be officially renamed, as - if I read the information correctly - it's known as "Gilneas City" in-game. Can someone in beta confirm? --Joshmaul (talk) 03:13, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

The map alone confirms it. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 03:16, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
Moving then. --Joshmaul (talk) 03:17, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Beta Info

I flew my druid over this city at level 70. The minimap shows the name "Ruins of Gilneas" and is completely deserted. This does not mean, however, that the worgen won't be using it as a city. But, it does mean that nobody else can. I will update with more information as my worgen levels up. —EGingell (T|C|F) Treader of Cenarion Circle 07:49, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Blizz has been pretty clear that the Worgen will only be getting the district in Darnassus. Just because you can fly over the ruins doesn't mean much - after all, you can fly over some of the outdoor dungeons and the Ruins of the Scarlet Enclave, all of which are deserted when entered from above. Seeing as how the only official piece of information we have is that the ruins will be a battleground, it makes sense that it follows the same mechanics when flown into or over. User:FrejyaFrejya 15:32, August 11, 2010 (UTC)
That's a good point. Perhaps I'll take a walk and see if there are instance portals and/or locked gates around it. —EGingell (T|C|F) Treader of Cenarion Circle 23:51, August 11, 2010 (UTC)
No instance portals or locked gates so, either they'll get added later or you have to be ported by an NPC (or both). —EGingell (T|C|F) Treader of Cenarion Circle 00:01, August 12, 2010 (UTC)
As soon as you complete all the quests in Gilneas, you are immediately ported to Rut'theran Village. Therefore, it is fairly obvious that it is not going to be a major hub for any players. —EGingell (T|C|F) Treader of Cenarion Circle 00:38, August 12, 2010 (UTC)
They also changed their minds and scrapped the whole idea of making the entire city a Battleground. The Battle for Gilneas BG will be somewhere to the north in the region itself, leaving the city deserted much like the ruins of the Scarlet Enclave.Orisai (talk) 05:52, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

so will it become another waste zone again like ruins of lordaeron, scarlet enclave, western tirsifal, etc gilneas city is ampty, worgen should have their own city with the forsaken kicked out of the kingodom :( goblin are getting their own city -- Menethils (Menethils) 23:52, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

Current status

After Creed's death, we do not know the status of the city or the zone. The Ultimate Visual Guide describes the city as "deserted" and "partially buried ruins," and I assume that to be the most current status.--SWM2448 03:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Creed is proof that the city is in Gilnean control because he was pretending to be one of them. The UVG has many falsifications in it, like that tauren were the first paladins. Both the final worgen and silverpine quests show that it is controlled by Gilneas, and Blizzard mentioned they had to have players leave Gilneas because they didn't have time to make it playable due to being next to Silverpine. Not only is it portrayed abandoned for gameplay reasons, but most recently, why would Varian mention investigating the plague in Gilneas if they didn't control it? Whoever wrote the UVG is an idiot, there is no mention in game of the Gilneans abandoning Gilneas. Their last quests mention coming back with the might of the Alliance and the Forsaken quests prove this. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 04:16, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
As far I can tell the author is not an idiot. We should accept the new lore tidbits whether we like it or not. Secondly, you are adding Wolfheart as a reference. The story of the book takes place in Darnassus (Teldrassil) not in Gilneas. And also the quest, the lore moves rapidly from that point... ya know, the conclusion of Silverpine, and then the clarifications from UVG. --Mordecay (talk) 10:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Like it or not, the UVG is the lattest canon source confirmed by Blizzard. And it doesn't contradict Creed's presence: UVG only says that the city was abandoned after 4.3.--Cemotucu (talk) 13:39, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
So why would the Gilneans abandon a city they control? And wouldn't an adandoned status contradict the battle for Gilneas? But lets stick to facts. The Kingdom of Gilneas is a de jure member of the Alliance and belongs to the Gilneans by right of law. The templates don't list the status, just the affiliation. So lets put Alliance to avoid any confusion. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 00:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
No.--SWM2448 00:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes.ShadowShade81413 (talk) 00:56, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
The city is "undersiege" by the dark lady. Its basicly contested from my point of view. — Surafbrov T / P / C 01:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Undersiege would imply the Gilneans hold it. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 03:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
That's why I have used quotations marks. — Surafbrov T / P / C 03:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
So you basically didn't say anything? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 04:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
The Kingdom of Gilneas is a member of the Alliance. That alone is enough to put Alliance on affiliation for the country and the capital. There is no status part in either template, and since its status is not clear, lets not worry about displaying it in the templates. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 04:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
The Guide says that Crowley surrendered the city during the events of H [20] Cities in Dust. After that, we have the Battle for Gilneas and Gilneans holding the city (but they lost the help of Creed and his blood and we do not get to see what happens next).--SWM2448 04:11, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Good reference Sandwichman. @ShadowShade, I prefer you providing reference that this city should be listed member of the alliance. P.S I was did type something, you can't possibly say something, well at least not here. — Surafbrov T / P / C 07:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
No point in arguing. Let's just wait for future references. There's a high chance the status of Gilneas is brought up in War Crimes considering that Sylvanas supposedly has a major plot in the novel. Ujimasa Hojo (talk) 10:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
It's not a good reference, it proves my point. "beat back the Alliance dogs and secure Lordaeron for the Forsaken", "Release her. I will sound the retreat", "Now leave here, Crowley, and never return", "Darius Crowley and his daughter runs back to Gilneas".
This quest shows they merely retreated from Lordaeron. If they surrendered Gilneas, than what was the point of using Lorna as a bargaining chip? Why wouldn't Sylvanas just kill her? I agree we should wait for future sources, but in the meantime the affiliation should just say "Alliance". --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 17:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
The quest is ambiguous and clarified by the UVG. No matter how much you love Gilneas, the zone's status is currently ambiguous.--SWM2448 17:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Would both sides settle for an "Unknown" status then? Ujimasa Hojo (talk) 19:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Normally yes, but the UVG gives an answer.--SWM2448 22:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
The quest bluntly states they retreated to Gilneas. This has nothing to do with any "love" of one fraction over another, an encyclopedia must contain only facts. If this is ambiguous, then why put abandoned, which is very one-sided? And why should Dorling Kindersley be considered any more canon than White Wolf? But I digress. We are discussing affiliation, not status. It should say Alliance, end of discussion. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 02:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
The quest does not say that. Crowley just runs back into Gilneas. It was ambiguous, with the issue dropped until the rogue quest where the issue was only hinted at. The UVG spells it out. It is canon because the RPG is the only thing that isn't. As to what that field in the infobox means, that is another issue. That said, Gilneas was never Alliance in WoW. The worgen joined after the zone fell, and the city and the Ruins of Gilneas (the current status) stays ruined (even if it has changed hands).--SWM2448 03:20, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
What part of Darius Crowley and his daughter runs back to Gilneas did you not understand? It's not another issue, even though we are debating about the status of Gilneas, this entire discussion exists to decide what to put in the template. Saying Gilneas was never Alliance in WoW is completely inaccurate. Even if everything you say is true, Gilneas was at the very least controlled during the worgen counter attack. Lorna even specifically says the Alliance controls Gilneas. So can we pleases top kicking a dead horse and just put Alliance in the affiliation box already? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 03:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
They entered Gilneas and... then gave up the city. I am not sure where the rogue quest fits, but I think the UVG is after that. They lost it after the counter attack. So, Gilneas was Alliance due to Lorna's efforts, but not for very long.--SWM2448 03:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Your issue was Gilneas was never Alliance in WoW, which I proved wrong. Can we put Alliance in affiliation now? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 04:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
That was not my issue. That was just an aside. So it was Alliance while it was a war zone. Fine. It is no longer Alliance, it is ruined and abandoned.--SWM2448 05:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Playing devil's advocate here. By putting "Alliance (former)" in the status, one can also argue putting "Horde (former) there. Ujimasa Hojo (talk) 12:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Things are ambiguous until Blizzard says it's ruined and abandoned. No, Gilneas has never been affiliated with the Horde. All we know for certain is that it's de jure Alliance. Do you two even know what de jure means? That is why it should say Alliance. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 18:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Blizzard did say it was ruined and abandoned in the Ultimate Visual Guide. The Horde held parts of it for a time, just like the Alliance. I'm not sure how law factors in during this war.--SWM2448 19:37, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
No, Dorling Kindersley did. Law is what affiliation is, which would be Alliance. The template does not have a status section, stop trying to turn the affiliation into one. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 20:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Ruins of Gilneas, sounds like its ruined to me. To me its sounds rather that Gilneas City is under a civil war. — Surafbrov T / P / C 03:54, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
"NO. Dorling Kindersley did." DK are just the publishers. The UVG was written by Anne Stickney from WoW Insider and CHECKED by Blizzard historian, Sean Copeland. Is official lore, like it or not. It's in ruins and abandoned, now. And all lore is official save it's declared non-canon (as the RPG manuals were).--Cemotucu (talk) 06:33, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't see how the word "ruins" changes anything, so it seems like pretty poor labeling to call a settlement ruins when it was completely functional five minutes ago. Probably just looking for a name more creative than "Gilneas".
Wait... So the UVG was written by a blogger/fangirl? And I hear it has many spelling mistakes. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 21:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Regardles of who wrote the UVG, it was written in close colaboration with Sean Copeland (and checked as a result), one of Blizzard's Historians. He has said the guide is canon. Gilneas is abandoned and in ruins, as a result. --Cemotucu (talk)

I'm still waiting on someone to explain why affiliation and status are the same things. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 21:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

If a place is abandoned (status), then it can't be affiliated with any group. Ujimasa Hojo (talk) 21:27, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
You've missed the de jure logic. Ordos City is still a part of the People's Republic of China even if it is abandoned. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 22:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
You just stepped off topic. Ordos City has nothing to do with this. — Surafbrov T / P / C 01:10, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
As of Sandwichman2448 about the Ultimate Visual Guide, it does say that he had to take the loss of Gilneas and he accepted the help offered by the night elves to take refuge in Darnassus and abandoning his kingdom.. I have provided the page number with the reference for the proof. — Surafbrov T / P / C 00:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


IIRC, players visit the city twice during the worgen intro, at the beginning and near the end, and Horde ones visit a portion of the city when they are in the zone, so the previous level should be 1 - 12, no, and the scaling should be there for Horde as well. --Mordecay (talk) 18:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to fix it Xporc (talk) 18:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


While the city can still be listed as ruined/abandoned, it's a part of the Ruins of Gilneas zone, which is confirmed to have been reclaimed by Gilneas as of BfA. Shouldn't the city be changed to follow suit, even if we don't know if it's undergoing restoration? I can't imagine they reclaimed the entire zone and just said "Except right there". --Berenal (talk) 00:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

If we have a reference that says Gilneas and the city have been reclaimed then yes. I have yet to see that reference though.--Ryon21 (talk) 00:07, 30 August 2018 (UTC)