Is anyone else dying to get to Garlemald?

[Kallera]

You know,Alleo, for someone not advocating genocide, if the argument that Garlemeld was somehow Hydaelyn's enemy gained traction, it would be tantamount to a literary death sentence. it would certainly be the closest thing I would imagine as a clarion call to destroy not only them, but anyone and anything related to them. Going back to the prior example, Ul'dah used this trope during the destruction of Sil'dih.

I do not want this. What possible reason would people living in the planet have to show restraint or mercy if the planet is on their side?

It just isn't my fight, I would rather we work with people than tear them apart. Being involved in destroying other nations would be a point of no return for me.

[Alleo]

@Kallera

And if they find out that their technology is hurting Hydaelyn they could simply change their way or do it less. Exactly how nobody in their right mind would say that we should kill of all modern real world people because our life style is hurting the planet. No there would be no genocide involved. (And unlike Garlemald we do know that the death of a lot of people would just destroy another shard and cause a calamity. And on top of that none of the current city stated showed any kind of sign that they want to kill any living Garlean.)

Also its all on Garlemald itself. If they went back to their own continent and leave the beast man alone, they would not need to summon their primal again. (A lot do it out of fear for their lives) Also leavin Eorzea alone means, that the city states could finally concentrate on getting better with their own situation thus they could finally try to get better with their neighbors beast tribes. All of this would lead to less summoning thus less suffering for Hydaelyn.

So I am not sure how you came to the idea that this would mean Genocide. Especially since none of the current city states showed any ambition to conquer the world.

--

Anyway I still have not heard about the true positive things that Garlemald did? I mean you have one soldier that called is underlings away before Eorzea came, so the civilians suffered less for this (but the village is not really positive about Garlemald itself) and you have some told stories about some unknown countries that have it great under their rule. But as long as we were not there and talked to people I will remain skeptic about it. The points Cilia used are really not that positive because Garlemald uses most of it to conquer the world that does not want it. And even in the worst dictatorship you will find kind and good people that are doing the right thing. So not sure if the actions of some side NPCs are truly showing the good side of the empire itself.

You also have two "honorable" important Garlean enemies (Gaius and Regula) but they are definitely not "many". In this expansion alone we had no single good Garlean (that is in any way important).

Please I am just really curious and since I am biased towards disliking them, maybe I cant see the good things but it would be nice if people finally wrote why they want to side with them, or why they are Grey and not black. (And I mean the government, not the citizens itself)

All that I see is people trying to say how bad Eorzea is, yet we already said that we know that no country is without bad stuff. But in the end they also have done lots of good stuff, thus they are way more balanced (or nuanced). Garlemald is really looking quite black at the moment.

@Klonoa7: Please stop with this talk about wanting to kill every single Garlean person..if we went with something like that we would be no better than them and you also would kill a lot of innocent people. Also Fordola was not committing Genocide. The situations in Rhalgrs Reach was simply a war situation. And sadly you will have to kill in war. She is a bad person but she definitely did not mass kill people.