Just how responsible for the Flood of Light was Hydaelyn?

[Edax]

What I find confusing is that in the First, the Ascians were defeated, yet the Flood of Light and the path towards Rejoining suited Ascian goals. So how does that work?
Just how responsible for the Flood of Light was Hydaelyn or the Ascians?

[Hezzlocks]

As far as I can see, not responsible at all. The Ascians manipulated Ardbert, they orchestrated the flood, and in HW it seemed as though Hydaelyn was barely even aware of the flood and couldn't really do anything about it until we fed her the aether in Ardbert and company's crystals.

[Cilia]

As far as we know, the Flood of Light was an accident.

While there are details Eden will probably clear up, what happened was the Ascians deliberately manipulated Cylva (known as Cyella these days) into tipping the elemental scale of the First towards Light by guilt-tripping her over her failure to save the Thirteenth, employing the very same "Rejoining is better than oblivion!" argument Elidibus would later use to bend Ardbert & co. to the Ascians' cause. Through her machinations the Warriors of Light, sans Ardbert, rose to prominence, tipping the elemental scale toward Light. However when it came time to kill them to keep the balance ready for rejoining but not at flood levels, the heroes of the First defeated but did not kill her, then set their sights on Loghrif and Mitron - the Ascian puppeteers of the scheme. Killing them tipped the balance too far to Light, starting the Flood.

Eden, supposedly, is the origin point of the Flood, but again, details on it are scarce right now.

Hydaelyn had nothing to do with it. The Ascians don't want it either, but one of their plans went awry and led to the Flood - though Emet-Selch took advantage of even that.

[MikkoAkure]

I didn’t think it worked for anyone and no one was the cause except for the warriors of light. Since the balance was tipped so far towards the light and the ascians were defeated, the flood happened (as far as we’re aware, pending news from future Eden quests). The reason for the whole expansion is that the ascians figured out how to make a positive out of a negative.

A completely flooded world of light doesn’t work for the ascians, but a living world with extra aether does somehow.

Edit: Got ninja'd by Cilia who had a better answer than me.

[TankHunter678]

If a Flood happens without a simultaneous calamity happening on the source then what happens is the flood reduces the shard to a useless void. This is why a shard needs to be brought to the edge of tipping over.

This is all independent on Hydaelyn doing anything, she simply chooses warriors of light to defend the source/shards as issues crop up. It is up to their actions how things go. The Ascians simply set things up so that when a calamity is going and the good guys win then they get their rejoining anyways. Otherwise they just use them to get the shard to the tipping point.

[Absimiliard]

Do keep in mind that it has been implied on a number of occasions that the Source could meet the same fate as the First if the Warrior of Light continues like they have. The fact that Hydaelyn entreats (or compels, depending on whether or not you accept the possibility of tempering) the WoL to keep at it is intriguing, though we do not know for certain if Hydaelyn is even aware of the fact that the scales are starting to tip too far.

[Cilia]

Do keep in mind that it has been implied on a number of occasions that the Source could meet the same fate as the First if the Warrior of Light continues like they have. The fact that Hydaelyn entreats (or compels, depending on whether or not you accept the possibility of tempering) the WoL to keep at it is intriguing, though we do not know for certain if Hydaelyn is even aware of the fact that the scales are starting to tip too far.

Also keep in mind that the source of this information is Elidibus, who has a vested interest in having Dark triumph over Light. His comments on the matter are less about "Stop or there'll be a Flood!", more about "Stop or we can't win!" As shown by Emet-Selch's disdain for the Light-infested territories of Norvrandt, Light is also anathema to them.

I'm still waiting for Lahabrea's ominous warning from 2.0 to be clarified... given as most everything else has been.

[Iscah]

If a Flood happens without a simultaneous calamity happening on the source then what happens is the flood reduces the shard to a useless void. This is why a shard needs to be brought to the edge of tipping over.

To be exact, a "Flood" should never happen, because it will render the shard useless regardless of when it happens. The shard needs to be on the brink of a Flood state to be rejoined, but it can't be allowed to reach the tipping point where the Flood actually triggers.

This was the point of what the Warriors of Darkness were trying to do on the Source - 'saving' their world by triggering the necessary Calamity at the last second before the Flood could claim it.

Do keep in mind that it has been implied on a number of occasions that the Source could meet the same fate as the First if the Warrior of Light continues like they have. The fact that Hydaelyn entreats (or compels, depending on whether or not you accept the possibility of tempering) the WoL to keep at it is intriguing, though we do not know for certain if Hydaelyn is even aware of the fact that the scales are starting to tip too far.

As I wrote in another discussion about the same issue, this isn't necessarily the case, but what we thought was the case due to our understanding at the time.

It's easiest if I just quote it here.

I think those implications that "Hydaelyn's command to fight the Ascians is putting the Source at risk" were a result of what we previously understood from the WoD arc: they killed the Ascian overlord of their world and triggered the flood, therefore if we did the same thing here, the same thing would happen.

The truth as shown in Shadowbringers is considerably different. The flood and the imbalance that caused it were due to Ascian meddling in the first place, and the balance tipped over the edge because they failed to account for how Ardbert would react.

The destabilising of aether on the Source was due to the Ascians meddling on the First, not a disconnected sign that something was wrong with the Source because of our heroic actions.

Perhaps most importantly, the Ascians aren't some supernatural embodiment of Darkness (as we might have previously assumed), without which the world will be overrun by Light. They're just people, in the end, however powerful they are.

[Absimiliard]

Also keep in mind that the source of this information is Elidibus, who has a vested interest in having Dark triumph over Light. His comments on the matter are less about "Stop or there'll be a Flood!", more about "Stop or we can't win!" As shown by Emet-Selch's disdain for the Light-infested territories of Norvrandt, Light is also anathema to them.

I'm still waiting for Lahabrea's ominous warning from 2.0 to be clarified... given as most everything else has been.

Urianger has also expressed concerns for the state of the balance. While I would tend to take what Elidibus and Lahabrea say with a grain of salt until proven or disproven, we know that Urianger is an exceedingly well learned individual that has the Source's best interests at heart.

As for Lahabrea... I'm beginning to wonder if SE didn't just sweep him under the rug at this point. It's pretty likely that a lot of his hammy writing was the result of them not yet having Ascian lore all that well fleshed out. Ascian appearances throughout 1.0 and ARR typically made them come off as mustache twirling villains of lolderkness. Maybe they'll use the frequent host hopping to explain why Lahabrea seemed to be completely off his rocker? It would be a pretty valid excuse. Emet-Selch already told us of the consequences of hopping bodies too often. What's to say doing it habitually wouldn't lead to psychological damage to go with the severely diminished powers? Anywho, I went off on a tangent, my bad. Tl:dr: Lahabrea was such a nutball courtesy of incomplete Ascian lore that we may never find out what he meant.

this isn't necessarily the case, but what we thought was the case due to our understanding at the time.

And what of Urianger's far more recent comments on the subject?

[Iscah]

Urianger has also expressed concerns for the state of the balance. While I would tend to take what Elidibus and Lahabrea say with a grain of salt until proven or disproven, we know that Urianger is an exceedingly well learned individual that has the Source's best interests at heart.

Which comments are you thinking of specifically?