Posted February 26, 2012 - 06:16 PM
- Death Knight likes this
Posted February 26, 2012 - 09:12 PM
Posted March 04, 2012 - 01:20 PM
They could run off your last saved profile for skyrim, though if you never played skyrim you could just pick a side, thats how I would make my games
- common knowledge now is that eso is a bitch, lol
Posted November 16, 2012 - 12:17 AM
Ulfric was being used by the dominion to weaken the empire. He, believing he was fighting for the nords, was in reality fighting for the thalmor he hated so much. The Stormcloaks and the Empire should have formed an alliance to rise up against the Thalmor. In the end, the empire really had Skyrims best interest in mind. Tullius actually grew to love Skyrim.
- martoto likes this
Posted June 14, 2013 - 04:40 PM
I remember starting this thread, but for some reason I dont remember making any of these replies
Posted June 29, 2013 - 01:21 PM
Posted June 30, 2013 - 12:21 PM
Posted July 03, 2013 - 01:17 AM
Ulfric is more fleshed out and passionate about his work.
Tullius is a quiet little prick who really doesn't give a rat's ass about what happens to Skyrim, just as long as his Empire's law is upholded, and Skyrim remains supportive of the Empire.
I've gone through both quest chains, and I believe Ulfric is a better leader. He is more in-tune with his fellows. Tullius on the other hand, isn't much cared for.
As far as military prowess goes...
Eh... both are even matched. After all, most of the Stormcloaks are ex-Legion soldiers. So it's basically Imperial Legion vs. Imperial Legion. Both of them have different mindsets and morals.
Posted October 31, 2013 - 10:35 AM
For those of you who are saying that Ulfric is the better leader I would have to say that I completely disagree.
Most of my characters have been in the legion but recently I tried playing as a Stormcloak and in the end when the war was over I didn't really feel good about the outcome. But forget that, I mean, just look at Ulfric's city, Windhelm. It is one of the worst cities in Skyrim. It has tons of rubble everywhere, most of the citizens are living in poverty, there's tons of murders the guards don't even care about, and overall it seems as though the people are suffering. Sure you could attribute that to the fact that all of the city's resources are diverted towards the war effort but still, Ulfric is living in that big ass gorgeous castle while his people starve and freeze. That really makes me think whether he is a good leader. Also, I didn't like how he acted after his final speech after the battle of solitude where he tells his soldiers that he will leave the other jarls to decide whether or not to name him king but then he turns to his right hand man (forgot the dude's name) and basically says that he already is high king so what he told his soldiers about letting the jarls decide is just bulls***. Furthermore, Ulfric is just a guy who doesn't realize all the political complexities with the thalmor and stuff so his judgement isn't really well backed when it comes to the future of skyrim. While Tullius is carrying out the orders of the emperor who is surely a better politician than Ulfric and knows better what is best for the citizens of the empire. And finally, I have to say that I really like Legate Rikke. And the fact that she is a Nord and still is fighting for the Empire really proves to me that the Empire is better for Skyrim. Hence In conclusion I would say that Ulfric is a better leader in battle (especially because of what he did in Markarth) but Tullius is a better politician who is not just thinking of himself.
Posted June 20, 2014 - 04:45 AM
Posted June 22, 2014 - 05:37 AM
blah blah blah, yada yada... opinion
Ulfric challenged the high king to a battle and ultimately won, granted that he cheated a great deal. Ulfric was chased from the throne that he rightfully earned, and the imperial army showed up to claim the throne, despite it not at all being theirs. Ulfric, in retaliation, starts a war with the imperials for invading the political realm of skyrim. Though this war is rightfully a national war it is cited a civil war being that it takes place in skyrim and is fought on one front. Ulfric is not fighting his own people, he is fighting for his people. You may say that he's selfish for saying in conclusion to his speech that the throne was his anyway, but rightfully, it was. The throne of skyrim deserves a nord, not an imperial, it deserves someone who fought for it, like Ulfric did, and most of all; it deserves a King. The democracy of Cyrodiil would never allow a hierarchy in an area they control, thus not allowing skyrim a king for the throne, thus making jarls and kingdoms in skyrim obsolete. Ulfric knew this and declared war with the imperials to stop this from happening whether or not he actually cared about his people or not, he cared about his country, that was his cause, he fought to save the nordic way of life. Whether or not you agree with that doesn't matter because, when it all comes down to it; it's all opinion anyway, it's a stupid game. You can dramatize it, or clarify it, or justify it in any way you want, no one here is probably even close to what the developer's had in mind making the game.
- Jorunn324 likes this
Posted October 09, 2014 - 02:04 PM
Kodlak is the best leader of every leader in Skyrim. 10 times better than Ulfric or Tullius He does not care for politics, wants to help his people (the companions) and is a wise man full of advice that you can add to your personal arsenal.
Seriously, though, both leaders are idiots. Ulfric is a Nord who will use anything to get what he wants. Istlod (Torygg's father) was High King when the WGC was signed. Torygg was simply the heir, and without proper experience, Ulfric saw in the guy the perfect scapegoat and victim for a powerplay. Tullius is a military man and has no part in the political scheme of skyrim, so should not be in the game at all.
Edited by Jorunn324, October 10, 2014 - 08:17 PM.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users