: Originally (as in, before Myth was released, when Jason
: Jones was talking about it in an interview), the
: *entire* cycle was 1000 years - 500 light, 500 dark.
: (Then again, Balor was named Ashfear back then, so
: some things change). [...]
: By the time Myth 2 was out and we were all speculating on
: it, it had somehow become "common knowledge"
: around here that the cycle was 1000 light, 1000 dark,
: 2000 total. (I'm going to call that the "Long
: Cycle").
I just want to add to your reasoning that a long cycle theory isn't compatible with the goal, depicted in the games, of the forces of darkness trying to ultimately destroy the world. Nor with the status of the world being on the edge of annihilation.
With the long cycle, what we would have is either that 1) the Leveler starts to make a mess which lasts for 1000 years until he comes close to an end but the hero kills it; or that 2) the Leveler quickly wins and establishes 1000 years of darkness, where humanity suffers and is desperate, until someone breaks the yoke.
For example, Balor was coming close to destroy the Free Cities of the North, the Fir'Bolg kingdom, and what remained of the dwarves. Balor didn't take a thousand years, he only took a couple of centuries from his first appearence in the east before already coming close to a victory against the civilized nations. This makes 1) not a correct answer.
But had he succeded, we wouldn't have had a 1000 years new cycle of darkness, we would have simply had 1000 years of nothingness, humanity extinguished, and nobody that could rise up to start a new cycle of light after a millennium passed.
According to the games, the Leveler comes close to destroy everything, only for a hero to kill him and save the day. It just ultimately fails, but everytime coming closer, because it reincarnates in the hero who saved the world in the latest attempt.
"Soulblighter, like Balor before him, seeks not to conquer, but to destroy."
This makes 2) incorrect as well. To be the right answer, it would require 1000 years of costant war, or barbarism, or slavery, with humanity suffering until an hero breaks the rule of darkness. It isn't the outcome of a quick total destruction.
Ok, you might say now that Myth only depicts one part of the world. Maybe the rest of the world would experience that age of darkness after Balor turns on other targets. Maybe he would really take 1000 years to literally destroy everything, until someone somewhere kills him.
But what is outside the campaign map is mentioned in-game as mostly wilderness, untamed lands, very distant isolated settlements and temples. It is assumed that most of the civilization is in the campaign map and the immediate neighbourhood. All the most relevant events of the mythology of Myth happened here, including the fate of the Callieach and the origin of the primordial trows.
I don't think that war in a fraction of the world would be so important to the point that characters talk about the end of the world, if it weren't a consistent part of said world, the center of most civilization, mythology, and history.
Is the campaign map as large as Spain or Europe, for example? Compare Balor's expansion to, say, that of the Huns, which were feared from the Atlantic ocean to the Caspian sea, or the Mongols, who were feared from the Atlantic to Korea!
When they appeared in the middle ages, many writers considered them a scourge of god for the destruction they caused during their initial expansion, which was gigantic. If hypothetically Balor destroyed Portugal during the middle ages, would it be as relevant as the Mongols raiding a big chunk of Eurasia? Would the wise men say that the hypothetical destruction of Lisbon ushered the beginning of an age of darkness and the extinction of mankind?
The scale is not enough large for that. I couldn't believe that Balor's invasion would be considered such a global emergency, rather than a local one, if his actions were comparable to somebody destroying Portugal; I would rather think of somebody destroying everything from Lisbon to Constantinople, that would be much credible. The Romans thought that the world was collapsing in the V century, because all the territories they knew were affected, not just one province.
(it wouldn't even require 1000 years to destroy all the world, if Balor only took 17 years to destroy almost everything west of the Cloudspine... unless the world of Myth is so large that the Free Cities of the North are an irrelevant blink)
Furthermore, we only see some of the Fallen Lords, the others might have went east and south to wage war for what we know, so maybe Balor is already messing the whole world during TFL.
Then we have Moagim and the myrkridia. I cannot imagine humanity surviving for 1000 years with such a destructive species. I could imagine 1000 years of suffering under a less destructive species that still represents a burden, like barbarian tribes periodically raiding, pillaging and massacring inside the Roman empire. But the myrkridia are depicted as supernatural monsters that destroy and slay all. They come close to do that under Soulblighter, imagine in 1000 years...
The short cycle theory instead make everything compatible. Balor appeared at the end of a 1000 years of cycle, ushering a new dark period while he was battling around, only to be defeated by Alric. The myrkridia were unleashed and started to exterminate mankind at the end of another 1000 years cycle, until Connacht defeated them. Both Alric and Connacht started a new 1000 years cycle with their actions. We won't see if the cycle hs been broken until 940 years in the future.
TL;DR:
1) the games state that the Leveler seeks not to conquer but to destroy;
2) the Leveler at the end of every cycle comes closer to this goal, only to be vanquished by a hero who will become the next Leveler;
3) 1000 years of darkness after 1000 years of light would mean that either some kind of dystopic world is established for a millennium, which contrasts with the destruction postulated at 1), or that the Leveler takes a very long time to achieve this destruction, which is contradicted by how quickly Balor comes close to a final victory and how quickly the myrkridia would require to wipe out humanity;
4) instead, a 1000 years cycle starting and ending with the death of subsequent iterations of the Leveler trying to destroy everything is compatible with what is depicted and described in the two games.
