Like I said, better keywording would fix the opponent type issues.
As to your example of why the ogres break off from the elf maiden - that is up to the fiction, largely, but it seems plausible to me. They're about to have their way with her, when suddenly, a threat appears (or bekons), best deal with it first.
If you wish to model the defences based on motivations in a given situation - nothing prevents this at all. If you're the DM, you can assign ad hoc defence bonuses to the targets, and if you're the player, you can raise your objection to the DM and ask for same. Page 42 and Rule 0 pretty much cover this.
If you take issue with taking control of NPCs, solutions have been given upthread. And I would argue that something in the in-game fiction DID take control. Maybe not the degree of fine control allowed by RAW, but there is certainly a narrative construct in action here.
If you still don't like it, you don't have to use it, but there is no conceivable reason to deprive those who *do* like it of the ability to do so. Unfortunately, that's the way 5e seems to be heading so far. If so, I won't be buying it, especially since I already have something I'm pretty happy with.
There are hundreds if not thousands of games. I own tens of them. There is a subset I'll play and a different subset I'll run. I'll purchase material that fits either of those criteria or that supports a different game inside those subsets.
I have never deprived anyone from playing what they like -- except for that time I sent Runequest 2 ninjas after the Runequest 3 material -- or wait never to be spoken of, right. I just won't participate when something outside those subsets is offered without other motivation (I can be bought).
When a discussion springs up as to *why* I don't like a particular game or type of game, I'll share my opinion, potentially exhaustively if work is boring me.