Ok, political talk and I have homework to do, So, I?ll talk politics.

My issues with Bush, are based on two areas, China and personal freedoms. We have not been hard on china because there is money to be made (both parties are guilty as hell about this)
As for the loss of personal freedoms again both parties (or we can say both this president and the former are guilty of this, same with China)

In essence many of the things thrown Bush?s way in this thread can be said of Clinton.

Bombing in Sariavo   (no idea how to spell it) was not supported by the UN, Somolia was a terrible disaster and contributed to many countries thinking the US is weak. During the Clinton administration the CIA and Military where both downsized and lost major funding. We bombed Iraq without UN support, We bombed Sudan without UN support. Syria offered the US Osama Bin Laden, we refused. A Deal was brokered with North Korea to give them oil and  Nuclear Reactors as long as they don?t make bombs, that was a poor choice of action as we see now.

The economy, is pretty harsh, mainly because of our having to adjust to a cheaper workforce due to free trade, that is not really free both Bush?s and Clinton Championed that cause.

I mean not free because other countries work much cheaper or have forced labor, and much worse environmental/workplace safety then the US does.    

Our power infrastructure is old and in vital need of modernization, yet no one wants a power plant near them.  (Democrats are mainly to blame for this one, but Republicans share in this).

Governor is probably the closest thing to being president available, and Texas, New York, California are probably the best example states to do it in due to small cities and large ones and the diversity in the states. But I think no job can train you to be President of the US.
Senators are legislative, they make law and budgets, the president and governors must lead, push the legislation to get what they want, but deal with what they get. Yet Presidents and Governors are held accountable for both the good and the bad that from both, Senators are almost never held accountable.

Kerry is an interesting fellow, though I think the best Democratic candidate to challenge Bush would have been either Edwards or Lieberman.  Overall we have two establishment candidates now,  both are beholden to ?special interests? as is every politician, but both of these especially so.

The only points of contention is our ?war? on terror and taxes. On the war on terror I truly think we could do better then we are doing in Iraq and that we have made many mistakes, but it is going forward and we have about 250 years at this rate to equal the losses we had in Vietnam.  I truly think that improving the lives of the people in the middle east and showing strength when wronged is a good policy and works well, the biggest failure so far has been PR or Propaganda, Bush and his team just don?t get how to do it.

On Taxes, I am a strong believer that less taxes the better, the federal government needs to get smaller in a big way, they have one major job, keeping the US safe They are failing in some ways in more ways then terrorists, but improving. Where the big failure seems to be is good Jobs. And that comes in phases, the boom of the 90s we will likely only see in 20 years time. Getting us to a good point is going to take some craftiness and quite possibly some sacrifices.  Allowing oil to be drilled throughout the US including off the coast of Florida and California and in Alaska could drive gas prices down and lower the cost of energy across the board, but we would have to put a no export clause on that drilling and use much of the money saved to build the infrastructure for an oil free economy.

For me this election is more about who is more likely to lead us in the direction I hope we go?

My major fear is what if Janet Reno had the powers available in the patriot act, and who is the most likely to use them abusively.

Also to consider, is who is a better person to lead this nation in a time where we are at war and in a truly new economy.  

Sadly the choice is between a guy who lacks any ability as an orator, and a guy who seems to never held to a core decision or opinion in his life.  I will not vote for a person simply because he is not the guy in power, I will and have voted for third parties. The sad thing is, our two party primary system of late creates extremists and not centrists?but what the hay it?s politics as usual.  

So for the long and short of it, I will likely vote for Bush, but I will not vote for Kerry no matter what happens, I am not as vehement in this as I was with Gore, Gore scared me and his wife really scared me?but that is for another day, I have homework to do.

Armenelos; to a large degree I agree with your wants, hell I want them too in many ways. But it is not my call per say.

I would have liked many things to be different, however the core of this game is Role Playing, and the mode to enforce that seems to be, allowing the player to choose their danger level.

If truth be told, and I had my way. About 99% of the content would be PvP to some degree with only certain sites being totally safe, but I am not a fan of open ended PKing, though I would like it if you joined a Thug or assassin faction?well their you go, but only if there is accountability, and letts face it accountability is not fun, and so it is more in line with happy happy, free, free land.

One of my biggest issues with EQ early on was?a Paladin and a Necromancer could join up, someone could have killed thousands of Halflings and the Halfling thief would join up with them. Though my favorite time on the game was the Race War Server, but even then it was not fair in any way, it lacked something and they made it worse as they made it a friendlier place to be instead of adding content in some way so it worked better.


But that was many moons ago and much has changed, there are PvP and PK games out there, there are many different takes on very similar things.

And the main people here want to make an environment that leads to Role-playing.

I do not think and personally would never say that we are making a game for the masses, we are making a game that to date has not proven profitable but we feel has some importance to many people. In fact I would say that we are targeting maybe 2% of the ?RPG? players out there.  

On the flip side I would love to make things differently, where death means something, and capture often worse, at the same time they are not deal breakers and you can have fun, not loose a ton of exp or the normal stuff that RPGs have had. In essence I want to push the limits and concepts of what a fun RPG can be, and at the same time recognize our limitations in developing that.

But it is not for me to say, and most (perhaps all who care about these aspects) of the other devs disagree with most of my wants.  

Not saying that they are not feasible, just they would not want to do it that way.  Thus is the way with these projects.

But we are not creating a Free MMORPG for the masses, we want our game to be an alternative on its merits, not because of price.

I?m assuming that you are all teens or younger. And I am not trying to sound wise, but maybe I?ll just sound old :-).

Anyway Fantasyfiend, that is common and  normal to happen, people can take the wrong impression from anything. Also, you could be giving vibes of the shy guy wanting to get together, or she may have some interest in you, but not wanting to endanger her current relationship.

All in all, it can be 1000 different tiny issues, from miscommunication, to not wanting to invest in a friendship with you other then simply a passing conversation, and now she knows, you are more interested then that.  

From my past there have been cool people that I liked that didn?t want me around all the time, but they enjoyed a conversation with me from time to time, as well as people who thought I was cool, yet all I wanted from them was a passing relationship. Everyone has different wants from different people, not everyone is going to be totally into you (in a friendship way).

Based on past experience and depending on how interested you are in perusing a relationship with this girl (whatever the nature of the relationship may be) confrontation is probably the wrong angle, it would be making an issue out of nothing.

Befriending the boyfriend is better, and your avoiding her for a while would be almost as good, if she confronts you on it, simply tell the truth, you thought she was put off by your asking her to the movies and you did not want her thinking you where some kind of creep.

But overall it seems like a small issue.

I am not sure how to go forward without insulting many people here, but I fear that most of you simply don?t get what is at issue, then again you may simply want this as a forum to say, ?this is what I want in the game?.

In truth, I had hoped that better heads would prevail, but they appear to have run for the hills.

In this game there will be no ?PKing? Vs. unwilling unacknowledged opponents, when I say unacknowledged, I mean that they know they are under possible danger of attack and have options to avoid it and still play the game normally.

What is much more at stake is the level of  PvP. To truly understand the stance of most of the powers that be (devs) is to view a game where if I don?t want to fight you and we are at war?I really don?t have to. I will not even begin to explain the lack of options for thieving from PCs other then to say?there won?t be any unless things change.

The current goal of this game is to provide a world to explore and adventure in, where the good guys, (the players) have a clear understanding of the bad guys (the MOBs wanting to kill you) as far as plot complexity?there will be those few NPCs that change sides.

I am oversimplifying greatly and to quote me on this would be folly, as I am simply venting a level of frustration at the disconnect that this portion (and many others) of the forum seems to have.

I am vehemently the strongest supporter of thieving content in this game, and I mean much more then simply picking pockets or muggings, of the devs. And yet what you all seem to want is not really a role playing game, but a game of one-upmanship, conquest at no risk, lowbrow jollies on someone?s misery. Simply said this game will not have that, nore will it have open field PKing with people playing cops and robbers (or some variation of that). Quite simply, think of all of your character as being heroic and united in a plight against external forces. Where differences are contested in a formal (sometimes bloody, but always formal) confrontation.

That being said, do ?I? want this?not really. But that is the current focus. Those of you who want PK/full looting/thiving/? will never get your wish from this game. This sub forum was made for you to vent a bit, as well as hopefully add some good ideas on how to make a fair and nice PvP/thief friendly environment, and with some very slight exceptions I have not gotten any of that in the last 4 months or more from this thread.

Will I do anything about it, not really. But I will say that those of you who think the will of this subforum will make the game have more PKing, NO!!! your time and effort is completely wasted, and better spent else where. I would suggest another game, or outside enjoying the coming spring. In fact I fear that many of  the posts here only invite more inflexible  regulation on any PvP in the game at all, at least at this stage. And thus making it worse for all who want more PvP content.

Anyway those are my current musings, do with them as you wish, I only suggest you start coming up with something better then bounty hunters, while I see merit in the idea, it does not even begin to cut it.

We are talking about something where eather everyone can enjoy, that is especially true for non-PKers, or it will not be in the game.

The focus of this game currently is ?Core-Role Players? for those who don?t know what that is, it is the people who will be interested in the latest fashions of PS, who is who, what the news of the day is in the world as much as killing the next mob and gaining EXP.  

While one can argue?I am role-playing and sadistic thug?the only sadistic thugs in the game will be NPCs if things go as they are currently planed.

Again not my idea of ?fun? but much more acceptable then open range PK, And all in all you have shadowbane.

For those of you who want a free alternative?not a great game to focus on, our focus currently is based on making the game that is as close to on-par with a purchased game as possible and your Pentium 3 and 3 year old video card will not cut it, even after we optimize things.

Anyways have a good time. And again, none of this is written in stone and all may change, but it will not be on the argument of ?beause Pking/thieving is better and more real? or the 1000 slight variations of that. You are not our current target audience and probably never will be.  

It was free.

But it spoke about some of the effects of badly controlled PK ability

While this idea is not all bad, the ?radar? how it affects PK is a mystery to me. You have perhaps an extra second to run, or the sneak thief type (that does not appear on your radar) hit?s you with a strong poison so you die a few steps after running away.

And some people only lurk, but on an odd occasion need to log in to post something, should they use a new name every time?

This is not a purely social board so the amount of posts or last post is pretty irrelivent.

It is a legacy of the genre.

In fantasy you generally kill your opponents. And since we do not have anything good concepts to balance ?capture and secure? or ?let him get up and whack him again?. Death and resurrection are easier to place in the fantasy genre. While KO would be valid in a super hero genre.