Sand

Have the enemeies scaled but to a point... Peons at most be half the power level of party (or character). Leiutanents be three-quarters the power level of party (or character). Bosses be at the same level of party (or character). Story based encounters increase all values by 25%.

Sounds like one kick arse woman back in her day, Walsh.

The bottomline, when it comes tot he media and and information, what is shown to children is the responsibility of the parent. NO ONE ELSE.

Muso, just let Eddo be Eddo.

Because if you are unable to help yourself then you are unable to help others.

So its not the CIA who are waterboarding people, eh?

Happy B-Day, Bokman. Enjoy them til they get too high.

I think that AP is probably more along done than the Aliens game.

Well, I am not against helping others but we should only do so once we, ourselves, are in good enough shape so we can do so more effectively.

I disagree, Krezy. Parents need to step and learn. Show some god damn initiative on their part.

Never expect help from someone else. Accept it graciously, of course, but never expect a hand out from anyone. Also if you have resources stored, the level of prosperity will not go down because you are dipping into that stored resources which is designed for such emergencies. Once the basics are covered you can once again create a surplus to replineshed the stored resources you used.

The problem with that lets say raiders strike your village or the village gets hit with natural disaster that causes your tools and whatnot to be destroyed. Since you gave those excess tools away instead of saving them in storage your village has nothing and the poorest members of your village are now suffering because of short sighted give-aways.

There are times in which war is justified and right and other times that it is wrong. In my ever so humble opinion our invasion of Afganistan was justified and right. A terrorist organization backed by Afganistan's government at the time attacked us on our sovereign territory. The invasion of Iraq was not justified and definitely not right. However, what is done is done. The question now is the expenditure of resources and where the responsibility lies for the US government. Who is the US government more responsible for? Who should it fulfill the needs first? Its own citizens or the people in Afganistan and Iraq. Given how the US economy is going south along with the rising costs of fuel, which in turn raises the prices of everything else, I am of the opinion that the US should place the needs of its own citizens before foreigners. Since we do give resources, which I am against, to other countries I think we need to reprioritize them just a bit. Those countries who are the neediest should get the greatest amount of aid. For example Israel gets billions and billions of dollars a year, yet it is pretty much self-sufficient now. Would it not make sense to lower or end aid to Israel and split those funds with Iraq and Afganistan?

I thought flamebaiting was against forum rules, moderator. I think you and I are practically at the stage where it's flirting, mate.

I have respect for Gandhi, but he was the exception and not the human norm. Who the frack knows with any degree of certainty what Jesus stood for. After 2000 years of interpretation and reinterpretation, translating and retranslating, of his teachings, and all the killing done in his name I don't have much respect for the guy nor the religion he inspired.

There is a difference. The KKK isn't backed by our government while Al Qaeda was supplied and supported by the Taliban, the government of Afganistan at the time. As for Iraq we should pull out, take care of the problems at home, and once that is done then fully focus on repairing the damage Bush did to that country.

At least I am against pre-emptive strikes. If they leave me alone I am more than willing to leave them alone.

Idealism? HA! Crap in one hand and fill the other with hope. See which one gets full first, Xard.

A nice naive view, Xard. We should thrive to make sure that our own people are taken care, and those who seek us harm eliminated. A government's first and foremost priority should be to its own people. May that be my government, your government, or Walsh's. Once that priority is satisfied and the country is secured then a government can set aside resources to aid others. I am not saying that the US should not help those in need, but let the US take care of those who are in need at home before those in other countries.

If the roles were reverse do you honestly think they would have aided us? I think not.

Not invade a country that is not a threat? Hmm... Not attacking someone... I think that is quite doable, Xard. Lets see, not spend resources to rebuild a country that attacked us seem quite doable as well. Just leave. leaving is very doable. Just get on the transport and go. Seems easy enough.

If a country attacks the United States, causing lost of life and damaging property, then we should go in and make damn sure they don't have the ability to do so again. With 9/11 we should have went in Afganistan, focus on killing every single member of Al Qaeda and the Taliban, then simply leave afterwards. Iraq did not attack us therefore we should not have invaded.

Anyone with a brain should have seen that could never have happen.

I thought this thread was how vehicles could be included in gameplay, not specific models of cars.