Atreides

Maybe people don't take it seriously, because it doesn't "sound" like a bad disease. If it was ebola or something they'd probably have a different attitude.

I hope there'll be a random group of druids that accuse you of being "unnatural" and you get into a really tough battle.

Some places in Africa are better off than others, like South Africa for example. They're actually working on hosting the next World Cup.

LOL, in IWD2 at least the problem wasn't my (high level) mage getting out of the way, but the rest of my party getting out of the way fast enough after the dialogue ended. Because my mage would go Sunburst if things got ugly. And that's exactly the way I'd play my badass mage ^_____^

Urrrrgghhhhhhhhhhhhh. So much for playing the character I wanted to play. Sigh. Fighter/Cleric and other derivatives it is then...again. Edit: one day I'll be able to play a character with skills like diplomacy like I actually want to play. One day. Ideally we wouldn't need to put up with that. However that doesn't stop me from playing my arcane characters. I just have evasion spells like Mirror Image, Stoneskin etc on them the whole time, including when I talk. Looks kinda weird for dialogue closeup though.

I think the real issue is distance - in particular initiating risky conversation at point blank range. Even in hostile situations people talk without goons standing in front of them, blocking the view. They'd usually do it further away, with the goons flanking them, maybe in slightly advanced positions. The difference is they're far away enough that it's not a blade in your heart as soon as the dialogue window closes.

I'd like to see combat difficulty sliders adjust enemy area specific strategies and stuff. Difficulty's not whether enemies have a % hp or criticals, but how they use what they have. What strategies, items, area benefits etc they use to their advantage. It stays within the rules better too. The tough part would probably be loading the AI scripts for areas, but if the technology's there it can be done.

I think the orc caves would have made sense if the orcs were finite in number, but setting off the alarm would draw them to you. They should move across the map to you I think. In that sense the caves are really tough if they're attacking from the front and back. I had some of my casters at the back where they usually are only to find out they were being hacked by a bunch of grunts. However, if they're teleporting or just respawning that's not cool.

Yeah, just read that he was seriously ill when I got up in the morning. By the time I finished my coffee the update was he'd passed away

Vote for Hill Dog?

Yay!

Dungeon crawls can definitely be fun. Especially if they're actually towers. IWD1's Hand of Seldarin is absolutely beautiful. I think it's the sense of exploring something decrepit and the feeling of something's not right that made it so awesome. Puts the player on the edge and more aware - like awakening the senses and focused into the game.

I really like Gurren Lagann. Lately I've been drawn into each ep I've watched. I really get emotionally pumped up when they're on a roll. Emo kids should watch this.

Sif. It's awesome but I like campy jokes and stuff (in b4 HADAKA SARU). Things just take off exponentially after they're fighting the Spiral King.

I can understand that. In serious games I feel pressure and find it hard to play my usual game. Post pics of jerseys!

This question's pretty deep and I put some thought into it. Long rant ahead. Basically it's looking like a world government that's more progressive and centrist. I'm aware that I don't know what's "right", if such a thing exists. I do think people/nations should be allowed to make their own decisions and I believe that market forces will allow them to reach their long-run equilibrium whether it's in politics or the economy. Under certain conditions, that long-run equilibrium may be socially optimal. In the long run things may reach equilibrium (though I think it's always changing because the situations keep changing, so such a thing may be unrealistic but it's a useful theoretical tool), but that doesn't mean that in the short run things won't get ugly, say with people getting laid off, recessions, wars as tools to reach political goals and stuff. In the short run things do get ugly, but they're necessary tools. Possibly inefficient (countries in a escalating buildup, spending money on the army while they could be spent on progress), but also possibly necessary to reach the long run state. I think if I had the power to nudge things to their long-run state (provided it's not too silly) and bypass some of the unnecessary? short run inefficiencies and ugly parts, I would do it. In that way I'd be somewhat similar to responsible governments and central banks in how they let general forces decide where they want to go but nudge things back on track or make adjustments for sustainable growth. As I said before, I don't claim to know everything and I wouldn't want to make decisions. That'd be commie-like, and frankly I don't know everything to make fully informed decisions. I think I'd set up a panel of experts in their fields (mostly academic and leaders, with a healthy dose of economists and actuaries - hey I still need my day job) to discuss their problems, and where they want to go in the long run. Mostly centrist, growth (economically, technologically, socially, living standards, arts etc) oriented. In that sense they're using their self interest (in the case of nations), guided by experts that could help them along to decide on where they want to go. After that I'd intervene if necessary to help things along to reduce short-run inefficiency. A real example would be the insurgents in Iraq. Now there are some locals who blow up local infrastructure and a healthy dose of sorta random people because they're not satisfied how they are politically and economically, which is clearly undesirable. They're fighting over how the economic/political pie should be divided instead of thinking how to get a bigger pie (growth in the long run?) so everyone can have more. In the meanwhile their actions are making the pie shrink because (human and physical) capital that's necessary for growth (or even maintaining current output - enjoy your blackouts) is destroyed and a large portion of aid that could have instead been used for growth is allocated to security. I'd rather have the Forum talk to their representatives on what they want or is realistic in the long run instead of blowing stuff up on the ground. The academics and experts in their field would help them along if necessary, explaining bigger pie vs dividing the pie. When the pie's bigger, everyone gets a bigger slice. If that fast-tracks them to the long run, great. Now I know that the forum's not the panacea of the world's problems. Smart people talk all the time and things don't get decided. Thats why wars happen - people look out for no1. Plus academics aren't perfect - there's disagreement among themselves but something's better than nothing. It's about getting people to see the big picture and compromises may be necessary. Eventually decisions need to made, hopefully inclusive ones but it's probably impossible to please everyone. Even if everybody's situation improves (bigger pie) for everyone, there'll be disageement on how it'll be split. I think that's human spirit - the desire for improvement. Hopefully though broader thinking (and vitally general education improvement so people are less easily misled and can make educated and rational decisions themselves, and understanding compromises are needed so the Forum doesn't turn out to be inefficient political posturing to interest groups) we can direct that powerful human spirit for improvement from fighting over dividing the pie to desire for a bigger pie. That could translate into economic and technological, social and artsy stuff growth. Perhaps my presence would be just as a deterant so people don't become asshats. Countries wouldn't need to build escalating arsenals as deterants to see who blinks first if they knew they wouldn't need them because asshats would be smacked down. Maybe that'll be enough for them to direct their resources at growth. Or helping the poor grow using the freed up resources. At the end of the day there'll be people that can't agree with what we're doing, no matter what (say alQ). I'd probably let them have their own place called say Hades outside my influence (I'd leave them be). If they want freedom to do things their own way and don't agree with the way things are being run then fine. Maybe they're right. Some people will feel that the future we're forging is not for them. I think there'll always be people like that, but hopefully they'd give us some time to see how things turn out before deciding to leave. Eventually after people get an idea of where we're going and the results we produce we'll let them decide if they want to stay or go to Hades. Or back from Hades to where we are, but that could be unlikely if they've been living in an environment where we're constantly demonized. So yeah, basically I'd let a more informed/rational people decide what they want for themselves, and only intervene if necessary to iron out the bigger kinks. That won't mean people will never suffer, it's part of reaching equilibrium and maybe it's necessary that way. I'd like to think though that things would be better off in the long run with my help than without. Sometimes I'd just like to spend the day with a normal person to get the feel what their life is like. Maybe that's an Iraqi kid playing soccer in the bombed out place, having Kraft Mac n' Cheese with a family that's worrying about their mortgage trouble or feeding pidgeons in a park, or living it up with decadant parties. The only thing I'd be quite adamant about is having my private elite clone army of Maria Ozawa assistants and officers.

I dunno, maybe killing off 99% indiscriminately's a bad idea because well ppl die and there's a lot of skills and labour that's lost when they check out. I can totally imagine you, Wals and a the chicks like totally freaking out when you realise the power generator's died and none of you have any idea how to fix it (even with wikipedia's help, but oh noes nobody's still running the servers so the internet's... dead?). Plus food may run out after a few months because there aren't enough farmers left or who are specialized in that kind of stuff/knowledge. In fact the tractors might run out of gas since nobody in Venezuela's pumping oil anymore or shipping it and eventually everyone who' not very good/productive at farming is sorta doing stuff there getting dirty with hoes. But I guess the good news is you're all superpowery and can haul a tank or two of gas from Iran (from the bands of survivors that have fortified Fallout style?) and redistribute resource and labour but that's sorta be commie-like and not cool. But Soviet Superman was pretty cool... Basically, I think it'd be better if you just carve out your piece of Paradise on the world (or the moon) and regulate who/what can come in/out. I'd could totally be like one of your advisors and handle the hoes.

I'm guessing if optimization has decreasing marginal return, there comes a point where you've fixed most of the easy ones leaving a few very hard ones. Eventually you got to spend so much time on the (few?) remaining ones that the leader may decide the programmers could be better used on other stuff (because they have a deadline) that would give bigger payoff for their time (like streamlining inventory UI?), even if they wish they could optimize everything. So maybe it's just a human resource issue...

Enjoy your Dota!

NO U

I'll wait for some scientist to link how this helped apes get lucky.

I think some of you may like Baccano! http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encycloped...ime.php?id=7492 In the first ep the mafia gunned down some dudes with tommyguns. Fedoras included of course.

It's quite a pity that a large part of the money spent on the countries goes to putting security in place so that people can work in relative safety. Or just protecting what they've built.

I think Afghanistan could have an advantage if they stressed they need help to advance. I think most developed countries that pledged to help could contribute technology and expertise that could train the locals to relatively fast-track them down development. Of course I think they'd be more willing to help if the situation on the ground wasn't so dangerous, with lots of wackos wanting to abduct foreigners.

I was wondering if there's stuff devs used to do at their previous workplaces that they brought to Obsidz. Although Obsidz was built on an Interplay core, lots of others have joined in and Obsidz has probably got its own vibe going on now. But is there any fun stuff that you did at Interplay or other previous development houses that got brought over to Obsidz?