hohto

You obviously don't live in america mate. I can't even find bands such as mayhem or venom in local stores. A lot of bands that are worth listening to I can't find anywhere. :roll: With that comment I mean internet stores. If you can't order it from the internet, it most likely isn't worth even downloading. Few exceptions of course are. Amazon for example has a lot of stuff from Mayhem and at least I trust Amazon more than Microsoft.

Guss, are you kidding? Metallica, Disturbed and "support your local underground death metal" at same post? :P Anyways, I'd recommend Amoral.

I personally find it really funny how people even now can still cry about their local store not having album X and justify their piracy that way. If you can't find an album from a trustable netstore, the album most likely isn't either worth even dowloading.

Space at the list isn't their biggest problem when adding new skills. I personally don't see a reason to get a new combat related skill. Either it would turn the combat triangle into square and cause balancing problems or it would be a "non-affecting skill" like prayer. For the 2nd option I personally don't see a need. IMO we'd need more things added to the current ones than a new one. Prayer for example should get more high level prayers. Piety was a good example, but unfortunately not high enough. I'd personally want to see more of these combination prayers and also combine range and magic prayers into strong melee prayers. Also like TrixStar said, agility should play a bigger role at pkin. At the moment it's good at big f2p fights, but otherwise a pker doesn't really need it.

IMO at certain points this subgenre bull-rear-window-thing has gone too far. CoB is a perfect example of it: basically there are many good reasons why it could be metal X, metal Y, Metal A and even some other stuff. I personally wouldn't put it under death metal, at least not in the "classical" meaning of it. CoB label themselves under "extreme metal" which imo is good enough. However the funny part here is that Dimmu Burger...err Borgir got mentioned at 1st page and still no1 has said a word about bm :P I personally wouldn't use metal-archives as any kind of a source. There's been far too many even comical mistakes as it works the same way as Wikipedia except there's bunch of 12-year-old hippies and not enough people to correct the mistakes. Yes, there are people who know a lot and then there's a lot more those who think they know. Btw you said CoB wouldn't fit under death metal... Listen to it and look for Shade Empire's music and genre at this source of yours. Pretty funny imo :P Also would want to notice you that also Behemoth put themselves under "extreme metal".

Or you could just temporary move to a country where universities are free ;)

10 if mastered equals for maxing.

I personally wouldn't say that RS suffers from a bad inflation. During last 3 year, raw material prices have been surprisingly stable. With a proper inflation they should be the thing that "live". Also the rising prices of rares don't depend only on the amount of money in game, it also depends on supply&demand. It's no wonder that discontinued items keep rising in prices and even with less money on the game they'd do it, maybe in a smaller scale but still. Did anyone mention depression at this thread? I personally saw that term first time at your post. I agree that without big updates the economy won't dramatically change. Smaller updates like we got yesterday will temporary affect to it, but they aren't too dramatic.

Suffer is a wrong word here, I'd personally use "how will it adapt to the new situation?" instead. The causes will depend fully from the sword itself. If it's a failure like the dark bow or dragon large, the affect will be minimal. If it's something that everyone must have, like whips were when they came, it will affect a lot. Lets look closer at both scenarios. Failure (not just worth getting) Last few "big" items have been like this. If it's not powerful enough to match against whip or has a bad shop value (=can't protect), the price will fall down pretty fast and its affect to the rare prices are minimal. Good examples of items like that were dark bow, dragon 2 hander and dragon large. Basically they didn't offer any reason to get them, thus the prices dropped a lot. Bullseye (a new whip) If the best scenario comes, this item is something everyone must get, both pkers and trainers. Also if it's hard enough to obtain, the prices won't come down too quickly. This would drain a lot money away from people who are cabable of buying rares and it would make people to sell them to obtain this. This could cause few things: slightly cheaper rare prices and later them boosting a lot. The same happened with whips: many people bought them at first instead of rares but eventually they created so many rich people that the demand of rares went up.

And you don't need to work to earn the cash to get it? I personally hope it's tradeable, really rare, powerful and has a decent shop value. This way it would also be useful for pkin and allrounded combat training, not just some fancy item used by edge scum-pkers and trainers. I personally am a bit sick of all this hype around the item. First of all, only a really small amount of people got the slightest idea what it will be like and most likely those won't be posting under this thread. However you're now rising the waitings to the skies and remembering that the higher you climb the more you fall. It can't be that hard just to wait, can it?

So even tho we have a good and working TT list with the locator and text comments, why not to add pictures of the location too? I know it from experience that some clues are in a relatively tricky places to find even if you knew at which direction it is. Adding hyperlinks to the coordination text list wouldn't be too hard, small pictures wouldn't take up that much bandwith, there's plenty of clue hunters to take the screenshots and it would be a new way to help people.

Being part of the staff isn't only full of glory and glitter. It's not like you'd be in extacy every time you logged in. Leaving is part of the normal situation: nothing lasts forever and people have different reasons for leaving. Like I said, when I left after being a mod for around 3 years, I current lifesituation didn't give me enough spare time to work here and my motivation wasn't good enough to continue. However here I'd like to point out that even tho I've seen many staff members to leave their post, I haven't heard of a single situation where the reason for leaving was personal problems with other staff members.

FBI doesn't look Osama for 911. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

I personally was a global moderator on these forums for some years and was forced to quit due lack of motivation and time. However here's few points of moderating these forums I'd like to share with those who on a stage wether to app for mod status or not. * Tip.IT staff has been known for being nice and friendly. I personally loved the atmosphere at the mod forum and the general attitude there. Even tho people were totally different, they all managed to work together very well. It's not like they would always agree on everything, but they are mature enough to know when compromises must be done. * There's a lot of invisible work and the amount you do it depends about yourself. The more active mod you are, the more personal messages you get. You also need to be ahead of normal posters at one thing: the bad threats can't stay there for too long. Good thing that they now got the report button and a lot of staff. * Moderators are an example of what you all should be. When you're a moderator, you just can't show those bad days. Of course the rules are the same for everyone, but as a mod you can't go even near to the limits. * Being a moderator is a great addon to your experience. It will teach you how to work with masses, how to lead by experience and how to judge people equally. For example many of the old or current Tip.IT moderators are currently also player moderators in rs. My message here is that if you think you even could be cabable of being part of Tip.IT staff, go for it.

Lenin will rise from his grave and strangle all the wannabe neocommunists. After that in hell Marx will make him count his facial hair and every tim he goes wrong or keeps too long pause, he'll suffer few decades in fires started by Mao.

In my opinion that's just one of the countless "metal logos" which don't really give us anything. Boring, no symbolism, basic and so on. Imo you should pay more attention on logos and study them. http://www.tuonelanportti.net/download/emperor2.jpg This logo shows immediately what kind of music it is, is somewhat easy to read (if that's a good thing) and I personally love it how symmetric it is. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... erlogo.svg Personally I love it how symbolism and little details are added to this one. On a first view it looks like a mess, but take a closer look at it.... http://www.calvarium.com/pics/etusivu.jpg Again great symmetrism there. Just love it how left half is like a mirrored version of the right one and it's still readable. Also when you're doing a logo, you should remember that it's a portrait of your band and along with the cover the first thing a man sees. It should describe the music well and same time look good. Compare Darkthrone's logo for example to these current pop album "logos" and imagine what would happen if the bands changed their logo styles....

Depends about the band. Some bands just grab a cool looking font and do it that way, some first draw it to paper and then idealise it until it looks perfect in their eyes and some people hire other people to do it. Here's a link you could also check. It's on Estonian forums but fully english. http://www.metalstorm.ee/forum/topic.php?topic_id=5923

Remind me to never take you seriously I stand corrected. http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article ... 64,00.html http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiap ... index.html They temporary suspended the food aid in 2006 because of the little bombs NK were talking about, tested and so on. However they did send before that AND they are currently sending again. In the other words: you, Sir, are wrong.

Let's see... Hiroshima: "little boy" - from 13 to 16 kilotons Biggest bomb ever used: "Tsar bomba" - 50 megatons Average US bomb: .3 kilotons to 1.2 Megatons First of all, Little boy was a small nuclear bomb with today's scale. Second, it was one bomb. If someone bombed US for example with nukes, they for sure wouldn't retaliate with only 1 or 2 bombs. Also if we for some reason managed to avoid the fallout, we also would have a risk of a nuclear winter. In a nuclear war there are no winners, there are only losers. In the worst scenario everyone loses everything.

Most likely wouldn't go for a full war with Russia, only start boycotts of their goods and politically pressure them. Also few units could be sent there as it's a "promise for the NATO countries". If you think it in a realistic way, it just isn't worth it for USA to go to a war with Russia just because one or two small boarder nations. A political hit is better than risking with a nuclear war. Like it would really matter can you destroy this planet X times instead of Y times when both of those symbol equal for number bigger than 1... Just because USA is more powerful than Russia, it doesn't mean they'd survive as winners from that war.

Producing more, fixing or updating nuclear arsenals shouldn't really surprise anyone. Doesn't look too secret IMO and not even too surprising (but definately not acceptable!) Estonia is after all part of the old USSR, the smallest NATO country that has boarder with Russia and close to St. Petersburg.

What would be point of that? If you wanted to cause some real problems, you'd gotta go so far that the alarm bells would ring. Moving a large amount of military vehicles or troops would be noticed in notime. With normal infantry a strike would be noticed far too quickly. No matter what strategies used there. Also there would be no point doing that: a war between those nations would just mean the end of this planet. Out of curiosity, where do you live? They won't attack, no matter did they have a real reason or not. A war between 2 out of the 3 bigs would equal to a war where everyone loses and no1 wins and they know it for sure.

Russia and USA are currently in getting a long really well. At the moment there's some argues about USA's missile shield project, but to show how badly Russians hate Americans, think this: Putin was ready to fund a big part of it if it gets build to somewhere else than it was planned to. Currently Russia's domestic policy they are more going for old Soviet countries. There are almost daily riots (around the country, not only in major cities) with native russians against the minorities. Many big political parties/spokesmen/leaders are openly for getting some parts of the old USSR back (Dagestan, Chechenya and many other autonomic areas) but attacking USA is something that isn't even seriously discussed about. Europe isn't a target for Russia. First of all, that's a war that everyone would lose. Second, one of the main reasons for their economical rise is Europe. All the time more and more European money is being bumped to Russia and staying there, unlike during Yeltsin's regime when the money was made there and bumped back to Europe. Also with Russian's gaspipe plans Europe is definately not the place they would attack. Didn't really understand what you tried to say here to be honest. Where did you even get the Iran+Russia+China allie? Too much Tom Clancy? Seriously, that kind of an allie would cause so much trouble to both Russia and China that it just isn't worth it. That would mean a stop to their economical rise due boycotts and rise the risk of a big war too much. Also Venezuela can't be a place where any "terrorist" cells can grow big enough to cause true damage to USA in militarical ways. USA's intelligence agencies are definately good enough to spot a rising numbers of training camps rising in South America. You gotta understand that nukes got the power to destroy this whole planet. If a new world war started, Russia, China and USA Would stay away from each other for the reason that a war would most likely end into a situation where everyone loses everything. Soviet Union had radars to detect nukes already in 1970s. There's no chances that a nuclear attack big enough to destroy any of the 3 big comes as a surprise. Smaller attacks may be done, but there are no chances they could watch USA blowing off the air without retaliation. You know that things like that would be just like trying to turn off a fire by throwing gasoline to it. Those things could be seen as a war declaration and that's something Russia, USA or China just can't afford. That would be a too big operation. It would be seen far too quickly and the risk of a war would be far too big, just like in the "terror case" you said earlier. However a revolution wouldn't be impossible in USA if the general attitude changed a lot, economical situation was bad and right people were at the right place in right time. The breaking of USSR was a good example of this kind of a thing. However unlike USSR, USA most likely wouldn't get split: after all USSR was pretty much a bunch of countries/nationalities collected under 1 flag whereas USA's one nation and one country under one flag. Edit: And now as we mentioned some of these semiautonomic places which belong to the Russia's federation, let's get some links :P Pretty cool places there actually. Tuva: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuva Krasnoyarsk Krai: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krasnoyarsk_Krai Irkutsk_Oblast: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irkutsk_Oblast Ust-Orda_Buryat_Autonomous_Okrug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ust-Orda_B ... mous_Okrug Tomsk_Oblast: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomsk_Oblast

Current warfare is totally different tho. We're so much technologically ahead of WW2 times that smaller units can now do more damage than bigger could during it. One good plane could easily sweep out countless of normal soldiers. Now I'm talking about totally theoretical scenario here, but South America and different Asian countries could provide the aid for intercontinental war. First of all, launching nukes to either Russia or China would just meant an instant retaliation which is as strong (=total destruction) or stronger than the 1st hit. Same would go with bio weapons: start spreading a disease, like anthrax or ebola for example, at the enemy's site and really soon you'll get a counterstrike. Also American soldiers aren't trained better than Russian soldiers at least, dunno enough about Chinese army to compare to it. Their special forces (Spetsnaz) are fully comparable to US special forces when it comes to training and Russia got many millions bigger reserve (active troop numbers are pretty equal) than US, all gone through a 2 year training. However if Russia and/or China got into war with USA, the number of soldiers wouldn't be important. I also don't fully agree with the line of USA being technically superior. They are ahead, but the difference isn't too big.

Lets clear up few things... These flights are now brought back after the collapse of USSR. The reason why they were canceled for a while was money: as a rising economy Russia can now put more money on their military than some years ago and thus they managed to bring back these flights. They've also had the missile technology to bomb the USA and missiles are targeted already. They won't need any planes to destroy USA or whole planet. They also got nuclear submarines to bomb you if so. Those flights got totally nothing to do with nuclear weapons. China is the most likely allie for Russia: they share a long boarder together and both are rising economies who got no1 else to allie with: NATO is already coming next to Russia's western boarders and allying with Europe would have negative affects to their gas/power companies. China itself is soon challenging USA at the economical fields, so allying with them isn't anything they'd do. The war with USA vs China+Russia is as likely to happen as Mexico attacking USA. Both sides know exactly that it would cost them a lot more than it would give if it was fought only with "normal" warmachines and the risk of nuclear war is far too big. I personally see Israel+Iran being the main threat to the world: while Israel has nukes, Iran needs them too to be safe if a war starts. However for obvious reasons this isn't OK for Israel and USA. If Iran manages to get some nukes and a war starts, it'll be almost certain that it'll be the 2nd time nukes are used against people (Hiroshima+Nagasaki being counted as one) and 1st time both sides use them.