Ulysses

Cold War never really ended with the dissolution of the USSR. The ongoing proxy wars, the tension over missile shields, over the status quo of other countries and etc. are mere testament to von Neumann's MAD doctrine. Looking back into the days of the Hetman, later on during the Swedish Invasion/Deluge, and fast-forward to the WW... it is clear that Ukraine is nothing more than a bargaining chip between Muscovy/Russia and most of Europe. However, I think that they are going to be better off under the Russia's sphere of influence. Suppose a crisis erupt in much of Europe, and they struggle perhaps in one way or another to extend protection, in terms of military, economy, society etc., who is best equipped in helping them? What are the rationale for both sides in supporting Ukraine? History is always a good-to-source, a good starting point when dealing with something like this, from our perspectives at least. What happened to Ukrainians and its culture the last time they sided with Russia? with the 'West'/PL Commonwealth/British alliance/etc.? The last time anyone wanted to be 'global police' failed horribly (I am looking at Russia in Europe in 19th century), today we have the US following down the same path with (arguably) no better result so far. Look at Afghanistan, the British tried that...so did the Soviets, by the looks of it the US and some of its allies are just following this well-trodden path. Crimea...well they tried in the 16th century (they did right?), they tried in the 19th century, and now? I remembered people mentioning about NATO involvement in the conflict should it escalate last month. Realistically, that won't happen. It is simply too close to 'home', they need a buffer state in Ukraine, from Russia. Missile shield? - Well the threat of Russia to Europe is zero. But there is no incentive for either side to undergo any degree of disarmament. Hence the tension. One may ask 'why' then, why Russia decides to 'occupy' Crimea. To protect national interests - just like what the US did - except under more scrutiny from other countries - because it's a competition - the Cold War continued..going beyond the scenes of Ice Hockey and the chess tournaments. Historically, they made a mistake in giving Crimea to Ukraine, I guess they had no idea back in the 50s that USSR would breakup. But just like the US, they don't sit back when these 'national interests' come under threat (the potential for Ukraine to join the EU, being a gateway to become a closer associate of NATO, putting Russia at a strategic disadvantage in their little game). Given what has happened in recent years, where military intervention has become commonplace in the name of counterterrorism or protection of subjects and interests, and the 'illegal' stature of some of these campaigns, e.g. Libya (UN resolution) and Serbia NATO bombing, it is not unreasonable for Russia to commit something similar...at least from their perspective - and I believe that was exactly the point they made. Fairly well justified. But of course, we know that 'protecting national interests' is just an euphemism for a range of political purposes. Wars are very powerful means to secure a dynasty of governance or even just to get re-elected...nationalism is key. Leaders are very well justified in exploiting this 'weakness' if it will help their causes or that of their allies. But if countries may not wage a war without some sort of congress declaration then how else will they be able to do so without incurring excessive resistance from within their own countries? Ukraine opposition staged a revolution, following the rejection of the EU proposal. Are all revolution against 'oppressive' regimes desirable, and in the interests of the people? Based on various other revolutions, it is not necessarily the case. WW3 is unlikely - at least not in the current Crimea/Ukraine situation. Countries have far more to lose in such conflict than there is to gain. Especially when 'they' have made such a mess in other parts of the world from their campaigns..can they really afford to start this? The world has evolved too much since 1945, especially with all the Internet, the surveillance (setting fire to the Internet...), the globalisation movement, the trades, organisations like EU, APEC, ASEAN and etc, improved living standards, living conditions, choices, and more vocal inputs and opinions from people in general, and of course, the media...it is not just the matter of starting a war (a world war) over something like this...it is about the livelihood of the billions of people that may be affected by it...the ramification is huge, and they simply cannot afford to do so. I can see them driving it along the lines of patriotism or nationalism, enforcing conscription perhaps? It is human nature, they don't support things that could put themselves at a disadvantage, let alone be part of it. Defend the status quo. (edited)

Yes, they modified the type of stats rolled on the items dropped depending on your class. I think that is rather nice..I used to get all these barb belts that are totally useless for me - I only have a ranged barb. The LS change made life difficult on T4+ against Siegebreaker. Got to keep in mind that when RoS gets released, the current legendary items (i60) would become obsolete fairly soon...so I wouldn't dwell too much on the drops unless you get some OP class specific stats like Kridershot for DH. Enjoy the last week of AH =]

The appearance also differs a bit from the normal version of the items, sort of like a darker hue.

Exciting...

Succeeded 3 out of the past 20 voyages; failed Exile 3 times. Gained azure and then lost most of it, even eating into my TC reserve. Did recruit 3 35k captains. Is the ideal captain selection still mcs/212? And are the +1% to mcs and speed traits still best?

I think a sizeable portion of people stayed oblivious to the accuracy/max hit equations back then (I do recall reading massive posts by Paleas and Oblivion a few years ago, I would think that the numbers scared off half the population right from the start), and why would they pay much attention to it anyway? I agree that people may prefer old tutorial and style of play, either because they are drawn into the allure of Gielinor or because they dislike other MMORPG available at the time. I guess the only connection those equations have with them, is when they ask whether what they are wearing to combat is best...and we use the equations and the numbers are evidence to justify our views. If players go about with the 'ignorance is bliss' attitude, it does seem like they would have had a nicer time back then. The current system thrusts the numbers (the tooltips to the abilities, the crits, the damage/armour ratings etc.) right up to the players. Pre-revolution, there are more things to manage (if one isn't using momentum), in ability uses and cooldowns. It is possible to play without paying much attention to these numbers, but it would noticeably affect the quality of the gameplay; and at the end one might just feel obligated to learn some of it. It is not entirely appealing to those preferring something other than that (why else would they join?). I am wondering whether the 07 and live games have lagged behind its times respectively. If one plays some other games, the live game might feel like one from yesteryear.

A very interesting video. I guess more serious gamers nowadays prefer to spend their time on games like dota2, sc2 or the myriad of fps games. So what's left are the casual gamers who either prefer simpler, and less competitive games or just haven't got enough time to devote to those games (where time invested actually matters imo). But I think RS3 is a lot more beginner friendly/forgiving than its predecessors (RS2 and RSC) - the learning curve for combat could be seen as steep, if you compare it against the simpler RS2, but I would imagine most newcomers would have had some degree of exposure to other titles in the MMORPG genre - where such ability bar-driven combat is the norm. And I guess the strive for efficiency is also not unique to RS3 (in terms of ability bar setup with revolution, gearing, training etc.), and one could always go back and adopt the trial and error or do-whatever-you-want methods. The other things that matters is the first impression. It seems like Jagex has been trying to repackage the game, to shake off the negative stereotype, which is still a bit of a stigma within the gaming community (have had some interesting conversation with gamers in rs and others from time to time). I can see they have done some serious work with the the fancy CG trailers, new website, new tutorials and skill introduction, but the core aspects of the game remain largely unchanged from RS2 to 3. But if the potential market of casual newcomers don't have much previous experience in the genre, it does make sense that they prefer the modest version with simple interfaces, combat and skilling systems (...but then why would they decide to join? Especially with the rise of mobile games). If this is the case, then the trailers and those fancy new additions (like cosmetics) wouldn't have made much of a difference. As for the continuation of existing players, I guess most people who have already had experience in other more 'complex' MMORPG, and so the move up to RS3 isn't going to be all that difficult. I think changes are good and necessary (over time), which is why these polls about bringing back things of the past can be quite dangerous. Nostalgia can be seen as denial of the present; a general unwillingness to step out of the comfort zone, and I think this kind of mentality does more harm than good to the game - forever living in the past. If they wanted to change the results to the video in the original post, i.e. to bring back former players and attracting new players, they need to think of something actually new to them, recreating the 'wow!' factor.

it's just a few clicks away if you use 6th age circuit. But then it depends on where you train and how quickly you can return. I just don't find it worth my attention to catch them in the first place (since the nerf).

Quest looks good; I hope it will be as good as described when released. Wonder whether decisions like Zaros' return made during quest affects the whole game world in general (like other players) or just me personally. I really hope its the latter. Does that mean One of a Kind is still off schedule?

I am quite surprised that they implemented the patch so soon, with AH closing in a little under 3 weeks and RoS not until 25th. A friend owed me about 500m, I guess that's no returning of that sum... Anyway, the items that are being dropped outclasses mediocre pre-patch items of the same level. And until RoS comes with the rerolling of stats, most supposed high-end gear will probably survive. Gutted about lifesteal...and CM.

I guess one cannot expect the whole TES series experience be transferred over to the ESO, because of its genre as a MMORPG. The complication that arise as soon as you put more than one player into the quest situation means that the world and the NPCs no longer centre around you (especially in Oblivion and Skyrim). While the presence of other players does take away a bit of self-immersion in the settings, it does reflect the MMO element of the game. The presence of a bartering system of trade as it is in the beta, group dungeons and the guild/group systems, also encourage player to player interaction; although they are not necessarily integrated with the rest of the lore, they do in some way resemble the buying/selling, hiring follower and the guild elements of TES. In effect, ZOS has made an attempt to implement the solo-play, RPG element of TES into the MMORPG; and the result is not bad. I think the takeaway point is that one should play ESO as a MMORPG as opposed to just a solo-play RPG because of the aforementioned elements. As with post above, I feel that there are things that ZOS could have done to make ESO stand out a bit more, rather than just being another MMORPG..and with a premium-priced subscription.

While it is nice that they have act upon the results of power to player polls, I don't think that it is the way to go. The ideas that are raised do not adequately address the concerns of most players, and the results are skewed in one way or another due to majority favouring certain type of activities, schools of thinking or ways of training. Therefore getting a 'yes' vote is not necessarily going to be the favoured option...more like the least objectionable option. What if the player 'don't care'? A random vote based on the presence of a few key words (e.g. 'smithing', 'legacy' and 'bonus') depending on personal play style to get it out of the way, may be detrimental to the whole polling scheme. Don't get me wrong, I think the redesigned capes are quite attractive. But I do not think that doing a player poll to determine whether they (and other polled contents so far) get released into the game is the way to go. I guess if they do decide to replace current capes with the ones in the first post, the current ones may go up for sale in the SGS...

Maybe it only works with ice spells? ..or maybe just chain. I'll have a look later today. editx2: Tried ice and bloodfire spells (blitz and barrage). Seems like the ice spell binds enemy on the spot regardless of whether you are using ability or autoattack - and this applies to all of the basics, asphyxiate and wild magic (didn't test the other ones but I guess they do as well). So I guess if you chain a creature outside of the 3x3, then it would have been frozen on the spot too, confirming 'what you know for sure'. For bloodfire spells, only autoattacks made heal the player. For autoattack, if I set bloodfire on mh, ice on oh and vice versa, then I heal every alternative attack, and freezes every attack. And for abilities, if I set ice on mh and bloodfire on oh, then it freezes when ability hits target, but no heal. So far, I don't think that setting ice on oh and bloodfire on mh freezes target when using abilities. But will have another look later.

I can also confirm that bloodfire spells and the AOE target only take place during autoattack/momentum, but not when using abilities...regardless of whether it is on mh, oh or both.

Try bloodfire barrage and titan, I am usually able to kill all 3 before or right when unstable explodes. If you were attacking the glacor at maximum range, I have found that it is sufficient for dealing with enduring - take a step or two back if you really want to. I usually autoattack it once, then chain it as it moves with the other glacytes, then it usually dies after conc blast. With ss, I can get away with void..but of course, it is less relaxing; virtus is worth upgrading to in the long run.

Not my cup of tea. Does look promising though. Voted just because it's him.

Two steps from Hell lately, somewhat fittingly for my d3 hardcore sessions.

Since the NDA has been lifted over a week ago, I think the game has a lot of potential (based on 3 beta sessions). Story and the characters were like a standard Elder Scrolls game. Layout is quite alike with WoW, and kind of reminds me of PoE too....and the gameplay seem a bit too linear (esp for an Elder Scrolls game - but I guess that's the nature of most MMORPG). Quite a number of bugs and problems but to be fair it's only a beta - and they are not known to make bug-free games anyway. Given how retail copies had to be readied by late March, I'd imagine there will be a large day 1 patch just to remedy the problems found during the last stress test. With its rumoured astronomical budget, it can either turn out to be the best of its kind or an epic fail in spectacular fashion.

Devotion nerf =[ Revolution looks good. and still no quest...

Don't really need 4 ox. I'd suggest getting 4th merchant by dismissing an ox. I also added a wisp in place of another ox. Not enough trio missions to justify keeping all of them. And i think it was said a few pages ago that rudder > crew if you do more than one mission per ship per day.

You gain renown while 'fixing' the building; you could also turn on PvP mode for improved renown gain in increments of 10 instead of 5. Alternatively one can gain renown by fighting either those at one of the sites or caravan convoy of the opposing faction, or along with the caravan, divining. You could also 'deconstruct' the opposing faction's buildings, that gives renown and corresponding construction xp as well.

Cannot say I like PvP element for this event. The armours look quite nice...gathering rate seems to be better than the last event as well. Wonder if we would see turncoats a few weeks into the event for a twist.

This price for next year's gold membership is a little over 15% more expensive for me ($102.5 compare to $88.95). The pressure from increasing costs in other projects such as OSR, there may have been increase in wages, increased demand from various stakeholders and etc. may have contributed to this. The way I understand this Premier Club deal is, like last year, they offer a range of promotional items and other bonuses (Runecoins/Loyalty points) to secure one's money for the foreseeable future (1 yr); if one thinks about it, it's not that much different from practices of internet and telephone companies. But given the pressure in the external and internal business environment to generate more revenue, the prices for these packages would inevitably have to go up. What they do here is quite admirable, by branding a VIP world/badge, they create an illusion of being important/special/elite that some people would succumb to...much like the loyalty programmes for telephone companies, reward schemes for airlines and membership for certain clubs. So rather than seeing the price increase as a petty way to leach more money from players using various promotional/unique items, it could now be seen as a premium to 'enhance your experience'. The exclusive pets seem a bit lame..I get that they are trying to promoting them as very-important-pigs..but I think much of the rs community has matured past that stage. The remainder of things on offer - spins, Q&A, loyalty points and promo items can be seen now, as the only kinds of prestige they can garner from the game to 'enhance' one's rs experience. So I guess in some ways whether next year's Premier Club is worth buying depends on how much you want out of what you pay for a game, and how that compares to your living expenditure, investments (gains/losses) and other income. The special case for bonds is rather interesting...I would have imagine (speaking from my experience) the earnings of those who work in the real world be far higher than earnings in game over the year, for example..so unless one doesn't work or for whatever reason prefers to do so, bonds seem like a significantly overpriced alternative.

Very disappointed with the retro armours..2011 isn't 'retro' imo. Creatures look promising though.

December looks pretty dull to me. Was hoping for a quest; slayer monster could really go both ways depending on time/risk/reward..Black hats? Lol..seemed like they took this idea from OSR. Festive aura could be nice i guess.. Suppose the loyalty points may make the premier club worthwhile..depending on what one can spent them on. Cautiously optimistic about retro armours...seems to be the only appealing thing this month.