Jonanananas
-
Posts
1307 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Jonanananas
-
-
Glad to see they included the penguin hide&seek label for w71
-
I'll be very interested what becomes of this. It kinda feels like it's Jagex's last chance of ensuring long term survival. There already have been so many failed tries to branch off from Runescape in the past, they really need to succeed with this one. From the description in the article, it sounds good, but of course that's no guarantee...
-
I remember those posts. Whilst I don't remember the figure I'm pretty certain it wasn't much more than 300k.
Wasn't it 200k?
I've seen player counts over 200k pretty often about two years ago or so...
-
Well it sounds better because you're used to it.
And it's the most logical as it's a logical order (from shortest time frame to longest) and you can leave out the latter parts if they're not needed (so, leave out the year if it's in the same, leave out the month if it's the same month)
Doesn't mean that the other system is terribly bad though, even if it can lead to some confusion.
-
DD-MM-YYYY is the most logical though. Makes you wonder how the other became standard anywhere. Changing that would still be somewhat possible though. It'd be way worse with the metric system (Though I still think that should be done, over time). Worst that I can think of, and that's really not worth changing is the definition of hours, minutes, seconds to fit into the metric system. It would be superior, but the damage done with the change would be awful...
-
Well, here's the thing. Jagex is a company like any other. Their property remains theirs and theirs alone unless they decide to sell it to players. We as players "sign a contract" when we create out accounts stating that we agree to not being owners of the accounts but rather "users" of the account, but at the end all property still remains that of Jagex's. So Jagex is kind of allowing us to borrow their account for a fee each month and do with it as we please, as long as we follow certain rules/guidelines. One of those rules being the RWT rule.
Lets say i rent a house from someone. They tell me i am free to live there as long as i want, as long as i pay my bills/rent each month, keep it clean and up to shape. The only thing i am not allowed to do is make any changes in regards to painting/building extras or whatever, and that i replace whatever i break.
Now lets say i break 5 windows in the house, paint the whole house purple and build an extra garage onto the house. Clearly i have broken the agreement we had, and that guy has full right to take me to court. This is kind of obvious.
Fishy did a similar thing. He broke the agreement and he decided to RWT anyway. What makes this even worse is that he profited off of someone else's intellectual property when the RWT rule was put in place to prevent that.
I'm not saying that my post is 100% fact or anything, or that it's 100% possible, but that's just my take on things and how Jagex might be able to take action against Fishy.
You have a point regarding why he should be able to be sued - unfortunately that doesn't mean that's actually the case. In most of these issues, it comes back to the same thing - laws regarding virtual items or anything of the like are still scarce. There have been some court decisions favouring regarding virtual items with a value, but so far, that's only individual cases mostly. The law is still outdated for general usage.
I think the possiblity of gambling real money for virtual items for minors through the SoF should be illegal too, but you meet the same kind of restrictions here....
-
I doubt things are going to change very much for World 60 even if the label should be added. We're already publically known and the label will most likely not have a big impact on the number of new/inexperienced hunters nor trapbreakers. Even if the numbers should change, we'd still be able to cope with it - and tbh moving would be incredibly annoying. There would have to be new friend's chats, we'd probably lose hunters who didn't realize the move, we'd have tons of offworlders - it wouldn't be pretty. I couldn't really imagine a situation where moving would be a wise decision for us.
W71 may a bit less known overall, but they also have a lot of hunters and are far from a secret tip or anything like that. They usually have had fewer trapbreakers than us, partly maybe because of publicity but I think also due to the fact that fc's tend to generate more drama and hunters who get angry for being kicked. They've had a pretty serious trapbreaking attack over several weeks(I think even months) recently though, so it happens to them too. But they have coped with it as well, and I doubt they would want to move.
Kim has a good point about Jagex "taking over" player aid - penguins may be the most prevalent example because those are the biggest groups, but the basic question is if Jagex even should make themed worlds based on a certain group at all. It could lead to less new groups being created, to one group being unfairly favored and it could also make the group look like they are controlled by Jagex or organized by them.
-
-World 60 will become an official penguin hunting world.
And about time, too ...
Will they decommission PKing for that world? I wonder ... :unsure:
That would be sweet but I doubt it, support outside the penguin hunting community is rather slim, as far as I have experienced it. It probably would trigger a lot of Babyscape comments and the like. And admittedly there are even some hunters who like it the way it is, although quite a minority. Well, and they said they would only change themes, no mechanics :P
I'm also wondering how the penguin whisperers of w71 feel about this. Bit of a slap in the face that only 60 is becoming a penguin hunting world...
Edit: Just read through the thread...Oh Lord, the drama. I wasn't expecting that much rage. I wonder what'll happen with this. While I don't think it's too much of an issue (Both worlds will probably carry on mostly like they have before, regardless of any labels) I do see a problem with seemingly promoting one group over an other (even if not intended). Labeling both or none is probably wiser.
-
Whoever is banning Fishy's fc's, their time would be far better spent banning the dozens, if not hundreds, of bots with 200m hunter xp. 90% of their betters are addicts and know all the hosts anyway, so they aren't really hurting the fc at all. Whereas the hunter hiscores are just a joke at the moment. Jagex need to get their priorities sorted out.
1)The two options aren't really related
2)Banning the fc's doesn't take long, even if it was the same team working on it, the time saved would be absolutely minimal
3)They already know how Fishy's fcs are being used, whereas they don't know for sure about those bot accounts. Sure, it's quite likely that those with "jgjljhl" names and only hunter xp are bots...but you can't ban because of that, because a human player could do the same thing.
-
On Hazeel:
[hide]
Zemourgal's notes originally read that Hazeel was resurrected, either by you if that was your choice in the quest, or by cultists if you did not choose to help him. When players asked why Hazeel wouldn't show up at the Ritual if you didn't resurrect him, despite the notes saying that he was alive, the notes were actually changed. It's in the patch notes archive:
[qfc]14-15-135-63743300[/qfc] page 12, notes from september 21.
[/hide]
-
1
-
-
Yellow journalism?
Just because I focussed on the conservative bunch of RS that likes to keep things the way they are now? harsh much...
I'm not going to pull any punches.
It's not just you-- this site (the forums, to be more specific) has been pulling negative for a while. Or rather, it's been a strong tone for far too long. I don't think it started out that way; maybe you don't know who binyam is, but I believe him when he told me the Times was his idea although he didn't get much credit for it. He struck me as a fairly easy-going guy, not a malcontent.
I admit I'm being a bit cowardly as this isn't my main persona. But I'm going to say it, flat out, that the Times as a whole needs to move on somewhat. I think Jagex already has. Remember "Biased banning raises eyebrows"? WOW. I was on Staff when that hit, and I remember quite well that Andrew Gower took that pretty personally, and yes, he did threaten a lawsuit (which he recanted on). I don't think he was wholly unjustified; remember the encrypted thumb drives he later promoted? It's a legitimate corporate technology, but players practically crucified him right there on the RSOF, because his incentive dared to suggest microtransaction/RTW-- buy the thumb drive, get some bank space. So then later he sells his shares, makes a R & D company, and people here are wrung their hands "Andrew, you're abandoning us" and the Times can't get off the "Yelps and SoF is dishonorable microtransactions, Jagex lies, Jagex breaks our trust" spiral...
...six year history right there, but...geez, what does the whiny bunch in Runescape want?
Seriously, kids, I swear, you'll get jobs, you'll get more life experience, and this stuff will all seem like creampuffs and powdered sugar. Your employer, your acquaintances, maybe your family will pull worse crap than this, but the world goes on. Pardon my tired, trite, cliché expression, but it is just a game, and having serious fun is okay, but if complaining and moaning-- even under the pretense of reporting the complaining and moaning of others, gets tiresome. My life is already pretty stressful without worrying over a game I'm playing to unwind and relax by.
Love/hate relationship going here. I came to the forums in 2004 but was using the site guides when I started in 2003. Had to pull back after a while, speaking of the lawsuit thing and all the dirty politics that brought out... wow, I can still remember how w13 and Zybez/RuneScape Community jumped on that mess ("Jagex is talking about Tip.It in their news release, we're not like that", something to that effect), thought it was a rabbit punch then, I still think it's a low blow now. Jagex obviously is turning a blind eye now, they're big enough that it's so much chicken feed, but would you prefer another indirect backhand? Zybez/RSC was right, it was Tip.It leaking passwords (I trust my sources), the users did need to cowboy up and get serious about password security, but... c'mon, if you read this far, I think you should feel sick.
Muckraking may get you some short-term attention, but in the long-term, it's already bitten you (Tip.It collectively, I mean), I was there, I tell you, it's a bad plan.
I'll admit, it was pretty difficult deciphering what you just said from all the way up there on your high horse.
I've been lurking in these forums almost since RS2 was released and joined a few years ago so that may hinder my response and understanding of your apparent hatred of Tip.it.
I personally disagree with Storm's article but in terms of the Times overall I don't see where you're coming from. Yes, Runescape is a game intended for fun, but like anything in the world, if people feel strongly enough about something they will voice their likes/dislikes about said product.
Like all people that think they are taking the high ground, you assume that everyone other than yourself is a child with no life experience; wrong.
Your whole statement about a trusted friend coming up with the idea of the Times baffles me. What exactly did he do, come up with the idea of writing? That must be what you mean, because complaining through a thin veil of contempt about the bad quality of the times is entirely subjective.
To add on to that, if you dislike the way the Times is going, there is a specific discussion thread about that here: http://forum.tip.it/topic/306074-editorial-panel-discussion/
I have seen no substantial arguments about what's wrong with Storm's article. Especially considering his article isn't even negative in the way you complain about it - there have been other articles far worse than that (though worse ofc doesn't necessarily mean worse in quality).
-
Player-Owned Ports (very high level)
OMG eastern lands, and pirates. Want.
I was surprised they put a mention of eastern lands in the BTS...unless they suddenly changed their minds (which I very much doubt), we won't be seeing any bit of the eastern continent, it's just the lore explanation where the sailors in your POP get their materials from...
-
Have you honestly not felt the recent tensions between the United States and Israel? Or how Obama is blowing off Netanyahu as "noise"?
I would think it is rather messed up that America is giving foreign aid to Muslim countries that are so anti-Americans, that protests with killing and flag burning is the norm whenever they find something to offend them. Or maybe it's the fact that they let US Embassies get attacked (Hint: Egypt). The United States needs to cut off all foreign aid to those countries. There is no negotiating or building friendly relations with those people.
Of course I've witnesses the tensions. But that's far from dropping Israel as an ally and besides that it's good that he's trying to reign in Netanyahu. The awful policy regarding settlers has made negotiation with Palestineans harder. And regarding Iran, he's a warmonger. Not that I couldn't understand him - when a country that has several times stated how it loathes you almost has nukes, I'd try everything to stop them too. But that doesn't mean war is the right solution. It's the absolutely last thing they should do, only if really everything else fails. Another war would maybe keep them from developing nukes, but it would throw relations with muslim countries back a long time. The reason why so many people there are so Anti-American is because their initial bias (coming e.g. from islam, because they see western culture&style as unislamic etc) is so often confirmed in their eyes with how Americans have acted. I've read a biography/interview of Bin laden's first wife and fourth son. You could really understand how carelessness and acting without though, without regard to another culture has worsened the conflict.
If you ever want to change the situation, you need to take a step towards them. There IS negotiating and building friendly relations with those people. They're not different from you, just in another situation, in another culture. Of course it won't be easy. They won't suddenly be all nice and friendly just because you are. But the last few decades really should have shown how trying to meddle with them too much, trying to force something onto them, and retaliating just won't solve the problem. (One hint: The theocracy of Iran was established after the US-backed Shah was dethroned, because living conditions under him were awful. That's just one of several examples where short sighted policy has come back to damage the US)
There is no way to avoid an eventual war with Iran.
The US isn't creating enemies. The enemies are already there.
Of course there is. There isn't a sure way of acting that 100% will avoid it. But it's definitely not impossible, and until that changes, war shouldn't be thought of.
And yes, the US is creating enemies, see above. Or you could say they've made their enemies into worse enemies, if you prefer it that way.
-
I'm not calling them lazy, they have no incentive to change. One of the crowning jewel's in Obama's progressive policy was to remove the work requirement from means tested welfare. Also, when you have 99 paid weeks to find a new job, where's the incentive to find work?
I see your point here. I don't fully agree with it, but don't want to argue further as I don't know enough how your welfare systems works to be able to do so.
The immigration system is broken, but that isn't what's getting people killed. Spill-over violence from the drug cartels is unacceptable. The only thing the administration has done is further arm them (see Fast and Furious). The entire issue should be taken on in one fell swoop - increase the amount of security at the border, fix the immigration system so that people that want to come here can, and declare war on the cartels.
Sounds reasonable to me. Again I fear I don't know enough to get into a deep discussion :/
When Iran's people were rallying in the street against their government, President Obama should have supported them. If the Iranian government was toppled, America could have gained an ally. He didn't. Instead, President Obama ousted "friendly" dictators, which shows anyone that wants to be America's ally that America might not have your back further down the road.
Supporting them would have lent a lot of weight to Iran's propaganda that the protests were not an expression of the people but the work of foreign agents who get these people to riot. As for ousting "friendly" dictators, the acceptance of those was a mistake in the first place. See e.g. Iran where that leads to. We can just hope consequences won't be as bad this time. But those people shouldn't be denied their right to freedom (Though I agree that western nations/the UN were too quick in asking for those dictators to step back. See e.g. Syria where they offered Assad the "option" to step down, cease the attacks and effectively fully submit to the rebels or to keep on cracking down. What a surprise he didn't accept the offer...)
-
Wow, why is there so much extreme negativity towards Obama? I'm far from a fanboy, I see the appeal that Romney had and don't think he'd be that much worse than Obama, though I'm still moderately happy about the outcome. But I have to say the amount of gloom surprises me...
I'm looking forward to see what can be accomplished in these next four years.
Probably the same thing he achieved in the past 4 years. Nothing.
There are enough things he's done. You don't have to like them, but I don't really see how you can say he achieved nothing. Besides, it's somewhat understandable with Republicans controlling the house of representatives for a good part of his term.
I stayed up til 4:40am (or there abouts) last night watching the BBC coverage down in my University's student bar... The atmosphere there was almost tangible, and the relief and celebration we had, even here in England, was amazing... So much happier Obama is in. I sincerely worried for the safety of the world when I read about some of the things Romney has said over his election campaign.
Still... 4 more years of the best man for the job sitting in the Whitehouse!
In before a nuclear Iran, 20 trillion in debt, breaking ties in with Israel, and support of more Muslim countries.
Iran: What exactly should he have done/do to prevent it? Start another war? Be more restrictive, because that has worked so well? The Iranian government is so opposed to America that trying to get any progress done is unbelievably difficult. And does another war sound like a good idea?
Debt: Fair enough, it's the biggest issue I have with him too. But the last years were the worst recession since 1929. There is only so much a government can do to fix the economy, and without stimulus packages it gets really difficult. Romney also didn't exactly seem to have a great plan to deal with the deficit, though I'd concede that he'd probably do better on this issue than Obama, although the question would be what he sacrifices for it.
Breaking ties with Israel: What? The USA is far from doing that...Obama won't do it either. And tbh, I feel/have felt? at times that some less support, or rather, some equalizing support for Palestineans wouldn't be bad for trying to solve that issue. While Palestina is the more hostile, Israel hasn't been acting like a lamb either and as it's a problem between two parties, you have to work with both to fix it, trying to find some common ground.
More support for muslim countries: Lol? And what's so horrible about that? Everyone has a right to their religion. And while it surely plays a part in how the country behaves, it's far from all of it. Judge a a country/government by its actions, not its main religion...and again, some support might help to be able to work better together
The east coast is still in ruins, the unemployment rate is still high, the labor force participation rate is at an all time low, the United State's foreign policy for dealing with Islamic Extremism certainly is lacking, the security of the U.S. - Mexico boarder still leaves something to be desired, America is still 16 trillion dollars in debt and is still spending the stimulus every year for trillion dollar deficits.
The feds are still flooding the market with dollars to try to kick-start inflation, 47 million people are still on food stamps, and we may have just reached the point where more people are dependent on government and are voting "to get theirs" than are voting for love of country.
At the very least, Obama shouldn't be able to blame his predecessor in 4 years.
Most people will vote for what's good for them (Usually they'll also think it's good for their country). That goes for both people dependent on government and not dependent. If those dependent on government vote for Obama, then it's because they think they'll be worse off under Romney. That's not Obama's fault. It's Romney's, for either not having a working plan to deal with that issue or not being able to convince them that it works. Also, I find this stance a bit appaling tbh. I'm convinced the percentage of lazy asses who really will just do anything not to work and leech of the government compared to those who'd like to support themselves but can't for whatever reason is very small. And if those aforementioned lazy asses vote for Obama, because they're better off under him, then that is a fault in the system, but that doesn't mean the whole system is flawed...and afaik, there's no country supplying welfare that doesn't have this problem.
Debt, bad economy etc., see above.
I'd like to know what exactly you mean with the security of the US-Mexican border. Is this about illegal immigrants or more about drug traficking/war on drugs?
As for Islamic Extremism, what should he do in your opinion to help solve the problem? I actually feel the US has been doing a lot better than in the past, with failed wars, and meddling too much with countries of a different culture. Just because religion and state should ideally be seperate doesn't mean we should automatically go about and try to force that onto a government of a different culture. Yeah, I'd like a secular government way better too. But rather a muslim government you can somewhat reason with than trying to install another dictator, like in the past, (if you go to the extremes), because that has worked so well. And it's the wiser course to try to accept their religion and just try to appeal to their normal logic and human reasoning than alienating them by trying to crack down on their religion(as it will undoubtedly be perceived)
-
1
-
-
The article on the BXPW was nice, though I was surprised to see (almost) no mention of Jagex's statement from a few weeks (months?) past, indicating that there would be no more BXPWs. I also would've wished for a bit more on the flat multiplier, discussing whether it is Jagex's responsibility to keep players from excessive playing (or at least not to encourage it).
One other point, on this section:
"In fact, even the passage of in-game time slowed down-for example, trees from farming that were supposed to take 15 hours of game time to grow may have taken a few extra hours to be ready. Note that the in-game passage of time for most events is not synced to a real world clock. Every game tick (every .6 seconds) a whole bunch of computations are carried out, and one tick of game time is added. Presumably there was some delay, causing each tick to expand a little."
It's not really a fault of Arceus, as he's F2P and thus not familiar with farming - but the described issue has nothing to do with lag or performance problems. The time required to grow a plant depends on growth cycles. Each plant needs to pass a certain number of growth cycles of a certain length. However, if a plant gets diseased, and then cured, it misses one growth cycle. This also applies when a gardener is looking out for your plant. Those trees that were not ready were simply delayed in their growth, which is a normal part of the game mechanic.
That may be one cause of growth delays for Farming, but are you sure performance issues did not also enter into it? I guess performance issues were possibly not to blame in that case, but they were for plenty of others, such as dungeons taking a shorter time by the Jagex clock versus real-life playtime.
It could possibly be part of it, but I've never heard of this happening on a larger scale. The difference shouldn't be that big. I can imagine the clocks not syncing up, but not by that much. Do you know how big the time difference for dungeons was?
-
If you dislike the two-party system and couldn't care less which of the two candidates wins(though I don't see how you couldn't care at all), you should still vote for some candidate. Assuming enough people are doing the same thing, it would lead to more discussion about the system and potentially lead to a reform.
Not voting does nothing. Are you really that indifferent about what happens to your government?
-
The article on the BXPW was nice, though I was surprised to see (almost) no mention of Jagex's statement from a few weeks (months?) past, indicating that there would be no more BXPWs. I also would've wished for a bit more on the flat multiplier, discussing whether it is Jagex's responsibility to keep players from excessive playing (or at least not to encourage it).
One other point, on this section:
"In fact, even the passage of in-game time slowed down-for example, trees from farming that were supposed to take 15 hours of game time to grow may have taken a few extra hours to be ready. Note that the in-game passage of time for most events is not synced to a real world clock. Every game tick (every .6 seconds) a whole bunch of computations are carried out, and one tick of game time is added. Presumably there was some delay, causing each tick to expand a little."
It's not really a fault of Arceus, as he's F2P and thus not familiar with farming - but the described issue has nothing to do with lag or performance problems. The time required to grow a plant depends on growth cycles. Each plant needs to pass a certain number of growth cycles of a certain length. However, if a plant gets diseased, and then cured, it misses one growth cycle. This also applies when a gardener is looking out for your plant. Those trees that were not ready were simply delayed in their growth, which is a normal part of the game mechanic.
-
A lot of posters here have commented on how Runescape doesn't take much skill, doesn't challenge you and how the only deciding factor is mostly time. They have a point with that, but I also feel like they're missing something. You don't have to play Runescape in that way.
Of course, there is no "right" way, and how I've spent my time on RS is probably quite different from your average player, but one of the biggest reasons Iike Runescape is how diverse it is. You can do so much different stuff from just grinding skills. If you just want to grind skills, there's nothing wrong with that. But if you criticize the game, it shouldn't be just on that topic, and honestly, I've never seen Runescape as a game made for competition. There are other games suited so much better for that, as really the only big deciding factor is indeed time.
I never enjoyed grinding and I never did much of it (usually just to get some quest requirement). When I did spend long hours training a skill which I didn't enjoy I regretted if afterwards, but that didn't really happen often. I've still very much enjoyed my time on Runescape and wouldn't hesitate to go back if I had the time.
OK, sure, but put evidence to that point. What is there to do in RuneScape that doesn't require me to have already ground my skills up to a certain benchmark level in order to ensure a reasonable amount of success?
Penguin hunting :P
Or, for a more widespread activity, questing(up to a point). There are a bunch of quests you can do without requirements and enough of those you will reach with not much effort. Or minigames.
Of course you'll have to train skills to get access to a lot of content. But that's not the point I wanted to make. What I wanted to say that it's perfectly possible to play Runescape without constant grinding. It undoubtedly is a part of it, but far from the whole, and I don't think it's exaclty fair to criticise RS for being a grindfest for the whole time. If you're fighting for highscore ranks it is, but you don't have to do that.
-
A lot of posters here have commented on how Runescape doesn't take much skill, doesn't challenge you and how the only deciding factor is mostly time. They have a point with that, but I also feel like they're missing something. You don't have to play Runescape in that way.
Of course, there is no "right" way, and how I've spent my time on RS is probably quite different from your average player, but one of the biggest reasons Iike Runescape is how diverse it is. You can do so much different stuff from just grinding skills. If you just want to grind skills, there's nothing wrong with that. But if you criticize the game, it shouldn't be just on that topic, and honestly, I've never seen Runescape as a game made for competition. There are other games suited so much better for that, as really the only big deciding factor is indeed time.
I never enjoyed grinding and I never did much of it (usually just to get some quest requirement). When I did spend long hours training a skill which I didn't enjoy I regretted if afterwards, but that didn't really happen often. I've still very much enjoyed my time on Runescape and wouldn't hesitate to go back if I had the time.
-
I think it probably looks better in game than it does in that close-up.
-
Obama's strategy in the campaign thus far has been to demonize Mitt Romney. It has worked until now because most people haven't heard Mitt Romney directly - normally just sound bites and talking heads paraphrasing what he's said.
It won't continue to work because Romney just got direct exposure to the American public, and showed that he wasn't a three-headed monster, and he knew his stuff better than Obama.
There were a couple of moments in the debate that I think Romney called out Obama - the tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas ("I have no idea what you're talking about," followed by the President changing the subject), along with "not being specific enough" even though Obama cited several points in his policies and plans.
One of the things that hurt Mitt Romney the most during the primaries was the fact that he was a Republican from a very liberal state - Ideologues absolutely hate bipartisanship. Moderates love it though, and Romney can consistently point out examples of being bipartisan while simultaneously point out examples of Obama being an ideologue.
I'd like to see Obama talk about the 47% remark in the next debate, because I'd love to see Romney slam him about the 14% Obama was pandering to 5 years ago.
Which reminds me - Romney hazing people in high school (50 years ago?) is dug up by the media, but Obama race baiting 5 years ago was covered up. Media bias.
Romney didn't know his stuff better, he straight up lied through the entire debate, even bringing up the lie of the year from 2010, that Obamacare is somehow a government takeover of healthcare. Obama lost because he let Romney get away with lying, not because he didn't know what he was talking about.
As for that video, it was an absolute embarrassment to Hannity. If anything it's a case of Fox race baiting by trying to paint Obama as some sort of Black Nationalist when nothing he said was in any way like that. God forbid someone talking to a group of a certain denomination discusses issues relevant to them...
That's what bothered me a bit...I would've liked a fact checker on some of these issues. Obama said Romney had $5 trillion tax cuts and $2 trillion spending planned, Romney said that was not true at all and he would not add to the deficit. Well, what is it now? That's not exactly a small difference.
Overall, Romney did quite well and of what I've seen from republican candidates, I like him more than most. Most of what he said sounded fairly decent to me. As a businessman, economy&taxes is kind of his field, so it's not surprising he seems to know his stuff. The big disagreement I had with him was on military spending. Partly also on Health care, but then I'm not too familiar with the American system, so I have no clue of how much truth there is in Obamacare taking money out of Medicare etc.
I agreed with Obama on most things, but he wasn't the winner of the debate. Major point for me was that when Obama attacked Romney, Romney retaliated and said Obama was misrepresenting him. When Romney attacked Obama, he most accepted and evaded it.
-
The problem with diesel in North America is that it has a negative connotation of being 'dirty' and, therefore, bad for the environment. This outdated notion is, of course, ridiculous as evolving technologies (like the increasing use of DEF) have lowered diesel exhaust emissions to a fraction of what they once were. It's not unlike high efficiency incineration, which I understand is gaining popularity in Europe but no one over here is even willing to look twice at because they think burning = smoke = pollution.
As for automatic vs manual transmissions, I'll just say this: In the middle of a blinding snowstorm or freezing rain, neither of which are uncommon several months out of the year, I'd rather be focusing on not sliding into the ditch than what gear I'm in. It's still good to know how to drive both, but I know which I prefer in my work truck. ;)
If you however are in that situation with a manual, when used to an auto one, you're in a pretty bad position. I'd prefer driving an automatic one, but learning should always be on a manual imo. Transitioning from manual to auto is pretty easy. The other way around is way harder. Here, if you get your licence on an auto one, you may not drive manual at all.
-
Hmmm I would say I would sell it relatively few money. I've never particularly cared for levels and starting anew would mean I could replay all those great quests :P I would just need some time beforehand, to log onto my old account and tell my friends what my new account is. I'd say for 300 upwards I'd be willing to sell. (But I guess you have to consider I've recently quit/taken an extended break which I might not be coming back from so I guess that plays into it too.)
World 1, 16 both P2P along with 10 others
in General Discussion
Posted
How exactly does it splinter the hunt? W60 is mainly for those who like chat-based hunting, W71 for thread-based hunting. Both are valid methods and I think both deserve recognition. The current communities will stick to their current worlds as they have in the past, and new hunters will see both possibilities and have the option to decide between them.
The peng hunt community is by far big enough for two worlds (there are actually some more being used) and due to the mechanics of how the different groups operate, trying to combine them in one world wouldn't even function properly.