Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Ray77 on March 15, 2013, 09:45:35 AM
-
IE Every 5th map players who die will not be able to sorte out of the base the previously used.
-
IE Every 5th map players who die will not be able to sorte out of the base the previously used.
And that would improve gameplay... how?
-
And that would improve gameplay... how?
Why, by making it easier for attacking groups to take bases of course!
:P
-
Disagree to both -1 + -1 = -2 :P!
Extremism is not productive, either way. Promoting either more fights or more captures alone can only be detrimental to the game. I say just keep doing what you've been doing and add a few new maps with more interesting options of gameplay : i.e Canyon fights / More hi alt bases / More meaningful, better defended supply & distribution targets (a proper dockyard / railway terminus / truck depot etc.) Inland rivers where PT boats can run patrols and wreck general havock....etc etc.
-
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/nope_logo2.gif)
-
Nein!
-
Guys, be gentle. Put some duct tape on the bats and don't use rusty nails.
Ray doesn't seem to have hit upon why the MA is constucted the way it is. So he's projecting his previous experiences with war games on the MA and finding it lacking by those standards. I'll bet he looks at the arena from a 2 sided winner takes all perspective and thinks somehow HiTech is a bit daft as a game strategy designer. So this is his, "I can't take the insanity anymore moment".
The MA is about promoting combat. Not about promoting a war to be won by any means possible. Winning the war is one of the possible outcomes if players so choose that day. All of the bases or capturable objects are equal in that each represents an opportunity for a mini war(combat) as the price of capturing or destroying it's ability to aid a near by feild. If the players so choose, bases are used to promote a simple fight for no reason other then to fight.
If you want to conquer the map, you actualy have to get off your kester and prove to others you are the man, so they will follow you into combat. That takes time and a reputation for leading successful missions, creating relationships with others, such that they see your name as the man with the plan. More often it's one or two squads in each country who everyone trusts and joins their missions and initiatives.
This is the secret to the MA's three country side success. Nothing is imposed upon the countries towards an outcome other than ENY and side change limitations. It's up to the synergy of the players each day after that what the outcomes will be.
So Ray, if you want to conqure the map, get out there and become the man. Instead of begging HiTech to impose disabilities on your enemies so you can steal their territories without having to risk your kester. Heck, we get trophies now for just showing up with the acheivemnt system. You need them delivered personaly to your door by HiTech?
What else could you beg HiTech for.....
An easy mode button to make you fly like a tie fighter
invisibilaty cloak
aimbots
fire and forget smart bullets
player point and click game eject mouse cursor to get rid of defenders
map with all CV's
map showing everyone, everywhere land, sea and air
master comm channel to read and hear ALL communications including private
Lazer guided taters in the K4 that will hit anything up to a mile away
Ray, you might be in the wrong game. WoP is down the street one block and turn left into the day care center.
-
The MA is about promoting combat. Not about promoting a war to be won by any means possible.
That may be the stated motive. I've heard it before, but it don't jive. If the MA is all about promoting combat, then why is there a "win" at all? They could just as easily reset the map every two days.
If everything stayed the same except there were no "win" People would still take bases, but now they would have no real reason to. Wouldnt that be more conducive to "promoting combat" than giving the option to "win"?
Either you took his thread all wrong or I did.
It sounded to me like he was suggesting they try something different, and keep throwing new things out there to find better game play, maybe even to better promote combat.
Complaining about the way the game is played without making any changes is insanity.
-
IE Every 5th map players who die will not be able to sorte out of the base the previously used.
Did someone deny your planned base capture??? Repeatedly?
-
And this OP sounds like he's offering a way for them to find a better way, without making a massive change to the game all at one time.
The "better" part hasn't been explained yet. But more importantly, the proposal would in fact be a massive change to the game. (That's why I asked for an explanation in the first place.)
-
The "better" part hasn't been explained yet. But more importantly, the proposal would in fact be a massive change to the game. (That's why I asked for an explanation in the first place.)
I get that. I didn't really care for the whole idea either. When I heard the idea, it reminded me of an idea posted before, that we have periodic "beta" setups to see how new ideas would play out. I'm not talking about massive changes to the game engine, just rules and set ups that affect game play.
"Periodic? could be once a month, or two weeks. Infrequent enough not to be too disruptive to the criers who cant abide a little effort to improve the game, but frequent enough to make some real progress.
But I do Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????ï3~ ï3~ 276706287MltCpy2.10 FILL FILLed Sector; ST500DM002-9YN14 (CC4H) S1D5GMZY Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs??????????????Data Recovery Labs?????????????? has a better balance of pros and cons.
-
And that would improve gameplay... how?
Just off the top of my head, (and without knowing exactly how the base snatching, fight avoiding, hordes work these days) base snatchers cannot send wave after wave of NOE goons or M3s to sneak the base before the enemy pops up in force.
They are forced to come up with missions that work in a single assault lest their support starts falling off one by one with even a modicum of defense by the enemy.
It seems many in the game are in agreement that this fixation on taking bases is Killing game play. So any idea that hampers that fixation would only help. The problem is, it takes away the little strategic aspects the game has to offer. So the question is, what is more important to the majority, stategic game play or the fight?
I think it's both, and I think a way exists to satisfy both desires. But most only want to complain and cry when you tell them they have to step into the unkown or endure some experimentation.
Perhaps you need to take a poll and put up one of those charts you're famous for that rates the players priorities top to bottom. Then you could know how to build a game that best suited.
-
Just off the top of my head, (and without knowing exactly how the base snatching, fight avoiding, hordes work these days) base snatchers cannot send wave after wave of NOE goons or M3s to sneak the base before the enemy pops up in force.
They are forced to come up with missions that work in a single assault lest their support starts falling off one by one with even a modicum of defense by the enemy.
But it works even better in the other way: A blob falling onto a base for a capture will very quickly and effectively kill of ANY resistance without even having to kill the hangars. Remember, that in such a situation it's usually the defender that's having the highest losses by far.
The even bigger problem is something not directly related to "basegrabbing" or the war, it's taking place on a higher level: It's changing all combat dynamics. Regardless if it's being seen as a prolonged base capture attempt or just being called a 'furball' - such a fight between two bases would be much more difficult to sustain, as soon the participants would have to come back from bases far away, sometimes even several sectors away.
So it's killing the action. It's hampering longer lasting ('epic') battles in favor of suprise 'horde' attacks. I'm not convinced that this is a good thing for the game, no matter what our individual gameplay style may be.
-
That may be the stated motive. I've heard it before, but it don't jive. If the MA is all about promoting combat, then why is there a "win" at all? They could just as easily reset the map every two days.
[/quote]
To promote combat. To give us a goal to aim for. :airplane:
-
This describes the personality difference between kids who make their own toys and spend the day having fun in a an empty lot. And kids who demand their parents constantly buy them new toys because they have short attention spans.
The MA is not the Special Events Arena with imposed rules of engagement and defined objectives to win a war between two sides. It's a sandbox with no rules for using the sandbox. Some children are not capable of entertaining themselves even if the toybox is full, and they are free to do anything they want in the sandbox with them. They always want more toys and pathalogicly interfere with the other childrens fun who don't need structure or rules when none are needed. You see this in adults played out between the proponents of paternal stateism versus individualism. They are the ones always crying "there has to be a law" after something tragic happens that any sane person knows will happen regardless of how many laws exist. It's your personal responsibility to account for such things happening in the face of the fantasy that the existance of a law will suspend reality.
The MA is a blank sheet of paper. The hanger is a box of crayons. Why do you need HiTech to place dots on the paper to force everyone to draw the same picture to see who can follow the dots the best? In effect, that's what the Special Events Arena wars are for.
-
That may be the stated motive. I've heard it before, but it don't jive. If the MA is all about promoting combat, then why is there a "win" at all? They could just as easily reset the map every two days.
To promote combat. To give us a goal to aim for. :airplane:
Everyone in this game came here to COMBAT, there is no real incentive needed for that. If anyone in this game ONLY cared about looking at themselves flying a ww2 aircraft on a computer screen, there are sims out there with FAR better looking graphics to look at and you don't have to pay to do it. This game has the repeat business that it does because they like the PLAYING the game. It's addictive. And you can take away the "win" and everything else in this game would stay exactly the same.
They could still take bases, they could still, in their own minds "win the war" by looking to see which country has the most bases at the end of each reset. But they don't get that trophy unless they accept the internal reward as the trophy.
As a matter of fact, that "Knights have won the war" message is like Silat in his leather thong saying beat me, beat me hard. Htc throws this challenge out there every time that message comes back up. Quit tempting people with it and those of us who come into this game with only the thought of flying fighters, would think nothing of it.
And that internal reward is what many "all about the fight" guys think should be encouraged more. Even if it's not as much about "the fight" as they want it, it could lead to just a little less focus on taking bases and a little MORE focus on the fight. A paradigm shift. It would be like the patch for smokers. You still get the drug, but you break the pattern until the habbit is gone even if the addiction is not.
So no, the win does not promote combat. If anything it is the exact opposite.
-
But it works even better in the other way: A blob falling onto a base for a capture will very quickly and effectively kill of ANY resistance without even having to kill the hangars. Remember, that in such a situation it's usually the defender that's having the highest losses by far.
Sounds contradicting but I'm not even sure how the applies to what I said or to the OPs comment.
What is "it" and how does it work better than "the other way"? If you are talking about the "win" all I can say is look at my last post. If you're refering to base restrictions....
The even bigger problem is something not directly related to "basegrabbing" or the war, it's taking place on a higher level: It's changing all combat dynamics. Regardless if it's being seen as a prolonged base capture attempt or just being called a 'furball'
What is this problem you imply is taking place? I can't agree with you if you don't identify "it".
such a fight between two bases would be much more difficult to sustain, as soon the participants would have to come back from bases far away, sometimes even several sectors away.
So it's killing the action. It's hampering longer lasting ('epic') battles in favor of suprise 'horde' attacks. I'm not convinced that this is a good thing for the game, no matter what our individual gameplay style may be.
Correct! If you took the simple undeveloped idea I just threw out there, that is exactly what would happen. If you took time to develop this idea you could find a "better way" that did not have the effect you described.
Judging from the many posts of yours I have read, you are by far one of the most rational and open minded people on these boards, so I have complete confidence that your lack of foresight was a brain fart and you can understand that I am STILL not trying to provide a fully developed idea here. But how's this for a little more detail?
--Spawn's are automatic every 5 minutes? per base, but are not synchronized with other bases of the same country.
--Spawns ARE synchronized with the opposing enemy base to put up an identical force.
--Spawns are nearly constant, occurring at staggered times along front line bases.
--A limited number of combatants are spawned each cycle. Say 20 fighters 20 bombers etc.
--If a player does not want to wait for a spawn at his current location, they may take the next spawn available which would be only seconds away but at a different base. (Odds are the impetuous will choose this method resulting in 20 v 20 engagements that meet loosely over a less inhabited part of the front line.)
--Spawns could be strategically prioritized by players to affect different parts of the combat front using strategic movements or "placement of forces."
--Spawn "wild cards" may be provided to each country. Wild cards may a one per hour vote that allows players to alter the spawn of a particular base to allow for more combatants to spawn for a specified time period. Defenders could possibly use this to break an overwhelming assault, attackers to break a defense.
--Once spawned players can go wherever they want or can work as a team. They can even rendezvous with a spawn from an adjacent base for a larger attack.
--A limited number of UNRESTRICTED spawning may be allowed in certain parts of the map to allow for some random fights.
In effect what you have are mini assaults on enemy territory, but no restrictions after spawn.
This method does not prevent large fights. It does help restrict a never ending stream of players from a country with a lopsided advantage.
Arguments like "I can't fly with my squad" are not defensible because we all know any joint venture results in players sitting in the tower waiting to roll and this would be no different. All other instances where a squad chooses to fly together, results in each member taking off at will so in effect they "are not" flying with their squad, they are intermittently flying near their squadron.
Of course there are still holes in this idea, that's what development is about.
-
Some very good points.... I can remember how easy it was for base captures before the towns were created larger.. we all thought the change would be dramatic and make it harder to take basis... fields are taken down and taken just as fast as before with really no difference in the past.
A change would be a welcomed sight.. without change its just more of the same. Unrestricted access to ords..plane types... little or no eny has all helped foster to the base capture game
-
I can remember how easy it was for base captures before the towns were created larger.. we all thought the change would be dramatic and make it harder to take basis... fields are taken down and taken just as fast as before with really no difference in the past.
There is a big difference. From the very moment the new town was introduced, the rate of base captures radically dropped. The # of captures per player went down to about 50% and the hours played per base capture went up by about the same amount.
The new town layout had the immediate result of much less captures, which hasn't changed in any way since then.
As a side note, it's interesting to see that the new strat system and the accompanying potentially longer downtimes of towns and ack guns in them, had basically no impact on base captures at all.
-
Does your data show an upward trend since the change or is it flat?
Another welcomed change I would like to see.. perks for everyone at the end of a war.... :neener:
-
Does your data show an upward trend since the change or is it flat?
Basically flat with the usual small variations with oen exception: In the very early days of the 'new town' we had even less base captures until the rule went from 100% to 70% and the flags were added. Since then, things have stayed on the same level (which is at about 50% lower than before the 'new town')
I will post the chart at a later point in the stats thread
-
I would like to see HTC change up the hardness settings of most or all OBJ in the game form time to time. For instance, starting with the shore battery why not make it 5700 lbs and not say a peep. Likewise, make the town buildings 156 lbs, ammo bunkers to 820 lbs, barracks to 115 lbs, radar towers to 998 lbs, auto ack guns to 15 lbs, and maybe even change up the CV to say 12,000 lbs and the cruiser to 3000 lbs. Maybe bring down the HQ to 23,000 lbs????
Rotate motate every 2-3 weeks.
remember... have HTC do this without warning. After all, during the real deal it was any persons guess as to how much TNT it took to level a certain structure. Not every town building came crashing down after two HE shells from most of the tanks.
C'mon HTC... mix it up! :aok
-
Did someone deny your planned base capture??? Repeatedly?
My idea is not about base taking. It is about survivor ability and a lack of consequence. I try to play to plan to survive each flight. I guess I was just thinking I something between FSO’s one life and the general MA rules now would be nice to try.
I'm not really into base taking, although I'll help out if the squad asks.
-
All of my base take attempts are done because I want to use that particular field.
-
The greater number of restrictions on players choices for activity in the guise of rules, the less fun a game devolves into. Players don't follow rules. They find ways to game them so they are not bored or burdened by them especialy if they seem to only make napoleon happy. Thats why the MA has very few rules or processes to restrict players. That's also why the AvA is not full 24x7 and the Special Events WW2 war arena is only 3 hours at a time.
The MA is a blank sheet of paper. The hanger is a box of crayons. Why do you need HiTech to place dots on the paper to force everyone to draw the same picture to see who can follow the dots the best?
The numbers and constant activity in the MA 24x7 is due to the lack of rules and restrictions. You cannot force people to have fun by imposing rules and limitations on them.
The MA is not the Special Events Arena with imposed rules of engagement and defined objectives to win a war between two sides. It's a sandbox with no rules for using the sandbox. Some children are not capable of entertaining themselves even if the toybox is full, and they are free to do anything they want in the sandbox with them. They always want more toys and pathalogicly interfere with the other childrens fun who don't need structure or rules when none are needed. You see this in adults played out between the proponents of paternal stateism versus individualism. They are the ones always crying "there has to be a law" after something tragic happens that any sane person knows will happen regardless of how many laws exist. It's your personal responsibility to account for such things happening in the face of the fantasy that the existance of a law will suspend reality.
-
The greater number of restrictions on players choices for activity in the guise of rules, the less fun a game devolves into.
Oh that's right, every game ever invented was by an idiot who didn't understand that. Maybe you should tell Hasbro they got it all wrong.
Players don't follow rules. They find ways to game them
What rules do people "game" in AH?
Thats why the MA has very few rules or processes to restrict players. That's also why the AvA is not full 24x7 and the Special Events WW2 war arena is only 3 hours at a time.
They AvA and special events are the way they are because no one's going to sit out for 3 HOURS. And because it restricts the aircraft that they fly. My suggestion was neither of those.
The MA is a blank sheet of paper. The hanger is a box of crayons. Why do you need HiTech to place dots on the paper to force everyone to draw the same picture to see who can follow the dots the best?
:rolleyes:
The numbers and constant activity in the MA 24x7 is due to the lack of rules and restrictions. You cannot force people to have fun by imposing rules and limitations on them.
The numbers and constant activity are due to the AIR COMBAT AND WW2 PLANES that drew most of us here. We TOLERATE the imperfections in the game, not stay because of them. Imposing rules ALLOWS people to have fun by creating challenges and atmosphere that are conducive to fun.
The MA is not the Special Events Arena with imposed rules of engagement and defined objectives to win a war between two sides. It's a sandbox with no rules for using the sandbox. Some children are not capable of entertaining themselves even if the toybox is full, and they are free to do anything they want in the sandbox with them. They always want more toys and pathalogicly interfere with the other childrens fun who don't need structure or rules when none are needed. You see this in adults played out between the proponents of paternal stateism versus individualism. They are the ones always crying "there has to be a law" after something tragic happens that any sane person knows will happen regardless of how many laws exist. It's your personal responsibility to account for such things happening in the face of the fantasy that the existance of a law will suspend reality.
:rolleyes: Again with childish babble. Those "children who don't need structure or rules" weren't born that way were they? How did they get that way?
-
You want rules imposed on people having fun without rules, becasue you are convinced you know better than they do how to have fun for their $14.95.
Lack of rules is the secret of the MA for 15 years now and why people don't get bored like they do in the rule structured AvA and SEA arenas. You seem pathalogicly incapable of leaving the place alone and playing without any rules. Rules are to punish or restrict activity in the favor of pre determined activities. Or attempt to. Players will not follow bad, boring, or rules imposed to punish them for not acting in a pre determined manner for very long.
With almost no rules or restricitons in the MA players are free to have fun and create their own individual experience. What you propose as rules are restrictions to force the paying customes in the community to follow a collective driven focus instead of individual focuses towards individual fun for their hard earned money. You seem to beleive yourself a better buisnessman than HiTech when it comes to keeping "his" doors open. Your only qualifying statment defines that it's time to sweep out the old and try the new...what ever it is but, the new for the sake of the new.
Your rules would have the same effect on player creativity in the game as does heavy taxation on companies creating new products, expanding, and hiring new employees. Taxes are restrictions on creative activity and punishment of the individual by redistribution of the owners created wealth. Simply by the decision of a thrid party who is convinced they know better than the owner of the company or his customers how their energies and monies should be directed.
So you know better than us paying customers how we want to, or should spend our energies in our limited time to have fun in this game? Wow, reminds me of the people in Washington DC and my taxes.
Who here likes paying taxes just because someone in a far off place tells you to pay your fair share because you don't have a clue how to manage or spend your own money? Or you don't have a clue how to play in the MA?
-
You want rules imposed on people having fun without rules, becasue you are convinced you know better than they do how to have fun for their $14.95. No, I'm say rotate in something new every 5 maps or so...If people say it sucks, get rid of it. I just threw the not being able to up at the same base as an idea
With almost no rules or restricitons in the MA players are free to have fun and create their own individual experience. What you propose as rules are restrictions to force the paying customes in the community to follow a collective driven focus instead of individual focuses towards individual fun for their hard earned money. You seem to beleive yourself a better buisnessman than HiTech when it comes to keeping "his" doors open. Your only qualifying statment defines that it's time to sweep out the old and try the new...what ever it is but, the new for the sake of the new. So why even have a wish list forum? "Everything must stay the same" says Blockbuster video
Your rules would have the same effect on player creativity in the game as does heavy taxation on companies creating new products, expanding, and hiring new employees. Taxes are restrictions on creative activity and punishment of the individual by redistribution of the owners created wealth. Simply by the decision of a thrid party who is convinced they know better than the owner of the company or his customers how their energies and monies should be directed.
So you know better than us paying customers how we want to, or should spend our energies in our limited time to have fun in this game? Wow, reminds me of the people in Washington DC and my taxes.
Who here likes paying taxes just because someone in a far off place tells you to pay your fair share because you don't have a clue how to manage or spend your own money? Or you don't have a clue how to play in the MA?
I think this your attempt to make some kind of thinly-veiled attempt to call me a liberal, when outside the world of cartoon planes my politics would probably make your brand of conservatism look more like RuPaul than Rand Paul.
-
IE Every 5th map players who die will not be able to sorte out of the base the previously used.
ray think about it. the purpose of the game is to promote combat not avoid it.
semp
-
ray think about it. the purpose of the game is to promote combat not avoid it.
semp
No doubt. And I was just using an example of what I'd like. But someone gave other ideas about randomizing the lbs of HE to destroy structures. I like this, right now when a mission goes up, if the guy running the mission knows what he's doing( ET comes to mind), he know exactly how many lbs he need for everything. If he has guys he trusts he wouldn't even need a backup plan. I think that could add to the fog of war experience, but hell, I'm just sayin' rotate some one these ideas in, if they suck and most hate them, get rid of them.
-
Rules need to be kept to a minimum.
-
Rules only have one purpose. To control human conduct or penalise them. As a rule, rules as with laws and taxes tend to only benifit the special interest who begged for them to be implemented. Universaly the originator couldn't give a ratz hairy kester about uninteded consiqueces and tends to never have to suffer the consiquences. Just that what he wanted was imposed on the larger population.
Why do you want HiTech to impose restrictions on other players actions when you are just as free as them to act in direct response or tangently to punish them as their choice of actions leave an opening they will not have the time to address. You cannot be in two places at the same time. All actions have cosiquences.
With no rules or punishments, the consiquences tend to be active disinterest in the bigger picture while favoring selfinterest. Rules in the MA seem to always be an effort to punish paying customers for not paying attention to what the begger of said rules beleives is more important.
Just like laws and taxes in the real world.
Guys who here likes paying any more taxes than you have to? You already pay a $14.95 fee to access a no rules game arena. Why do you want to pay an extra fee of your game freedom which you already pay hard earned money to experience? Based on the wants of a fellow player and his minority of likeminded? Rules that can force players to conduct themsleves in the manner the begger of said rules wants, have to give noncompliance punishment enough bite to make paying customers fear disobaying. Other wise they will simply ignore them or find creative ways to play around them.
HiTech has been very carfull all of these years about how he imposes restrictions in the MA. And you are still paying him $14.95 for access. The OP and supporters are essentialy asking you to vote for them over HiTech to determine how your $14.95 is spent by HTC to provide your game fun. Same sales pitch species politicians buy your votes with by convincing you there is a problem, the current administration is clueless to your pain and suffering, your life is one big bag of unhappiness, so vote for him and his shiney new and improved laws and regulations to save you from what??
It always begins with: Theres gotta be a law. A few innoucuous ones get passed. And ends with you being punished for being yourself in the name of the collective good one morning before you get out of bed.
I've never met a conservitive who had to tell people he was a conservitive. When you meet one it's very obvious and needs no explanation.
-
Rules only have one purpose. To control human conduct or penalise them. As a rule, rules as with laws and taxes tend to only benifit the special interest who begged for them to be implemented. Universaly the originator couldn't give a ratz hairy kester about uninteded consiqueces and tends to never have to suffer the consiquences. Just that what he wanted was imposed on the larger population.
Why do you want HiTech to impose restrictions on other players actions when you are just as free as them to act in direct response or tangently to punish them as their choice of actions leave an opening they will not have the time to address. You cannot be in two places at the same time. All actions have cosiquences.
With no rules or punishments, the consiquences tend to be active disinterest in the bigger picture while favoring selfinterest. Rules in the MA seem to always be an effort to punish paying customers for not paying attention to what the begger of said rules beleives is more important.
Just like laws and taxes in the real world.
Guys who here likes paying any more taxes than you have to? You already pay a $14.95 fee to access a no rules game arena. Why do you want to pay an extra fee of your game freedom which you already pay hard earned money to experience? Based on the wants of a fellow player and his minority of likeminded? Rules that can force players to conduct themsleves in the manner the begger of said rules wants, have to give noncompliance punishment enough bite to make paying customers fear disobaying. Other wise they will simply ignore them or find creative ways to play around them.
HiTech has been very carfull all of these years about how he imposes restrictions in the MA. And you are still paying him $14.95 for access. The OP and supporters are essentialy asking you to vote for them over HiTech to determine how your $14.95 is spent by HTC to provide your game fun. Same sales pitch species politicians buy your votes with by convincing you there is a problem, the current administration is clueless to your pain and suffering, your life is one big bag of unhappiness, so vote for him and his shiney new and improved laws and regulations to save you from what??
It always begins with: Theres gotta be a law. A few innoucuous ones get passed. And ends with you being punished for being yourself in the name of the collective good one morning before you get out of bed.
I've never met a conservitive who had to tell people he was a conservitive. When you meet one it's very obvious and needs no explanation.
edited for violating Reagan's 11th Commandment
-
...I hate authority...unresolved political issues...
You still haven't answered my question, where do the sandbox kids get their sandbox skills? Should I give you a hint? Parents! Come on now, just one more step to go.