Hugginator

Change the channel.

Use 1, 6 or 11, nothing in between they overlap.

If you have a utility to scan and see what other AP's are in the area and what channel they are on put yours on a channel that is not in use in your area.

[ QUOTE ]
I totally and completely agree with the OP.

I've seen this sort of thing before, and I've watched as it slowly killed the population of a couple of favorite MMOs that I used to enjoy.

It seems "not an issue" to some people at first, but lets face it; the act of actually doing this is AMAZINGLY BORING. Do players want to pay monthly for something dull? No. And there really isnt any denying that fact, no matter how much some may try.

Normally, I love joining up with groups and going out and doing missions. It's chaotic, it's challenging, and most of all, it's great fun. But this....... this is literally NONE of those things. This is for lazy people that arent willing to just freaking play the game they're paying monthly for; instead, they'd rather use exploits.

And yeah, I've heard the arguements before. "Just dont do it if you dont like it". Funny thing though: Nobody that says that actually considers the real problem here. *I* dont want to do things that way, no...... but the simple fact is, if everyone else on the server is just playing the cheap way, well, I wont be finding a team anytime soon. Which rather ruins the experience. THAT is the real problem here. The "farmers" ruin the game for those that want to play normally..... particularly when there's just so blasted many of them.

And yes. I get that this issue just came out. I personally dont think that's an excuse though. Why wasnt this problem discovered in testing and dealt with long before releasing it? It's not exactly the type of problem you just arent going to NOTICE till after the fact.

For the first time since the game's beta, Im feeling bored of it, due to this.

For now, Im just gonna play Everquest instead.... at least there, people DO stuff.


And no, it's not a "doom song". I dont honestly think the game is going to just go down the drain or something. But one way or another, wether the "farmers" like it or not, this problem DOES need to be addressed in some fashion by the devs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Double QFT with a cherry on top.

iirc the beta expires August 1 2009 and after that point you have to reinstall something else.

You don't 'lose' anything, data on the drive can still be read but you cannot boot that OS.

[ QUOTE ]

another kick to the balls is that Microsoft will soon be cutting off support to Windows XP...kind of an incentive to buy vista or 7. *this is insider info from my father who works with computers for a living; I'll try to find an article to back this claim up*

[/ QUOTE ]

If 2014 is soon then yep they will be cutting it off, but till then we will still be getting security patches etc.

http://support.microsoft.com/lifecyc...=9&C2=1173

Heck, they are still supporting Windows 2000 to 07/13/2010

[ QUOTE ]
I have Vista Ultimate 64 on my sytem to take full advantage of my duo quad core Q9450. Will Windows 7 do as much for my box as my current OS, or will it back down a bit similar to XP?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are confused, XP takes full advantage of your CPU, any improvements in the Vista version of the Kernel are micro incremental and in actual practice Vista is generally slower than XP, Windows 7 however appears to be faster than both of the above so far, which is encouraging.

There are some extra registers that could be used depending on the hardware, but its not a night and day thing, so NO, thats it Long Mode addressing is the ONLY reason.

Here do some reading you need it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_mode

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many are checking this out on 64-bit?

[/ QUOTE ]You mean folks are still using 32-bit windows? Gasp.... I been testing it on 64-bit windows 7. No need to ever bother with 32-bit ever again.

[/ QUOTE ]

It isn't a bother, and it isn't really important 32 vs 64 for most people.

90% of the planet will never ever need the 1 feature that 64bit offers, that is access to memory beyond 4GB, even then PAE does that job already just not on Windows desktop versions, PAE on Linux allows memory use past 4GB on 32bit for example.

Of course I use 64 bit all over the place, but I actually mean use it and not have it just because 64>32, or 'I want to see that 500MB of memory, I paid $10 for it'.

All that being said its easy to assume 32bit will be replaced by 64bit someday, but there certainly is no rush, unless the next update to CO* suddenly uses 2.1GB that is.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The point was that as their work grinded on they started realizing their goal (what will now become Windows 7) was so far in the future that they decided to throw Vista at us as a stopgap meaure knowing full well that it wasn't really what they had in mind. Remember that many of the features we are finally getting in Window 7 were originally advertised for Vista years ago.


[/ QUOTE ]

I can't help but disagree. Sure Microsoft isn't as user friendly as they come across but releasing Vista just to stall the community so they could make a finished product, is a bit on the extreme side of paranoia for the programming industry. I still see it as them realizing their "something different" product wasn't delivering what they originally intended and so made their way onto a product, a hybrid version of the original, that would hopefully correct what they were seeing Vista doing wrong.

Vista always was a gamble because you weren't taking a IP from anything else before hand and tweaking it. Sort of like XP to ME, not exactly the same but they both shared similarities. Vista had no predecessor and so in delivering something different, Microsoft was taking a chance. Judging by how the users reacted to this new product, was what I feel encouraged the "revamp".

[/ QUOTE ]

Vista was originally based on XP then they restarted it based on 2003 Server code.

From Paul Thurrott's Supersite
[ QUOTE ]

So why did Vista take so long? Microsoft will tell you that Vista has really only been in active development since mid-2004, when it "reset" the original Longhorn project and restarted development on the Windows Server 2003 code base. I'd argue that this is a convenient misstatement of the facts: Windows Vista is Longhorn and Longhorn is Windows Vista. In short, Microsoft did take five years to bring Longhorn--sorry, Windows Vista--to market.

As it turns out, the reason why is simple. Microsoft screwed up, plain and simple. Each version of Windows is based on the version that came before it and because Windows Vista was envisioned as a kitchen sink release that would include every major new feature imaginable, it eventually teetered and fell under the weight of the technology Microsoft was heaping upon it. That Vista is now based on the Windows Server 2003 code based and not that of Windows XP is meaningless. When the project started, back in 2001, it was based on Windows XP.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

The point was that as their work grinded on they started realizing their goal (what will now become Windows 7) was so far in the future that they decided to throw Vista at us as a stopgap meaure knowing full well that it wasn't really what they had in mind. Remember that many of the features we are finally getting in Window 7 were originally advertised for Vista years ago.

The expectations for Vista got downgraded to become the lameduck bridge between XP and Windows 7.
That's why I never wasted much time with it because I knew MS didn't really take it too seriously themselves.
They were just hoping enough people would buy it to keep making some money while they worked.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah very good, I saw it the same way, once I started seeing the various feature deliverables being scratched off the list, I pretty much wrote it off then, but would have still considered it if it was faster etc etc, but it wasn't.

That is a fast rate, your download will finish in 1-2 hours, don't worry about it, its a waste of time to switch now.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm running Windows 7 (build.7000) with an nVidia 8600GT with the unreleased 185.x drivers from nVidia. You can find them on Google. Windows 7 blows Vista (and even XP) out of the water in terms of speed.

If the benchmarks thus far are any indication of where Windows 7 is headed, it will definitely be the next XP. I think Microsoft glued the ball to their hand this time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty much everything I've read about Vista suggests that it was a "half-finished" attempt at what Windows 7 is supposed to be. In other words Windows 7 was always the main goal but they realized it was going to take so long to complete that they released Vista as a sort of "placeholder" OS until the "real" OS was finally done. We can only hope that it will work out like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not seen any evidence of an actual plan like the above, its much more likely they just plain bleeped up Vista and now are scrambling like mad to 'fix it' with Windows 7.

Its about time they paid more attention to the end user instead of the corporate interests like the effort put into DRM etc, no wonder they are scrambling, after losing ~10+% desktop market share in the last few years and more in the IT/Server market, indicators are that they are going to trim up to 17% of their workforce this month as well.

A new version of a working OS has to be faster, more reliable, easier to use, more secure, and prettier. They failed on most if not all of those with Vista depending on your perspective.

All that being said I still predict MS will share a huge chunk of the desktop market in the future, they are having a tough time competing with even the more expensive Mac let alone the free Linux desktop OS/software available now.

PS: There is a Slashdot thread with direct download links and all 5 keys posted that works in Firefox.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I sure hope the problems can be fixed. It would be nice for ATI/AMD but it would be really great for this game. I shudder to think how many customers have been lost because they were crashing and getting weird graphic errors with a high end ATI/AMD card.

Now we need to wait and see. "No timeline" doesn't exactly fill me with excitement, but it's not a message of doom, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

In all fairness though, things do seem to have gotten a bit better with ATI compatibility over time. Before I switched to Nvidia, I remember the random crashes, missing textures and alt+tab bugs, but since I switched back to ATI recently, I don't have any of those nagging bugs anymore, just the lingering inability to mix FSAA with high water effects or depth of field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree's, the problems with ATI seem somewhat overblown and entrenched in the forum culture.

Certainly the mutually exclusive AA/AF and Bloom/DOF/Water problem still exists but for example I don't like the Bloom/DOF and water on low looks the same as water on high (except for some/all reflections iirc), so this 'problem' doesn't bother me at all.

And I don't remember a crashing problem except for 1 driver version a year ago or so, which was quickly sorted out on the boards here and everyone avoided that version.

Star Strider Forces Registry
Name: Toadly Awesome
Global Contact: @HuggyX
Level of Classification: Lvl 50 Controller
Origin: Mutant
Super Rank & Super Group: Founder and Leader of the Jr Bacon DOOOM Burger Brigade

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Define "anguish."

Under your definition, attorney's, bill collectors, police officers and my ex-boyfriend all fit that description.

It's subjective. Which is why it's not a sound argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm having a really, really hard time believing nobody knows what Jack's talking about. It's true that it's hard to define what level of [blank]holery is unacceptable without descending into suffocating legalese, and I agree that Jack has used some (shall we say) sweeping generalizations in his rhetoric, but is everyone really going to act like they don't know what kind of conduct he's talking about?

Really?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree - emphasis in your quote is mine

I kinda like the label JackButler has put on it too, has a nice ring to it.

[ QUOTE ]
Having only skimmed part of the thread, let me just throw in that I love Gauntlet. Love, love, love it to death. To use it you just have to, like, move around. Do stuff, you know. Don't just walk in and say, "The Tanker is here," and expect every mob in sight to fall in love with you and only you.

Gauntlet is a neat little boost to my aggro drawing abilities. I don't care that it's not the uberest inherent. I find it very
helpful.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in this camp, I find Gauntlet to work great for me, I can instantly turn a few baddies back onto me with 1 hit.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But, hey, you blappers let me know if I missed the mark.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say you did. The reason for such high damage on the melee attacks is the "risk" of entering melee range. Adding range to these attacks almost demands that their damage be reduced to compensate for balance.

Also, "Blappers" would no longer exist... as you just turned all of our key melee attacks into ranged ones. Losing the melees would completely kill my character concept. Some of us don't care about attack chains.

I understand the Blaster debate. However, drastically removing and altering powers at this stage of the game with this magnitude is extreme.. and the Blaster problem is not "that" extreme.
Adding new power options is the way to go. Not removing them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm with PMM on this, taking away my melee powers, any of them breaks my Boss Bashing Build. I can solo +2 or +3 Bosses, I don't generally because I mostly team, but I can and my melee powers are a form of defence for me. So when a Boss decides i'm his target I quite often rush in and melee to get a breather.

So I am completely against the removal of any powers the way the OP described.