Apollo

Jim Hacker: "The trouble with Brussels is not internationalism, it is too much bureaucracy." Sir Humphrey: "But the bureaucracy is a consequence of the internationalism. Why else would there be an English Commissioner with a French Director-General immediately below him, and an Italian Chef-du-Division reporting to the Frenchman and so on down the line." Jim Hacker: "Oh, I agree." Sir Humphrey: "It is like the Tower of Babel." Jim Hacker: "I agree." Sir Humphrey: "No, it's even worse, it is like the United Nations." Jim Hacker: "I agree." Bernard Woolley: "Then perhaps, if I may interject, you are in fact in agreement." Jim Hacker & Sir Humphrey: "No we're not!" Jim Hacker: "Europe is a community of nations, dedicated towards one goal." Sir Humphrey: "Oh, ha ha ha." Jim Hacker: "May we share the joke, Humphrey?" Sir Humphrey: "Oh Minister, let's look at this objectively. It's a game played for national interests, it always was. Why do you suppose we went into it?" Jim Hacker: "To strengthen the brotherhood of Free Western nations." Sir Humphrey: "Oh really. We went in to screw the French by splitting them off from the Germans." Jim Hacker: "So why did the French go into it then?" Sir Humphrey: "Well, to protect their inefficient farmers from commercial competition." Jim Hacker: "That certainly doesn't apply to the Germans." Sir Humphrey: "No no, they went in to cleanse themselves of genocide and apply for readmission to the human race." Jim Hacker: "I never heard such appalling cynicism. At least the small nations didn't go into it for selfish reasons." Sir Humphrey: "Oh really? Luxembourg is in it for the perks; the capital of the EEC, all that foreign money pouring in." Jim Hacker: "Very sensible central location." Sir Humphrey: "With the administration in Brussels and the Parliament in Strasbourg? Minister, it's like having the House of Commons in Swindon and the Civil Service in Kettering." Aired 23 March 1981 ,damn Brittish cynism

Jean-Claude Trichet? He's there right now. He is? Ok i think it's time i crawl back under my rock...

A pity to say the least. I dont think we are the worst in this by a long shot but even so we sent our own damaged goods with tarnished image to become- guess what- EU trade commissioner (Peter Mandelson)! I just get the feeling Europe is becomming the political dumping place for corrupt politicians ,deffinatly the fees that one can earn with an position in Europe attracting some guys who are rather in it for the money.Go to the European parlement and check how many representative's are actually there trough the day ,often the majority of chairs are empty even when there is vote on a important issue. What was the name again of that French guy france tried to put forward some years ago for head of the ECB? Afaik he had quite a dubious history.

That was just a sideremark ,genneraly just saying older people are usually easier nationalistic. Well i was talking in general ,and what you say basicly means "Swedish youth is mainly against a EU of older value's" ,the Swedish youth would probably be more pro for a "young" EU. The point is the somewhat continued decline of nationalistic sentiments among young people and the willingness to join into a larger and stronger entity. I know that ,but plz do not use that silly benchmark that is American politics. It's not because most of our our right is relative left to many outsiders that their arn't clear distinctions between left and right in Europe.In western europe usually the far right party's are very nationalistic ,almost the dominant factor of their strenght. Im not saying culture shouldn't be preserved ,im not quite propagating the burning down of cultural landmarks as ex. ,im simply saying that probably there few to be done about the decline of local culture's ,even if the EU wouldn't exist.If you try to preserve it youll probably end with a mere reflextion of what it once was. The thing is we still will know how that culture was like ,we just probably won't live anymore according to those custom's as we evolve.It's already like that anyhow and it always have been like that in history ,we don't live by medieval customs anymore because modernity have made them obsolete ,but we still know how it was like and we can appreciate learning about it. In africa we can still sometimes see a shamen dance while on a trip ,but he does it for a fee and afterwards he just live's by more modern custom's.We may be saddend by the fact that technicly it isn't real anymore ,but it's evolution you can't stop. I wouldn't be sad if culture in Europe evolved like that ,in the end the more we become assimilated in the whole structure the easier it is to live with eachother and to hold the structure toghether.It's good to preserve an image of previous culture ,but it's also good IMO to addapt to eachother IMO. An example is languaghe ,you bring it up to ,sure in a 1 generation conrtext languaghe assimilation isn't that big ,but see that over multiple generations.I know many people from immigrant background here of wich their children don't speak the native languaghe of their parents anymore. you might be Swedish in Southern france ,but will youre children still be that Swedish if they went to french schools ,have french friends etc...? People adjust their languaghe if they have a need for a different langhuaghe for communication with certain people ,there's a reason why most of us speak english on the internet ,and in the end ,even if it will take long ,i forsee many langhaughe's getting unused in europe after a long time ,probably decade's. I figure the lowlands will be the first to go that way. Example's of assimilation are legio trough history ,often assimilation is a good thing for stabilety and unity ,and while many culture's have gotten unuesd by this progress ,it doesn't mean they have got forgotten.

Let the US and UK have their phyrrus victory ,you can't stop globalization and evolution. As i see it ,the political problem's of the EU these days is mainly due to the ideals and interrests of a dominant elder generation in wester Europe. Go to a local conventions of any far right wing party in West Europe and calculate the average age ,some of the most elder and somtimes staunchest members often were part of some Nazi symphaty group in WW2 ,or analyse the roots of the party... In most West European country's the dominant political wing is often right ,or centre right.in the EU the conservative's are most dominant.Even the social party's in Europe are often pretty mostly centre left or even a bit right.The party's adjust themselfs to the needs of those groups in society that have most power ellectoraly. Wait 30 years and the demography of Europe is tottaly different if not only for a decline of a few dozen million people in Western europe ,heck if not 100 million.Belgium has now almost 11 million people ,it's expected to have 6 or 7 million in 2030 if we don't get additional immigration.Immigration will be a must ,there goes youre national identity ,prepare for a European multicultural society i would say as people will move all over Europe probably. I forsee the growth of the European identity ,it's already growing ,especially among us young people ,who often talk to people all over the world by thing's like internet wich is much more used by the young generation.Most of us think more mondial ,and probably frankly couldn't give much of a damn about the nationality of their tiny insignificant country. It's not like you can stop this evolution of cultural breakdown and assimilating into a multi-culture ,see how easy large portions of American culture has penetrated into the European country's during the last decade's.Human is a flock animal ,and essentially we were born human not for ex. Luxemburgian.That doesn't mean all local culture is lost ,only a portion.But local culture gets lost anyhow ,my grandma for ex. her local dialect vocabulary is a thousand times richer than mine ,when her generation dies most of that local dialect dies to.It has always been like that in the past to.

So far these concerns doesn't seem to be nessecary ,Since Poland joined the EU i havn't seen a mass influx of Poles here ,neither did many company's leave for Poland at that point.As for Poles working at a low costs ,those thing's will change soon to.Portugese and Irish were also cheaper to employ 15 years back ,but their membership of the Eu have given them such an economical rise that these days the average salary is about the same there as in most of Europe. Basicly Europe has proven in the past that it can turn somewhat underdeveloped county's in developed ones to the standard of the rest of the EU ,Ireland ,Portugal ,Greece are a few example's ,I figure within here and 10 years Poland will have progressed a lot to.Though granted the costs for modernizing poland is hihger with a poppulation of aprox 40 mil. Can't say what people in other country's feel ,but in Belgium atleast most people are happy with the euro. Yeah Brussels and regulations ... don't tell me about it.As Belgian i know all to well how absurd this country can be in administration ,you have to fill up 10 forms atleast to be able to even let a fart in this country. But Brussels isn't filled with Belgian politician ,there are representative's of every country there ,and they make the regulations. However wheter it's Brussels or Strasbourg ,i would like them to finnaly put all European institutions in 1 city instead of 2 ,wich is really a big problem in Europe today. Afcourse it's like that because the French really had to have these institutions in their own country ,damn chauvinistic French politicians are always first to demand certain possitions in Europe ,and the candidate's they put forward often have very dubious pasts. NATIONALISTS are concerned with this ,not the overall Eruopean ,and it depends from country to country.In Belgium many people would rather assimilate in Europe than actually stay as Belgium ,understandably as really there doesn't exist such a thing as a "Belgian". (except or King maybe) There are a lot of EU member state's with a low patriotic or nationalistic feeling ,country's with few identity. But country's like the UK ,France or Germany have more nationalists ,because their national identity is stronger. Another thing to note here is that usually mostly people from older generations are Nationalistic ,younger people are usually much more pro-Europe.The elder generations make the majority in current European demographics (damn WW2) ,but once that generation is gone the picture will be different. Yeah ,like Health and safety regulations ,or regulations on amount of pollution made. So what ,should be just let the company's do what they want? Goverments putting rules and regulations on company's is normal over most of the world ,and usually this means additional expenses for the company's. It is IMO ,personally i think Europe is less ready to make steps to further political intigration than further economical intigration. (the last has has so far being very benificial for the EU member state's) Nationalism and local politics are to blame IMO ,politicians of a certain country will often hold to a very specific issue because of local needs ,thus making a Europe wide consencus very hard ,and when a consencus is then reached it's very complex as it has to take into acount many very specific issue's in individual member state's.

By posting such thoughts on the forums you are reaching BIS, there can of course be no guarantee that you will receive feedback or even that any/all suggested ideas will be implemented but we see everything  I was just scared that the suggestion might go unnoticed , what you said was all i needed to know. From here on ,ill see if the thought was technicly/commercially feasible if BIS implements it ,if not then i know BIS had it's commercial/technical reasons not to implement it ,and i trust BIS in their judgement.

Well i'm sticking to my guns. No pure MMOG plz where one has to pay monthly fee's ,and i think BIS wouldn't go MMOG anyway.But plz expand the amount of players that can compete in MP as much as possible. Therefore my proposition of a server grid option ,though i don't know how easy it would be to implement it ,and how much additional performance a second server could offer ,it all depends on how service's can be spread among servers and how certain servers could be specialized for a certain task.I figure the bottleneck of current MP gaming limit's is in the amount of net connections a server can handle that is already performing dedicated game service's ,then a conection server might actually increase performance a lot depending on certain factor's ,like network packet sizes and amounts over lan ,and multiple connection servers even more ,but in the end that would be limited also eventually by the performance of the dedicated server. In the end that is what MMOG's do ,spread workload over multiple servers ,however MMOG's aim for player numbers in the thousands and game enviroments sometimes expantionally larger than thos of OFP ,thus they need a lot of servers to create that game world for wich then they have to charge the players for the servers. Allowing customizable server grids would offer a new system to larger online games ,not a MMOG but a game with the posibilety to allow more players online than any other NON-MMOG MP FPS game out there withought additional server costs.Players would create and support the semi large server grids ,not BIS ,so it's no additional costs for them ,the can offer a semi MMOG withought having to charge their fanbase for servers ,thus not hurting sale's.the supportable players would be only in the 100's ,not in the thousands ,but for Ofp this is perfect. IMO that would give the sequal of OFP1 another substantial advantage over it's competitors ,and it would very much fit it's scale to allow 200 players or more (depending on private server grids) on an Ofp map. Also ,IMO ,if BIS wants to go further in creating a realistic war platform ,then increasing the number of unit's on map is a must ,afterall most opperations in RL easily consists of a few hundreds of combatants.Their dynamic SP campaign is a good direction to that goal. IMO allowing a customizable server grid system would offer OFP players flexibilety in that area that is otherwise comon for OFP on many other area's ,one of OFP's major strenghts is it's flexibilety. I really hope i can reach BIS with this idea ,it doesn't have to be implemented and i can understand when it wouldn't be technicly feasable ,but i would really like BIS it's feedback on this proposition ,as to know where i stand with this.Such a server system would really be my most preffered addition to Ofp.

A few bugs: -When you climb the mosque ladders you climb thme backwards -Some of the mosque stairs are somewhat imbedded in the mosque wall -You can walk trough the round thing's on the mosque roof -certain parts of the map make jeeps go a lot slower ,not due to il or anything ,just some places where the jeep tends to fall into the ground and bounce -Had some errors when placin some unit's -The helux jeep it's MG looks bugged when looking to gunner view Overall a VERY nice map ,i love it's look ,and the buildings are very neatly made ,model and texture's.I also love the house placement in some towns like Jalalabad ,where you have a little labyrint of small alley's around the mosque.Performance is also very good ,probably what i most like about this map ,it performs as well as the normal Everon. Good job ,i'm sure this island will be highly appreciated when it's fully finished.

The thought i have with the French referendum result is that people more voted against Chirac than really on the EU constitution issue. As Europe is really a complex instution ,i wouldn't be surprized if Most french ,or for that matter most people of any European member nation ,didn't know what the EU constituion is mostly about.Personally i know i dont understand it for some parts neither ,and AFAIk statistics show that over Europe in general people don't know much about it's institutions and workings. Therefore i was not really a pro to referendum's about this constitution. I do not live far from the French border and often travel trough France ,My brother is a truck driver and is there a lot to ,were both interrested in politics and we like to talk about French politics because it's quite different in it's politics than most other country's. (France being the bastion of the Republic and its value's) From what we heard of most French ,Chirac is perceived as a corrupt politician ,a lie'r ,deffinatly some story's i heard from his day's in Paris leave that impression ,like using city funds to make purchases for their intented private use. A pitty that many Western European political establishments are not very much liked by their own poppulace ,or for that matter that in so many European country's the political establishment is quite corrupt ,i know Belgium is not that much better than France ,and i deffinatly know Italy is terrible.

Don't compare Ofp to JO. But having a flexible server grid system is like having a JIP option ,it's handy for those who want it and it can be kinda turned of for those wo rather not have it.A server grid system might allow a lot more players on a server ,but it's still possible to put a limited server online wich host games with a server limit of for ex. 16 player.Basicly it's to the server admins own discretion.And given the costs of maintaining only 1 server already i figure there would still be a lot of "1 server" servers.But atleast that would be a flexible system of expanding a server depending on player needs. There is a segment of players of the Ofp kinda games that would like the possibilety to play the game with considerably more people. Games like WW2 online have a fair fanbase even for a MMOG wich costs a fair bit in monthly fee and wich isn't all that great graphicly.If Ofp could create a Server grid option it would make it kinda a semi MMOG ,it would never have a server like the WW2online mainfarme ,instead of thousands of players probably only a few hundreds could maximaly play ,but that would be a high number for the normal FPS game's out there ,it would be free compared to WW2online ,and it would suit IMO the Scale of OFP as we fight over large but not gigantic maps like WW2online. Implementing a "pay to play" system would keep a large mass of players of actually buying the game probably ,thus would hurt sales.

Well there may be other ways than persistant game worlds and developer run servers. Some years back i had a bit of talk about that in the ofp2 multiplayer suggestions thread and some people agreed that maybe an option to put servers in a grid to distribute the workload to multiple pc's might improve MP performance while maintaining game flexibilety. These server grids would be created by 3rd party groups like gamers and clans ,and wouldn't probably involve that many servers.Basicly the server load could be distributed thus allowing more people to play the same game session online depending the number of servers of the grid ,or array. But Ofp wouldn't be default need multiple servers to run an mp game ,it would be up to the third party how many server he wants for his specific game. I don't think such an option wouldn't be ultimatly that hard to implement ,IMO it would deffinatly be a very worthwile feature ,but afcourse it has it's limitations.Realisticly noone in the Flashpoint is going to create hughe grids due to the sheer costs ,but you would have a larger number of servers that distribute the server load over 2 or 3 servers.Neither would the increase of the extra server mean an increase of performance in the same quantity as the one delivered by the first server ,but it would be noticable ,and a grid of 3 seververs might alow something between 100 and 200 players depending on the netcode and base mp performance of the game. Such a system IMO offers most flexibilety to player demands in player numbers for an MP session. Atleast i like the fact that BIS fullfilled atleast one of my suggestions for the game ,though i doubt that they duid it for me personally ,in the sense that i wanted to have more life and crowd in the game ,i always had the opinion that Ofp allowed to few objects and people on a game compared to the space it offers.These dynamic campaigns look a wonderfull way to me to give Ofp layers the impression that the island is full of life.

1 time in CTI ,was gunning an T72 with AI driver north of Monti and was shooting at a west tank just while the tank was driving ,i missed it but the shell flew up all the way to somewhere near levie where it did hit a west player driven jeep.i had to ask that guy where exactly he was shot ,just random luck.

Be it as it may that CM did some work at OFP to ,nevertheless the nature of their work doesnt grant them that much slack as concerning campaigns ,well ,we all can make campaigns.The Spanel brothers engineered the engine and the core wich was essentially the most selling part of this game. This does remind me with what happened to Sid Meier's team a bit after civilization 2.Then there was a whole debacle with the publisher about the name to ,it posponed version 3 of the game and in the meantime psuedo clones came out like Civilization : call to power. Not that these clone's were entirely bad ,there were some good elements in it to ,but consumer support was bad and probably sales to.Civiliation III however ,the new version created by Sid Meier (a saint in the strategy gaming world ) sold millions of copies in virtually no time ,becoming one of the most big gaming franchise in the industry. But then ,long lasting fans of the Civ game's knew who was the creater of this jewel ,and like i most of these people in the 90's would have bought anything with the label on it "Sid Meier presents..." ,because anything with that label had to be just a fantastic game (thing's like pirates or Gettysburg) .About any gaming magazine out their mentioned in their reviews that civilization : call to power was not a Sid meier product when it was released ,and the large majority of the civ comunity knew what that ment. What i mean is in the end people prefer to buy quality and most of the time's they know quality when they see it.When BIS released their OFP1 demo it paved the way for hughe sales ,because the demo was so obviously fantastic.If BIS creates an equaly innovative game in 2006 then it's demo will convince large numbers to buy it anyhow ,and this debacle will have been irrelevant. The best way for BIS to solve this problem is simply to release a game that is as equally impressive or better as Ofp1 was at the time of its release ,and that is not nessecarily bad for the community ,though i trust BIS to be on the good way anyhow.Atleast ,the debacle about the 2 versions might inspire BIS to overload us with screens and game media. Â

Yep, ironically EiS is slated for a relase between Q4 2005 and Q2 2006. I made the same point a few posts up. Â You think EiS could be CM's Ofp2? Some info on EIS and it's Dev's: Hmm ,the makers of hidden and dangerous and mafia series ,not exactly a tottaly small frie in the gaming developing industry i'd say ,and while some of the feature's are similar to Ofp's other's arn't (like deformable terrain) ,i figure especially since EiS is already announced under the destinct name of Enemy in Sight that therefore it won't change ,and was never ment to be an Ofp2 in name ,but it's screenshots look very similar to Ofp ,and it could be that the EiS developers have gotten some mterial of the BIS engine from CM?

Well OFP1 sold that many copies purely on it's quality ,it hadn't have a famous name then ,it was made by an unknown studio and promotion was minimal almost. We bought Ofp1 becaus it was so original and true to our desire's of an FPS game ,if BIS make's it's future game as attracting in it's time as Ofp1 was then it will sell over the million copies easily. If people will see astonishing ingame footage of a BIS sequel wth equally astonishing game feature's then name won't matter much to someone who even maybe never played ofp1. But the new BIS game needs at least a bit of promotion ,if it can get a very good review from game review site's and magazine's then it will probably sell a lot regardless of other factor's. There are also quite some fans of Ofp1 on the game magazine's staff's ,they might know the BIS-Cm story and probably would prefer BIS over CM to.If much of the gaming media is on BIS side then OFP1 true sequal will have much less problems ,however while some game reviewers prefer to praise the truly good games ,others probably wouln't mind to take some cash from a publisher to put a certain game more in the attention ,some game review site's are even blatantly the promotion guys of some publisher(s).

if this is all true ,that is Codemasters owning up the tiletle Ofp2 and using it for an own product ,then i am quite mad on them for that. Yes from a legal point of view CM has the rights and then some urge to give them credit and see what their Ofp 2 looks like,but for a designer and consumer point of view this a horrible situation. This debacle ,especially when CM releases a Ofp2 before BIs does ,will affect BIS in sales for their upcomming sequel ,undoubtedly.Yes BIs has a staunch community ,but one has to take the community in it's right value.The forum of a site like Ofp.cz has 5000 members ,i figure BIS forum's itself have a few 10.000's + a few 10.000's lurking as guest.A topic like "OFP2 and "armed assault" - what's up?" had 40.000 views of wich many looked at the topic multiple times.Ofp sold AFAIK about 1.5million copies.The spread of information from BIs site will reach a few 100.000's of people ,but never the full 1.5Mil. I would purely guess about 40 to 50% of the Ofp fans won't know about this debacle when a CM releases an Ofp2 ,and will rely more gaming magazine's and on the spot analyses to figure out that CM Ofp2 is not BIS it's sequel.Atleast informing the game magaine's thuraly about this debacle so that they mention it could be important. Atleast in the marketing sector it's AFAIK a common perception that changing the brand name of something very succesfull is probably going to hurt it's sales. Another thing is that noone of us really wants CM to produce a Ofp2 ,sure they might do a better than half assed job ,but still ,who wants to see a star wars film not directed by george Lucas or a civilization copy not touched by Sid meier? I do not want any other Dev team than Bis one's. Yet i think that a Bis sequal to OFP that amazes anyone who reviews it will sell majorly whatever really ,BIS made their first succes withought much name or promotion neither. In the end though ,if this story of CM owning "Operation flashpoint" and wanting to release an own sequal is true then all i can feel is that this is extrememly stupid unwise ,IMO Both BIS and CM can only be hurt by this ,but CM is bound to be hurt more ,while coorperation or for ex. allowing BIS to buy up the operation flashpoint name could be atleast profitable for both. Obviously ,a game released by BIs with the nmae Operation flashpoint 2 that stun's everyone on seeing or testing it will ultimatly sell a excessive number of copies.

By 2010 the USA will probably have more advanced drone's that cut down greatly on the needs of humans to wage war ,there are already airborne drones with limited weapons onboard and tracked ones armed with MG. But then i think Ofp2 will just offer a wide range of comparable vehicle's on both side's just like it did in Ofp1 ,even in Ofp1 BIs balanced out the unit's for gameplay reasons ,T80 and Abrams had about same value's ,then there was M60 and T72 counterpart ,BMP2 and M2a2 ,vulcan and Shilka ,su25 and A10 and etc. ,if Bis understood the value of balanced side's in the past why wouldn't they implement it in the future? By the time Ofp2 comes ot Btw most of the major mods wil have seen completion ,they wont probably take much work to Ofp2 ,so well probably be able to play practicly any time period by the time Ofp2 has come out for some month's.Ofp2 will also give more potential to those mods due to more soldiers being able to be on field at the same time ,deffinatly for infantry big wars like American civil war or WW1 this will be great. So in the end i do not care to much about the game period ,I'm confident that Bis will make it balanced and that the modding capabilety's and community progression will be there to allow us play Ofp2 in a wide variety of time periods.

Are you trying to pull our leg? Â PC = Personal computer (platform) ,just like XBOX is an other platform.PC has nothing to do with it's name. Mmmm porobably. Yes i know the cold war stopped with the collapse of the USSR in 1986 ,i actualy wrote civil war crises ,although i wouldn't really know yet why a civil war would let west and east fight it out over various area's in africa and Azia.

What about: Guba's return Everon 2010 Mission Malden Fighter's in arms (FIA) civil war crises War over nogova Open Fighting platform 2 (ofp2)

They do exist!? *Walks up a few flights of stairs* *Phew* Â I'm safe. Watch out i heard they got hoverboards to!

Exactly my feeling to. For me BIS doesnt have to create high quality models and texture's ,indeed they cant compete with the addon quality of the Ofp community ,simple because it's has much more addon makers ,hundreds of them ,and they produce quantity's of addons far larger than any company could in the same time.In addition some artists here are just better than there is to be found artist in any game company. But i think BIS all to well knows the value of its addon community.Ofp got a hughe addon community because it offered a potential others games didn't ,that is easy costomizabilety in addition to large game area's ,abbility to control multiple types of vehicle's good performance in Mp and Sp. To appease most of it's commuity support all OFP has to offer is the same engine potential Ofp had to offer but improved ,and with somewhat better graphics.Thing's like better physics ,house and vehicle destruction ,house usage and walking on ships ,armor value system ,netcode and mp configuration ,and afcourse a larger modification potential are more important than fancy graphics. And afcourse ,current Ofp mods should be very easy to convert.I don't think that will be a problem. I think bis is wise enough to understand that the longetivety of Ofp 1 is mainly because the game offered such a potential to modding ,and theyll make Ofp2 an improved platform for modding because they know it will greatly improve the value of their product. Many games with big addon community's score better financially these days.The impact of modifications like Counterstrike on the sales of half life were probably enorm ,And the Half life 2 dev team made sure that mods like CS and DoD could easily be converted to HL2.Most good games have an good addon community extending the longitivety of that game for years and making interrest for a sequel larger ,modding community's are a significant part of the pc gaming industry these days.

Onward technocrats. Sure ,they arn't creating the build materials themselfs ,but then they could create a fully automated material suply module that supply's the material and a automated material creation module maybe ,that combined with a material extraction module .... and afcourse an automated module cration module. With the technological acceleration these days ,thing how much we have progressed the last 20 years in the field of electronics ,robotics ,software engineering ,and how much faster we are going to progress in the next decades.It won't take that long anymore before robotics can outperform most humans in most fields of labor ,pitty we still got the money system.

Sorry ,then i misinterpretated youre words.Maybe i misinterpretated it due to these comment: And the fact that these regions "decide the political course" ,is because they are most populous ,any alteration to this would also mean an alteration to a 1 person 1 vote system under a popular vote system ,probably i misinterpretated this because you still talked from the perspective of points allocated per state. thus ,my Apollo-gies

  That's not representative democracy. That's just "There are 5 of us and 1 of you, now you'll do as we tell you." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy cut and pasted text: ------------------------------------------- Representative democracy comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies—i.e., not necessarily as directed but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances. some further on topic snippets: Tyranny of the majority This issue is also discussed in the article on Majoritarianism. Whether or not there is a very broad and inclusive franchise, majority rule may lead to a fear of so-called "tyranny of the majority". This refers to the possibility that a democratic system can empower elected representatives acting on behalf of the majority view to take action that oppresses a particular minority. This clearly has the potential to undermine the aspiration of democracy as empowerment of the citizenry as a whole. For example, it is theoretically possible in a liberal democracy to elect a representative body that will decide that a certain minority (religion, political belief, etc.) should be criminalized (either directly or indirectly). Proponents of democracy make a number of defenses to this. One is to argue that the presence of a constitution in many democratic countries acts as a safeguard against the tyranny of the majority. Generally, changes in these constitutions require the agreement of a supermajority of the elected representatives, or require a judge and jury to agree that evidentiary and procedural standards have been fulfilled by the state, or, very rarely, a referendum. The separation of powers into legislative branch, executive branch, judicial branch also makes it more difficult for a small majority to impose their will. This means a majority can still legitimately coerce a minority (which is still ethically questionable), but such a minority would be very small and, as a practical matter, it is harder to get a larger proportion of the people to agree to such actions. Another argument is that majorities and minorities actually take a markedly different shape on every issue; therefore, majorities will usually be careful to take into account the dissent of the minority, lest they ultimately become part of a minority on a future democratic decision. A third common argument is that, despite these risks, majority rule is preferable to other systems, and the tyranny of the majority is at all events an improvement on a tyranny of a minority. Proponents of democracy argue that empirical statistical evidence strongly shows that more democracy leads to less internal violence and democide. This is sometimes formulated as Rummel's Law, which states that the less democratic freedom a people have, the more likely their rulers are to murder them. ---------------------------------------------------------- What i point out is that what i said is basicly true in that 1 vote per person with equal weight is normal to the deffinition to of representative democracy. These snippet's point out a lot of thing's that i tried to point out earlier: -Majority rule is more democratic than minority rule -Even then there are thing's in place to make sure that the rights of the minority's are represented to ,interrest groups ,constitutional rights ,etc. -Seperation of powers means that while one president is ellected by minoity ,there are still things like a senate where power is devided according to ellectoral power.   And the farmers feed them and the miners give them the materials to produce products in their factories.  Though they are just stupid hicks right? They shouldn't have an equal say. I didn't say they are stupid hicks ,dont bend my words like that.  They have an equal say ,each miner and farmer gets 1 vote ,just like any urban dweller.Individually the power is the same. giving every farmer and miner 10 vote's because they are only 1/10th of poppulation would make it unequal rights.   I never said I don't like their right to vote. I think it's wrong for them to have the entire vote. Yeah there are more of them, so how does that justify them having all the say on how the nation is run? Sounds like the law of the jungle to me. But then what should be the deciding factor on who gets more votes than an other?Poppulation indensity? Looks to me as a rediculous deciding factor and thus makes my point of gays vs non gays all to valid.Btw may i point out that in land mass Alaska is about equal to 1/3th of the USA. What the hell does sexual preference have to do with anything  you make the point that ellectoral power should be decided on other factor's rather than poppulation number of a certain area ,then the question arises on wich factor's ,you point towards the rural minority vs urban majority ,but rural minority is not the only minority that by youre logic can be overuled by it's counterpart majority. There is also a non gay majority vs a gay minority ,should gays have more ellectoral power because otherwise they could be ruled by the non-gays? There are many majority/minority differences in society ,in Europe demographicly the older gennerations are in bigger numbers than younger generations ,that doesn't mean that the young gebneration is that much more dominated by the older generation ,or that we therefore have more right for ellectoral power. Try to give me an ethical reasoning why a rural minority vs a urban majority should be trated otherwise in society because of the thought that "the majority can rule the minority" ,but why this same logic wouldn't apply for other minority's like gays wich for wich the same "majority rules over minority" thought would apply. What i wanted to point out is that you have a very small view on how a representative democracy could work ,their are many systems possible ,atleast in Europe representative democracy "mod rule" works with a vote for every person withought therefore minority's being more overruled than in any other system.