Edgwyn

I'll take a big slice of the third one.

It all depends on how many of the Japanese were willing to die. At Iwo Jima, we had a three to one advantage in personnel and a huge advantage in equipment. US KIA were 1:3 Japanese Empire KIAs. Okinawa, US KIA were 1:6 enemy KIAs, with at least one third of the enemy force being minimally equipped and trained civilians. If just the remaining Japanese military units had fought to the death, then a 1:10 ratio of KIAs would have resulted in 100,000 US dead. If 5,000,000 civilians had fought (certainly possible), at a 1:50 ratio would have meant another 100,000 US dead. The official estimates by folks who studied it more than I have were 200K-600K US KIA. My WAG of 200K US dead, would mean around 500,000-1,000,000 US WIA. Japanese losses in the millions of KIA. And all of that is assuming that there would have been a surrender at some point, not a guerrilla war.

I suspect that it will be a balance between his health and how he feels versus sales. If he can remake the Exile/Avernum and Geneforge Series' and get good sales numbers that is a lot easier than creating a new series.

Here is my stab at it. The war lasts until late 1946 or early 1947. The USSR mainly stays out of the fight for the home islands and concentrates on territory in mainland Asia. At the end of the War with Japan, the US has taken a lot higher casualties then we of course did in real life and is not in a position to object when the USSR ignores the dividing line for the occupation of Korea and maintains control of the entire peninsula through the establishment of a Communist puppet government. The ROC falls a little faster but still successfully evacuates to Formosa. Without a divided Korea, there is not a Korean war. UN peacekeeping activities occur at a dramatically smaller rate than in real life. The US economy is weaker in the late 1940s and early 1950s due to the loss of an additional 2-3% of the productive workforce due to WWII KIAs being 2-3x as high as in reality. While still a small percentage compared to Germany and the USSR, this results in another wave of isolationism. While the US does join and host the UN as the only country capable of doing so, the Marshall plan is greatly scaled back and US support of NATO is less. The Berlin blockade succeeds in causing the evacuation of the UK, France and US occupation forces from West Berlin, but results in the reinforcement of US forces in the remaining area of West Germany and a falling out between the US and USSR. USSR support for "revolutionary" and "anti-colonial" groups in the 1950s increases, US support for "democratic" groups is initially low, but increases as the 1950s continue. The successful elimination of French Forces from Vietnam emboldens the USSR and PRC even more. 1. The US successfully developed at Atomic Bomb but did not use it. While the USSR is familiar with the results of the Trinity tests, developing Atomic and Nuclear bombs of their own is less of a priority, delaying their program several years. The US nuclear weapons program is slower as well. This does not have much effect in the US, but in the USSR, more resources are put into the space program and their lead over the US increases. The UK, French and PRC weapons programs are delayed even more substantially. Without the Korean War, no US intervention in the fall of Indochina but little USSR/PRC involvement in the revolutionary groups in the Philippines, there is not any direct Superpower confrontations until the Cuban crisis. That confrontation in this scenario is more likely to have gone nuclear and to have resulted in serious damage to both the USSR and the US. If the nuclear exchange happened, then a nuclear arms race in Europe would have ensued while the US and USSR would have been less active cleaning up their own countries. The PRC would take over the lead for exporting communism. Without the nuclear exchange over Cuba, then first use could very well have been Israel in 1967 or more likely 1973. It is likely that Iraq, Iran, South Africa, Argentina and Brazil would be nuclear powers by the end of 1980s. 2. The US did not successfully develop an Atomic Bomb and did not develop atomic energy. It probably would have taken into at least the 1980s for another country to decide to pursue and apparently blind alley for research, with the USSR being the most likely, possibly followed by the FRG. The potential superpower flashpoint remains Cuba. With the USSR using Castro's Cuba as a stepping point to export revolution into the Western Hemisphere, mid 1950s America possibly gets concerned enough to launch an invasion of Cuba. The USSR is not able to effectively intervene since it does not have Atomic weapons or the power projection apparatus for conventional forces and so Cuba falls to the US.

Like any good traveler does. Unfortunately putting it over my face does not seem to stop the wretches or ogres from attacking.

The problem with settling down somewhere quiet is that Lyneaus is falling apart. I prefer happily ever after endings, and I am hoping for one at the end of Avadon 3, but right now in the story settling down and enjoying the quiet life doesn't seem possible.

I suspect that relationships are tolerated for the Hands and Eyes, but that being a Heart or part of Redbeard's inner circle, you are supposed to be totally devoted to Red Beard. The life expectancy of the Hands seems to preclude much in the way of relationships there, and I think that the Black Tower is kind of isolated (geographically, not just every other way). Really, your best shot at having a normal life with a family seems to be if you are an eye in a long term posting away from Avadon.

5 Hungry (similar to Finnish) 7 Venezuela 13 Chile 14 Sicily

In one of the dialogs when you are getting to know her, you think to yourself that she cannot be more than 17.

#8 Southern US #12 reminds me of places in the Azores and the sign on the left in #15 does not look like english to me, but I can't blow it up much

Randomizer, will Avadon 3 be between Avernum 2 and Avernum 3?

I thought that I saw something on here about A:CS or Avernum 2 ver 2 or Exile 2 ver 3 or whatever we are supposed to call it with a guesstimate of late 2014.

It was primarily a joke, but it would have allowed for the romance to build up over the duration of the game versus just the opening as several folks have suggested. I did not think that the PC in Avadon 1 was that much older than Nathalie (2-3 years tops), though I just re-read the introduction and my impression was likely mistaken. Maybe in the remake, she could be 18 and so is finally allowed out on missions instead of 16 and finally allowed out on missions. And as to the female Shaman in Avadon 1, she had a boyfriend. A relatively quick romance developed during her loyalty quest. Of course taking this thread even farther off of the subject. If the PC in Avadon 1 was an experienced warrior of the Pact, and if your companion Hands in both games are experienced Hands, why are they sent out on missions with just daggers? I know budgets are tight, but come on, Avadon could really cut back on its recruiting and training bill by sending its people out with something better than the game equivalent of a pocket knife. Maybe RedBeard is part of the conspiracy and wants all of his Hands to die.

There is really not enough detail in these photos to get very far with this. 1. Western US 2. Tropics 3. Central/South America 4. US MidWest or Western Europe 5. Europe Without a whole lot more cultural content, we might as well stick to locations like the Great Wall of China, Sydney Opera House, Eifel Tower, etc

I thought that the PC in Avadon 1 was pretty young also. I don't remember seeing any of the characters (PC, Silke/Rainer, etc) actual ages

Had romance been an option in Avadon 1, you could have bought the wizard's tower and settled down with Nathalie. An ostentatious tower and the chance to burn creatures to a crisp periodically would, I am sure, have been the way to her heart. Maybe in the Avadon 1 remake in ten or so years.

If Nixon wins, then yes, I think Watergate still happens. Of course in my previous post, I am biased in that I do not get the veneration of the Kennedy clan. I therefore focused more on what I consider LBJ's two biggest pushes (escalation of the Vietnam War and the increase of entitlements in the "Great Society") then what JFK would have done had he remained alive. A big question is if the American people would still be as fascinated with JFK had their been eight years of him instead of his assassination. Would the public ignored his vices (after all, Clinton was just a cheap knockoff of JFK) for eight years? How far would LBJ and J Edgar Hoover gone to prevent an RFK presidency (I am not talking about assassination, just revealing what they knew about the Kennedy's personal lives)? The whole Camelot thing was based on the myth of a handsome, young, energetic president with his beautiful wife and wonderful family. Many people choose not to believe the mild rumors at the time about what his personal life was really like. I believe in a SF book (I think it was Number of the Beast) one of the parallel worlds had at least six successive terms of Kennedy's as president (presumably JFK, RFK then Teddy). The Goldwater versus Nixon campaign would have been interesting. With a smaller Vietnam war, the public might have found a more confrontational approach to the Cold War acceptable, though I tend to doubt it.

I assume that JFK would have won in '64, after all most presidents do. The fight to be the democratic nominee in '68 would have been pretty ugly with the Kennedy dynasty versus LBJ's connections to the establishment. Based on JFK's brief time in office and focus on Green Berets, I will assume that he did not escalate the Vietnam war and kept it as a relatively small counter-insurgency focused operation. I do not think that the outcome would have changed, since we never succeeded in making an effective government in South Vietnam. I believe that North Vietnam would have continued to escalate things and as we lost advisors we would have decided that it was not worth it and pulled our forces out, allowing South Vietnam to fall to a conventional invasion, just like in History. I do not think that the "Great Society" would have been pushed nearly as hard, resulting in a slower growth in entitlement programs and federal government power. This combined with a smaller scale Vietnam war would result in us entering the 1980's with a greatly reduced national debt. I do believe that Civil Rights would have followed essentially the same path that it did. Kennedy was probably more interested in civil rights than Johnson (not to hard), but was concerned about congressional support. The democrats would have had a better chance in the election of '68 without the escalation of the Vietnam war. Nixon may still have been able to take advantage of what would have been a very punishing battle between RFK and LBJ for the nomination (assuming no RFK assassination) and win the presidency. A LBJ or RFK presidency in '68 may have delayed the thaw of US relations with the PRC. After all, there is an old Vulcan saying: "only Nixon could go to China." Ultimately I do not know how much effect this would have had on the world as PRC/USSR relations were collapsing on their own. Even without the distraction of a large Vietnam war, I do not think that we would have stopped the crushing of the Prague Spring.

It is actually more realistic and less linear this way. The whole I am loyal to you forever no matter what you do in the future because you rescued my cat from a tree once is kind of crazy.

I would start with the fact that it applies to optimists. The belief that in the future we will be more successful, have good/loyal friends and be happy. Everything is going to get better.

Probably not, which is unfortunate. The replay value of a system like Blades is much higher than they typical CRPG due to the ability to play multiple scenarios, just like in paper RPGs. But the Blades system has to sell enough to make it worth Jeff's time.

I too stay away from MMOs as I already spend too much time on the computer with games that end. I also stay away from games where you have to buy additional content/power-ups, etc. I am not completely consistent in that I do buy scenarios and map expansions, but I look at them as options, and something that I can enjoy the game without. It seems from the comments that it is unlikely that Jeff will do a new Blades game. I wonder if having a business model of a set price for the game and basic scenario and then selling additional scenarios for $2-4 each (half going to SW and half to the scenario developer) would make Blades viable?

I like Triumph's approach of having a link on the Spiderweb store page to the other outlets that are selling the games. I am fortunate enough to be in the position that the difference in price does not matter to me, I just see it as a fairness issue. I am not sure that the Steam and GOG prices would need to be listed, though it is probably better if they are. Like Springacres, I do not like the on-line issues with Steam as I am often places where my internet connection is iffy or expensive, and so I would rather pay the higher price on SW's site versus the Steam price.

I upgraded tool use fairly early on, as a way to help defeat mines. I did not buy any lockpicks until near the very end of the game and had plenty to open things with. There were several opportunities to buy lockpicks that I did not take and ended the game with some lock picks left over.

If I remember correctly, once you have completed the test, you should be able to get into the chest which contains a key that will allow you to open the North part of the level, where the plot will advance.