Based on the sorts of things you're asking for, between 3-6 years away.
Because the problems in simulation you describe have never been licked, be it in the world of muds or elsewhere.
Because the audience isn't ready for the degree of PvP that you describe.
Because permadeath isn't commercially viable at large scale right now, again because the audience isn't large and diverse enough for it yet.
I could go on, but basically my answer to your two posts thus far is "well, duh, of course." Only it's turning out much harder to pull off in practice.
You dismiss UO, but consider the things on your list that it tried:
Simulated ecology? Check, it blew up badly. Players affecting the world? Check, too bad most players do not want their worlds affected. Non-combat roles that were truly different, such as fisherman? Check, and players loved it, despite much derision in the press. We were working towards player governments. Freedom of PvP action, check. Fell flat on its face.
I'd note that EQ went on to add the trade skills, which were the only clear-cut "win" in UO and it has now bcome a de facto standard. Something that trade skills are not in the mud world.
I guess I can summarize my answer as "sure, we want to do all those things. And UO was too ambitious and fell on its face trying to do too much of it." You're describing a game with a 3-4 year dev timeline, massive expertise, and massive investment. We'll get there, but only incrementally.