Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

PzcK vs CMBB

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Discontinued Games] >> Panzer Command: Kharkov >> PzcK vs CMBB Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:01:51 PM   
marcusm

 

Posts: 748
Joined: 12/8/2007
From: Göteborg/Sweden
Status: offline
Just a question of time before this was asked but I will do it anyway.

So. For those who have played both games. How does this compare with Battlefronts
old gem? Is this more moddable, compared to CMBB where much of the date was locked.



< Message edited by marcusm -- 4/13/2008 11:04:46 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:25:28 PM   
Mraah

 

Posts: 1085
Joined: 2/20/2008
Status: offline


You're right ... it's been asked ... see page 2 of this main forum page ...

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1744469

Rob

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 2
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:26:47 PM   
marcusm

 

Posts: 748
Joined: 12/8/2007
From: Göteborg/Sweden
Status: offline
But now people actually have this game ;).

Features is one thing but since there is no demo I still like to hear what veteran CMBB players thinks.

Btw. The no destructable buildings was new to me. How is battlefield destruction abstracted in that case? Degrading protection?

< Message edited by marcusm -- 4/13/2008 11:28:54 PM >

(in reply to Mraah)
Post #: 3
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:31:34 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3090
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
I have all four installed(Pck,Cmbo,Cmbb and Cmak).  They are alike in some areas and in other areas not.

Pck is at Platoon level(Hq Platoon with attached squads and or teams.  Their are no leaders but the Platoon Hq makes up for it. 

Graphics are good as or better than CM.  Sound is as good as CM but not better.  CM may have the individual weapons down more on the sound effects but again Pck is good.

The game is alittle more intense at times than CM and I am not for sure why but it seems to be.

Editors come with the game -Random editor is good, Campaign editor is excellent and for the scene editor is not user friendly.  Here CM excells over Pck in the editors.

They are both close cousins but not the same game.  If you like CM series you'll love Pck.  I would buy if I was you.  You won't be disappointed.

_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 4
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:34:40 PM   
marcusm

 

Posts: 748
Joined: 12/8/2007
From: Göteborg/Sweden
Status: offline
The campaign thing does sound good. Loved that aspect of Steel Panthers.
Battlefront still havent finished the campaign edition as promised :(.

Regarding non destructable houses. DOes this go for all terrain or just buildings/houses?

How well are airstrikes/artillery modelled.


(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 5
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:35:48 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcusm
Just a question of time before this was asked but I will do it anyway.

So. For those who have played both games. How does this compare with Battlefronts
old gem? Is this more moddable, compared to CMBB where much of the date was locked.


Definitely read the other thread and the first impressions as well. There are a number of differences once you get below the visual layer, where they look similar.

It is definitely more moddable. You can add your own 3D Models, textures and add entire new units or change existing ones (though I recommend making copied new units for any changed versions so that you don't affect the balance in the official scenarios).

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 6
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:35:52 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3090
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
They don't have destructable building yet but may do so in future realeases. However there are some building already destroyed, so it isn't a totally clean battlefield.
quote:

ORIGINAL: marcusm

But now people actually have this game ;).

Features is one thing but since there is no demo I still like to hear what veteran CMBB players thinks.

Btw. The no destructable buildings was new to me. How is battlefield destruction abstracted in that case? Degrading protection?



< Message edited by Titanwarrior89 -- 4/13/2008 11:43:10 PM >


_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 7
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:37:05 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online
Regarding buildings as well - we do model the possibility of HE fire "penetrating" the building and affecting those inside at full effect. We do plan on having destructible buildings in the next release.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 8
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:41:37 PM   
marcusm

 

Posts: 748
Joined: 12/8/2007
From: Göteborg/Sweden
Status: offline
Nice. I am getting closer to buying :).

Wish there were more AAR.s and Youtube clips though. Makes it easier to judge the game.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 9
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/13/2008 11:51:29 PM   
Rick

 

Posts: 12507
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline
One big difference is the campaign mode for PCK. NOt only a campaign mode, but the ability to make both Random and your own custom designed campaigns.

I used RoBO's Quick Campaign for CMBB, but wven with his tools, it was a lot of work. With this system, the Random campaign can be done up it a snap, complete with briefings.

I was a latecomer to CMBB, but I got to enjoy it. I'm only starting with PCK (having decided to pass on PCOWS). But even though I"m still only 1/3rd of way through manual, I really like what I'm seeing so far.

The Platoon level order system at first bothered me, (not having COMPLETE control of individual squads or tanks), but the more I play the more I like it. I can still do some manueuver of squads (or tanks) but only within the parameters of the platoon orders and that seems to work pretty nice after all. Gives much more incentive to keep them together.

But like I said, I'm still methodically going through the manual, and playing the tutorials.

(well with breif excursion into the editors).

I'm liking this more the more time I spend with it).

Rick

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 10
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 12:08:01 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
IMO, the PzC engine is easier to play, to just sit down and let her rip.

On the other hand, I think that PzC is harder to play well. This is true in part because the turn sequence is much more complex than that found in the CMx1 games. You really have to put some thought into an orders phase, knowing that your options in the reaction phase will be thusly restricted.

Then, there's the map/terrain...

For me, reading terrain in PzC is much more difficult than with the CMx1 games, lacking the older games tiled design. It's also worth noting, however, that this would appear to make the newer game not only more attractive, but, potentially, more "realistic" as well.

I'm enjoying Kharkov, BTW. And although I don't know if I have the patience to play it well, I still get a kick out of socking the ---- of them nasty old Reds. About all I need now is bigger maps and the Western Front. It's my sincerest hope for the game that it generate enough interest to make those possibilities a reality.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 11
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 1:30:47 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcusm
Nice. I am getting closer to buying :).
Wish there were more AAR.s and Youtube clips though. Makes it easier to judge the game.


Hey everyone, are any of you ready to post a new AAR yet? We need to convince Marcus.


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 12
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 1:33:43 AM   
marcusm

 

Posts: 748
Joined: 12/8/2007
From: Göteborg/Sweden
Status: offline
That would be great :). Especially those with majority of infantry.

Might as well give the old demo a whirl. Should give me a good idea of how this plays out.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 13
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 1:51:47 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online
The old demo is... old, but it will give you some idea. I'm afraid it lacks all of the new stuff that's in Kharkov though, so I wouldn't use it to judge infantry.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to marcusm)
Post #: 14
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 4:14:08 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2769
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
Infantry squads rended up to 5 men per squad (but no step loss)...
And no Big Heads.


(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 15
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 11:11:33 PM   
PDiFolco

 

Posts: 1139
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline
I have all 3 CM and 2 PzC ;)
Just a complementary notes on graphics and sounds :
- PzC graphics and models are *way* better than CM - the CM engine is really old, with "playmobil" soldiers and tanks models with very few polys by now counts.
- But CM sounds are imho still much better than PzC, which has very repetitive sounds (I think there's only one "soldier speech" per side..), and unimpressive, seemingly baffled,  fire/explosions sounds. Arty in PzC is really much less fearsome than in CM... I expect some sound modpack for PzC !



(in reply to jomni)
Post #: 16
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 11:24:14 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco
- But CM sounds are imho still much better than PzC, which has very repetitive sounds (I think there's only one "soldier speech" per side..), and unimpressive, seemingly baffled,  fire/explosions sounds. Arty in PzC is really much less fearsome than in CM... I expect some sound modpack for PzC !


Thanks for the feedback. We've heard from several customers regarding the voices and that the sounds in general could be better. We'll see what we can do.


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to PDiFolco)
Post #: 17
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 11:36:06 PM   
PDiFolco

 

Posts: 1139
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline
Hmm, I suspect that the fact of having only "generic" sound files (ie tank guns <60mm, 60 to 90mm etc) doesn't help sound immersion at all.
CM had specific unit/weapons sounds. CMBB has approx 2,300 soundfiles (!!!) to... 80 for PzCK !!! It's not the same league (with all due respect)

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 18
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/14/2008 11:53:31 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco
Hmm, I suspect that the fact of having only "generic" sound files (ie tank guns <60mm, 60 to 90mm etc) doesn't help sound immersion at all.
CM had specific unit/weapons sounds. CMBB has approx 2,300 soundfiles (!!!) to... 80 for PzCK !!! It's not the same league (with all due respect)


2300? Well, I certainly agree then. Individual sound files for each weapon is certainly something I'd like to do but it was not high on the development priority list. Perhaps if we at least add support for that it will enable those with time to do some sound mods until we expand the official sound library.


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to PDiFolco)
Post #: 19
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 12:00:40 AM   
PDiFolco

 

Posts: 1139
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline
Well, just put a sound file tag in unit and weapons xml descriptions and wait for fans to help you make them 

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 20
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 2:13:09 AM   
Mraah

 

Posts: 1085
Joined: 2/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

Well, just put a sound file tag in unit and weapons xml descriptions and wait for fans to help you make them 



Very good idea !! I second the motion.


(in reply to PDiFolco)
Post #: 21
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 4:10:58 AM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3090
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
One good thing about the weapons fire, you could just about tell off camera what country was firing.  So if a German MMG fired up you knew to look or do a replay if your camera was away from the sound for the full minute.

This is one of the features I like in Cm.   Hopefully sometime in the future we may have something similiar for PcK

_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to Mraah)
Post #: 22
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 4:12:36 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online
We actually do have different MG sounds for Germany vs. Russia but I guess they are not distinctive enough amidst the other battlefield noise.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 23
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 1:59:20 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2220
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89
One good thing about the weapons fire, you could just about tell off camera what country was firing.


Not only what country, but which of your tanks or anti-tank guns, etc. It is very cool.

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 24
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 3:35:14 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 1441
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
Here is a comparison of CMBB and PCK I did at gamesquad forums:

"OK, I've been playing for a couple of days and here is my feeling on PCK compared to CMBB and who should buy it. (keep in mind, I am still a noob to PCK and may have missed some things.)

Buy PCK if:

1) you are just plain tired of CMBB. There are people who have burned themselves out on CMBB after six years.

2) you like Steel Panthers-like campaigns that include promotions, medals, gaining experience, etc., no matter how unrealistic it may seem.

3) You really have always wanted ASL in 3D. That is the feel I get from PCK.

4) You think using real world armor data is too much or complicated and you want simpler to understand armor ratings. The words I keep hearing about PCK is it is probability-based armor combat. To me that isn't any different than the armor ratings in ASL. I think a lot of the people saying that don't realize CM used empirical, theoretical, and probability in its calculations.

5) You want the game to be completely moddable. Man, you got that.

6) You have never liked Steve or BFC's attitude towards its fans. OTOH, Erik is very outgoing and willing to act on suggestions. But it is early and JasonC hasn't shown up yet on the Matrix forums. Also, I think a lot of people have dismissed CM out of hand because of their dislike of the forums and developers.

7) You need random campaigns

8) You like handling the details, like ammo selection, stance, etc.

9) you want platoon orders with formations, stance, etc.

10) you want a HUD that includes event lists and unit lists (something CMer's have been screaming about for years)

11) you see future potential, including ongoing technical updates and support. BFC still somewhat supports CMBB, but they are not putting a penny into it since they see CM2 eventually being in this space. (edit)

Stick with CM if you want

1) a map editor and random map builder

2) a larger variety of units

3) a more engineering-oriented armor model

4) One developer controlled database that provides consistency, but prohibits modding

5) A much more fleshed out infantry model that takes into account a lot more factors and provides better support weapon models

6) Ammo tracking that forces conservation of ammo

7) flexible command delays, not static, regardless of year or situation

8) a much larger scenario development community (could eventually be moot)

9) a TacAI that handles a lot of stuff like ammo selection and unit preservation in action phase

10) a less complicated turn structure

11) hotseat play

12) operations that cover mutiple battles on the same map. For a tactical game, this is probably more realistic, but can be considered less immersive and fun.

13) unlimited map sizes

Overall PCK is fun and enjoyable. Unlike ToW and EYSA, it does not make want to go back and fire up CMBB after a game. As it stands right now, it is less than CMBB. But is starting out only a little behind it nad has so much more opportunity to grow. BFC has clearly stated CMBB is going no where, so PCK has no choice but to be the successor. In the end CMBB, IMO as a tactical combat wargame, has a better core engine. But PCK has an engine that is only slightly inferior, but is wrapped with so many other features that CMBB will never have, I think I will stick with it. I am not retiring CMBB. For now, if I want to see how a company of Soviet Gaurds can hold out against a company of Germen Pioneers on a hand built historical map, I will use CMBB. If I want to get that company of Gaurds through a series of battles from 1942 to 1944, PCK is the way to go."

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 4/15/2008 7:22:54 PM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 25
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 3:49:19 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online
[I posted this reply at GameSquad too, re-posting here]

Hi Wood,

Thanks very much for your review, I'm glad that you are enjoying Kharkov and I agree with much of what you wrote, we certainly do have plenty of work still to do but I feel like with the Kharkov release we've finally showed what Panzer Command can be, which our first tentative steps with Winterstorm did not.

A few comments/clarifications:

quote:

4) One developer controlled database that provides consistency, but prohibits modding


This is true, but I do want to note for those that play PBEM (since I've had a few discussions on this in the past) that although the data is open, the game will not allow "single side" modding. If someone equips their Panzer III with a 88mm gun and tries to play a PBEM against you and your standard Panzer III, the first time his shoots the game will stop and prevent further play.

From the design and modding side, I can certainly see the possibility for "total conversion" mods where a gamer adjusts the entire data set to what they feel is best, but in the case of head to head gaming you'd need to make sure that both had the same mod installed. For the purpose of expanding, adding new units that do not modify the "standard set" is the easy way to go as it doesn't affect the standard scenarios and campaigns while allowing as much growth in the available units as you could want.

So a designer who needs a new unit that's not in the other scenarios can distribute that unit's data file along with his scenario (and such units can be set to decide whether or not they will be visible to the random battle and campaign generators for random games) - so everyone who installs it will know they're getting a new unit but it also won't affect their play experience outside that scenario.

quote:

6) Ammo tracking that forces conservation of ammo


We currently don't track individual shells, but if you keep firing you will run out and rarer types will run out first, which in my experience does still encourage conservation of ammo. I'd like to improve this area, but I don't really want ammo counting at the company command/battalion command level. Perhaps some more detailed internal tracking combined with several reportable ammo levels (like Full, Low, Out) would help.

quote:

9) a TacAI that handles a lot of stuff like ammo selection and unit preservation in action phase


Just on the first point, if you just click on Engage -> Target and don't choose the weapon or ammo, the game will automatically make the best choice for the target type as it does when it auto-retargets.

Thanks again, I think that was a very fair and detailed review.

Regards,

- Erik

< Message edited by Erik Rutins -- 4/15/2008 4:01:10 PM >


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 26
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 4:19:48 PM   
Mobius


Posts: 9279
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline
thewood1, I can go along with most of your comments. Though I don't see the downside of some things.

Ammo tracking is not in PCK, but ammo depletion is. I don't think a remote FO would know how many shells his artillery battery would have. Remember "Fiend hort mit!"

It's true PCK does not as first resort use theoritical engineering formulas. In most cases it uses real data from military archives . If there is none to be found for a particular weapon is uses the same data that CM uses but puts it in tabular form.

< Message edited by Mobius -- 4/15/2008 4:21:16 PM >


_____________________________

All your Tanks are Belong to us!
panzer

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 27
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 4:31:38 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 1441
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
I am not saying there is an absolute downside, just there are different types of people looking for different things.  The questions were how are the games different.  I was just trying to compare.

(in reply to Mobius)
Post #: 28
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 4:49:15 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 33198
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1
I am not saying there is an absolute downside, just there are different types of people looking for different things.  The questions were how are the games different.  I was just trying to compare.


I think you did a great job of comparing. This should be a good help to folks who are asking the same question.


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 29
RE: PzcK vs CMBB - 4/15/2008 5:20:13 PM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Buy PCK if:

1) you are just plain tired of CMBB. There are people who have burned themselves out on CMBB after six years.

2) you like Steel Panthers-like campaigns that include promotions, medals, gaining experience, etc., no matter how unrealistic it may seem.

3) You really have always wanted ASL in 3D. That is the feel I get from PCK.

4) You think using real world armor data is too much or complicated and you want simpler to understand armor ratings. The words I keep hearing about PCK is it is probability-based armor combat. To me that isn't any different than the armor ratings in ASL. I think a lot of the people saying that don't realize CM used empirical, theoretical, and probability in its calculations.

5) You want the game to be completely moddable. Man, you got that.

6) You have never liked Steve or BFC's attitude towards its fans. OTOH, Erik is very outgoing and willing to act on suggestions. But it is early and JasonC hasn't shown up yet on the Matrix forums. Also, I think a lot of people have dismissed CM out of hand because of their dislike of the forums and developers.

7) You need random campaigns

8) You like handling the details, like ammo selection, stance, etc.

9) you want platoon orders with formations, stance, etc.

8) you want a HUD that includes event lists and unit lists (something CMer's have been screaming about for years)

9) you see future potential


I wonder if you'd consider adding the following as a reason to buy PCK:

10) No Borg spotting and targeting.

The Borg-effect always bugged me, BTW, and PCK's handling strikes me as dramatically more "realistic."

PoE (aka ivanmoe)



_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Discontinued Games] >> Panzer Command: Kharkov >> PzcK vs CMBB Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109