Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Ants or Supermen?

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Ants or Supermen? Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 12:16:11 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3862
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I propose that the ZOC MP costs should be scaled to unit size/effectiveness or some other criteria of the defending unit. As it stands the Soviets receive many brigade size units and can build many others and simply swamp the map with a bunch of 'ants' in order to suffocate the Germans in 41/42. They do this by creating a carpet of many low value units that have little military strength but still cost the same MP's to attack, the same MP's to move past or to cross a river against (ZOC's), the same expenditure of fuel as a hex stacked with 3 full strength Divisions. I say this is a fundamental flaw of the game and it should be addressed. We have many complex algorithms and such for combat, supply, production etc yet the ZOC MP rules are very simplistic and in my view do not befit this game. Even boardgames of 30 year vintage have more sophisticated ZOC rules. I would even suggest a blanket reduction of ZOC costs for German Mot/Pz units for June/July.

I would also support an overrun rule of some description that would apply to ants only. Plus obviously a reduction in the costs both in MP and Fuel/Ammo/Fatigue.

Ants can also dig many forts that then can be used by much larger units. I would suggest forts should not be able to be constructed by Tank/AT brigades. And a limit be set of level 1 only for forts dug by other Brigade size units.

I am no German Fanboy. Just how I see it.

Let the flaming begin :)

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------
Post #: 1
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 12:37:15 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5305
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
Humm, humm, so the Soviets never built defensive positions far behind the front, eh? That's utterly wrong. They massively built defensive lines. I'm like a parrot (sqwaaaak), I know, but in 1942 they even fortified areas 600 km behind the frontline... Are you going to throw overboard this REALITY? For the sake of what exactly?

The whole thing is abstracted... You actually need a unit in place, right. But the local population OR for example RR Brigades assigned to HQs will be the ones digging in fact. The Soviets raised ARMIES of engineers, later disbanded. And yes, they were put to good use

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 2
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 1:47:14 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3862
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I think the general concenus is that too many forts are being built in the rear by the Soviets. It needs to be curbed, not stopped. I suggested that a way to do this would be to limit the abilities of the ants. Not stop it completely.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 3
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:03:41 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
My beef with brigades is the cost in Administration Points.

Cost is 5ap for an infantry Brigade. Yet it cost 20ap for an Infantry Division.

The rules quoted:
quote:

Two or more rifle brigades can buildup into a rifle division.


Does the Soviet player buy 1 infantry division or 4 brigades? The math is easy.
I'm buying 4 brigades to build up into 2 infantry Divisions eventually.

I'd like to see an increase in the cost to buy maneuver brigades. 5ap is to low, 10 might be to high. Somewhere between 7 and 9 would be acceptable.

At 5ap Tank Brigades are pretty cheap also. Increase the cost a little to reflect the ability to move long distances?





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 4
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:17:27 AM   
Pawlock

 

Posts: 1041
Joined: 9/18/2002
From: U.K.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I propose that the ZOC MP costs should be scaled to unit size/effectiveness or some other criteria of the defending unit. As it stands the Soviets receive many brigade size units and can build many others and simply swamp the map with a bunch of 'ants' in order to suffocate the Germans in 41/42. They do this by creating a carpet of many low value units that have little military strength but still cost the same MP's to attack, the same MP's to move past or to cross a river against (ZOC's), the same expenditure of fuel as a hex stacked with 3 full strength Divisions. I say this is a fundamental flaw of the game and it should be addressed. We have many complex algorithms and such for combat, supply, production etc yet the ZOC MP rules are very simplistic and in my view do not befit this game. Even boardgames of 30 year vintage have more sophisticated ZOC rules. I would even suggest a blanket reduction of ZOC costs for German Mot/Pz units for June/July.

I would also support an overrun rule of some description that would apply to ants only. Plus obviously a reduction in the costs both in MP and Fuel/Ammo/Fatigue.

Ants can also dig many forts that then can be used by much larger units. I would suggest forts should not be able to be constructed by Tank/AT brigades. And a limit be set of level 1 only for forts dug by other Brigade size units.
I am no German Fanboy. Just how I see it.

Let the flaming begin :)


I think you will generally find the construction value of units is scaled, so very low manpower units have a very small construction value.



(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 5
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:20:03 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
The 20 AP costs for divisions go down to 10 in 1942. The higher cost in 1941 is there to offset the fact that destroyed units come back for free until November.

Building rifle brigades is pointless generally speaking. You get a huge number of them for free and should be looking to consolidate them into rifle divisions come May of 1942. I have never built one. If you had to buy anything, better to drop 10 APs and get a rifle divisions, which eventually can be used to form rifle corps.

Once again, the problem here is lack of planning and understanding how the Red Army evolves during the war and people getting stuck on this mode of ants. Ants will not win the war. Ants are at best a temporary and emergency expedient and building blocks for larger and better units. To persist in building yet more ants past the emergency period of 1941 is merely retarding the growth and evolution of the Red Army.




_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 6
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:34:23 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3862
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Maybe I need to simplify the question(s)

Do you think a zoc projected by an ant should hinder a unit in the same manner as a fully stacked hex does?

Do you think a hasty attack on an ant should cost the same MP as a hasty attack on a fully stacked hex?

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 7
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:38:31 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pawlock


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Ants can also dig many forts that then can be used by much larger units. I would suggest forts should not be able to be constructed by Tank/AT brigades. And a limit be set of level 1 only for forts dug by other Brigade size units.
Let the flaming begin :)


I think you will generally find the construction value of units is scaled, so very low manpower units have a very small construction value.




This may be true, but they still can invoke the Civilian Labor Assist, as detailed in Rule 15.3.2.3, and negate fort degradation in the fall back lines.

(in reply to Pawlock)
Post #: 8
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:40:06 AM   
Farfarer61

 

Posts: 698
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline
This what I was getting at in suggesting a trade off - eliminate or greatly reduce HQ Build Up and in return have ZOC strength based on unit size and effectiveness.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 9
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:46:09 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Maybe I need to simplify the question(s)

Do you think a zoc projected by an ant should hinder a unit in the same manner as a fully stacked hex does?

Do you think a hasty attack on an ant should cost the same MP as a hasty attack on a fully stacked hex?

No, and no.

I am a firm believer in scalable effects. A security regiment imposing any semblence of military 'control' over a region of 700 square miles, in a divisional/corps scaled game is rife with possibilities for gamey behavior. Unfortunately, use of ants to effect checkerboards, and inhibit movement, is part of the officially sanctioned 'proper' techniques of play, and thusly not deemed to be cheesy, gamey abuse of the system...

Therefore, expect me to use it, with relish, until a better design choice prevails.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 10
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:52:37 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
The "ant factor" is surely a factor in how the 42 campaign is shaking out in my game vrs 76mm. They are everywhere and they slow down offensives, cause disproportionate casualties and also provide row after row of fort hexes.

There is nothing wrong with the Soviet using them as they are there and provide these advantages.

I think the emerging patterns of their use show that there capabilities need to be looked at.

Fixes I could see for ants on both sides:

1) Reduced MP costs for their ZOCs.

2) Unless stacked with other units their combat effectiveness is reduced. This concept was in the boardgame FITE where small units were deemed "unsupported" unless stacked with a unit capable of covering the frontage of the hex which is the case we have here. There combat value was halved because it was realized a brigade or regiment size unit with limited artillery assets would be unable to cover 10km of frontline in an adequate fashion. This made using them solo in the frontlines a poor tactic because it made them easily overrunable. However when properly supported they retained combat effectiveness and eventually were used as building blocks for bigger units.

3) Brigade/regiment sized units digging solo in a hex and creating a level 3 fort that can be occupied by 3 divisions later and reap the benefits need to be looked at. This seems out of whack. Perhaps just make them dig a lot slower?

I clearly understand this will have implications for both sides but the longer I play into 1942 the more it seems that the endless carpet of brigades I am facing is shaping the campaign a certain way.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 11
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 2:55:17 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Ketza, there is a solution to your ant problem, and it will even probably help you win the game taking the long view. However, it will be a very boring game for both of you.

Counterturtle.





_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 12
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 3:06:45 AM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 1839
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
I generally agree w/ the OP - ZOC costs that are variable based on the type of enemy unit (i.e. based on something like mobility, firepower, recon, range, morale - because they'd patrol more, etc) would make sense.


_____________________________


(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 13
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 3:21:06 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Ketza, there is a solution to your ant problem, and it will even probably help you win the game taking the long view. However, it will be a very boring game for both of you.

Counterturtle.






The thought has crossed my mind.

Giving the offensive a go however regardless. Making a two turn post soon in the AAR I have made some progress.


< Message edited by Ketza -- 5/24/2011 3:22:08 AM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 14
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 3:21:39 AM   
tigercub


Posts: 1852
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline
Now that HQ build up has been put right and good job guys...the Ants could be an Issue and i like your ideas Micheal T on Zoc reduction and digging with Tank & AT brigades.



_____________________________


You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 15
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 5:37:09 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
Building brigades is one way to grow and evolve the Red Army. Personally i find Brigades to be the seeds of destruction. The fact is in NOV 1941 The cost for 1 Soviet infantry division is the same cost as 4 Brigades. The soviet player doesn't have to wait until 1942 to create 10ap Infantry divisions. Buy them starting in Nov41 as brigades.

4 Brigades in Nov of 1941 can do just about anything a single soviet division can do, and even more. Sure it takes time to plant them, cultivate them. But its worth it.

1 division can sit in Stalino. 4 Brigades can occupie Stalino, Makeevka, Gorlovka and the town of Dolya. Freeing up a Division for the front.

8 brigades can defend in depth a quiet sector of the front, 2 divisions can defend 2 hexes.

3 divisions can stack fully in 1 hex with a CV of 3, 12 brigades can stack in 4 hexes each with a CV of 3. The CV will increase over time based on refit.

All units have a use, and to each unit a use.

Building the brigades, if you can, and want, is not a waste of manpower, arms and AP's. You don't sacrifice the future of Infantry Divisions or Corps. Its an investment for the future. Its the axis nightmare of zombie hordes.

The emergency period is past when Nov41 rolls around. This is the time of seeding the rear areas. The time to breath again and think of the future, beyond the blizzard. These zombies will grow into Divisions and Corps. Before that they dig, they grow, they multiply. When it is time to grow-up and shuffle forward, they will.

Let me make this clear.

It feels like an exploit, to be able to buy brigades at a cost of 5ap's starting in Nov41. The cost of the Division goes down to 10ap later in 1942, the brigades stay at 5ap. The time of Seeding is over, the time of growth begins.

If the designers and majority of players, think its not a big deal, cool by me. I'll just keep buying the seeds of destruction. Beware all who visit my collective.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 16
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 5:44:49 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Building rifle brigades is an utter waste of APs. I really cannot put it more plainly than that. Nor do they have the offensive capability of a rifle division, let alone a rifle corps.

As a German player, my response to this sea of useless ants would be to sit tight, fortify myself, and invite the Soviet to crack them with these units. They have no offensive capability to speak of. The German need only run out the clock.

This is exceedingly boring play, to be sure.

Sooner or later, if the Soviet wants to actually win the game, he has to proceed to build up the offensive capability of the Red Army. And the longer this is postponed, and the more APs wasted on inneffectual ants, the harder it's going to be to do so.

But I'm getting the sense that too many Soviet players are merely trying to bore their German opponents to death and win in this fashion rather than actually conquer a victory.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 17
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 5:50:05 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Furthermore, you are absolutely incorrect in believing that 3 rifle brigades have the same defensive potential as a stack of 3 rifle divisions. Don't be misled by on map CVs. They are not a true reflection of combat power. They are, at best, an estimate.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 18
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 6:38:05 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
We all have choices to make. War-gaming lends itself to many choices. Same game different choices. All trying to get to the same destination. Winning.

Heading to that destination we endure the same people saying the same tired things.

Do it my way or you will fail. Don't do that its not efficient. You should have done it my way. Can't you see its not historical. Thats a waste of your time. You must be one uncreative person to continue trying that. Heck, i don't know you, but its clear I'm better than you. And my favorite, you suck.

Play how you like. Boring or not its not up to me to pass judgement.

To Brigade or not to Brigade that is the question.

As far as my choices to the destination. I did pretty damn well. Boring to some not so boring to my opponent.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 19
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 6:46:01 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Furthermore, you are absolutely incorrect in believing that 3 rifle brigades have the same defensive potential as a stack of 3 rifle divisions. Don't be misled by on map CVs. They are not a true reflection of combat power. They are, at best, an estimate.




You are so sure of yourself. Yet your absolute fails to see the fact that 3 rifle divisions cost 60aps while 12 brigades cost 60aps. What do you absolutely know to be the CV of 12 brigades?



_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 20
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 6:47:34 AM   
jzardos


Posts: 578
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline
I think the game really could use some sort of overrun rules. Taking into account the defending units capabilities. Would no longer be feasible for the Soviets to lay down a carpet of single units, 5-6 hexes deep in early 42 that fort up to 3 and cause excessive and completely unhistorical loses to German experienced units. Almost all games of this WWII style on this scale have some sort of overrun rule that concering attacking mobile units when they exceed some final combat ratio like 10:1 (example). Would work for both sides.


One can dream...

< Message edited by jzardos -- 5/24/2011 6:49:33 AM >

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 21
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 6:52:05 AM   
jzardos


Posts: 578
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarHunter


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Furthermore, you are absolutely incorrect in believing that 3 rifle brigades have the same defensive potential as a stack of 3 rifle divisions. Don't be misled by on map CVs. They are not a true reflection of combat power. They are, at best, an estimate.




You are so sure of yourself. Yet your absolute fails to see the fact that 3 rifle divisions cost 60aps while 12 brigades cost 60aps. What do you absolutely know to be the CV of 12 brigades?





I have already proven that spreading out 12 rifle brigades in 42 vs a few rifle div, is a much more effect strategy to blunt any Germans 42 offensive. Also helping to protect against a deep breakthrough.

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 22
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 7:05:12 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
3 rifle divisions cost 30 APs in 1942.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 23
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 7:13:01 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
June 41 to End of Oct 41 Soviet infantry division cost 40ap
Brigade cost 20ap

Nov 1941 to ? 1942 Soviet infantry Division cost 20ap
Brigade cost 5ap

When the cost for a soviet infantry division reaches 10ap sometime in 1942. Its time to forget buying Brigades.

Until then, Brigades are viable pawns in the game.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 24
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 7:20:38 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
Another picture. Costs for brigades are 5ap divisions are 20ap
Feb 1942
60ap = 3 divisions or 12 Brigades.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by WarHunter -- 5/24/2011 7:21:11 AM >


_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 25
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 7:21:13 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
WarHunter, rather than wasting your blizzard APs on more rifle brigades, you should be building up an AP kitty to build up corps in 1942. You already get something like 150 rifle brigades for free by mud season in 1942. You get so many of them there's no room in the front to squeeze them all in them in.

And you want to get more of them?

Here are some dates to keep in mind:

December 1941: cavalry corps. 10 APs a pop for each conversion.

April 1942: tank corps become available. 20 APs a pop.

May 1942: rifle brigades can now be consolidated into divisions. That's 75 rifle divisions if you play things right. Enough to fill out a good half dozen armies. Rifle division costs drop to 10 AP.

June 1942: rifle corps. 20 APs a pop.

September 1942: mech corps. 35 AP expense total between the three brigades and and the corps conversion.

October 1942: artillery divisions. 10 APs a pop for those.

1942 is an expensive year with a lot of upgrades to plan around. If you want to get ahead of the curve you need to set aside APs well in advance, starting with the blizzard offensive. I like to have at least 400 in the kitty going into April. You get two front activations during the course of the year, which helps.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 5/24/2011 7:24:58 AM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 26
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 7:38:12 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1209
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
Flaviusx, I appreciate your help in the future use of ap's for higher level combat units. Its true there are more units than there is frontage to use them. But until the axis offensive is spent, the brigades do have many functions if only to garrison cities and keep the population safe. In fact i think they are op.

I totally agree the higher level combat formations, Tank Corp and Infantry Corp are vital for an offensive. As a matter of sop, i pull out all guard divisions from the front during the blizzard, as they appear. In preparation to build up to guard infantry corp, Airborne brigades into guard infantry divisions and holding a shock army back for those 1st guard formations.

Either side is enjoyable, but given a choice, i like the big fuzzy bear.


_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 27
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 7:43:11 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6872
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Pulling out the guards is good practice, I do this myself and set them aside for a strategic reserve.

Converting the airborne brigades to guards rifle divisions is debatable. If you wait another year, you can convert these into guards airborne divisions, which are actually pretty nice. Flipping the airborne brigades in 42 to guards rifle divisions has the disadvantage of not maximizing your guards count -- they will count against the limit. Whereas the guards airborne divisions in 1943 do not count against your guards rifle division maximum.

Then again, most games don't make it to 43.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 28
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 9:43:36 AM   
arras

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 9/7/2004
Status: offline
Aren't brigade/regimental unit applying ZOC only to their own hex unlike division/corps size units which do it in one tile around them? I remember reading something like that in manual. In such case it would be fair reduction in their ZOC ability. You pay no cost to moving around them.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 29
RE: Ants or Supermen? - 5/24/2011 1:34:11 PM   
jaw

 

Posts: 990
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Maybe I need to simplify the question(s)

Do you think a zoc projected by an ant should hinder a unit in the same manner as a fully stacked hex does?

Do you think a hasty attack on an ant should cost the same MP as a hasty attack on a fully stacked hex?


YES and YES because until you engage the "ant" you don't know it is an ant. The information the game gives you was put in there for playability purposes. If Gary was to be realistic the player would have extremely vague information about the enemy until he got it the hard way, by fighting for it.

The combination of "unrealistically" detailed information in the form of number and types of enemy units and their CV and the imposition of blanket ZOC and attack MP costs is a design trade-off to make the game playable.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Ants or Supermen? Page: [1] 2 3 4   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

0.176