Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer

 
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 >> 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/4/2015 7:39:22 PM   
Konrad_Novak

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 3/20/2013
Status: offline
The message is from Saper from Russian wargaming community at war-game.org.

"1. There's a "1:1=2:1" rule for CV ratio, which favours USSR. Because of it, Axis player suffers big losses during retreat. Sure, you can replace infantry squads and infantry weapons, but replacement is not easy with AFVs (allies can forget about losses with their 6-point-industry). In practice, nobody wants to play Axis now, and the activity of players in Matrix forums has decreased sharply.

2. Developers tried to balance the game for the aforementioned rule and have increased Axis CV (while Soviet divisions have even less CV because of their small experience value). So, the latest games now finish even before the winter of 1941, because players (which waited for return of 2:1 CV ratio rule) can't build up their defenses. Increased time for fort building doesn't help either.

3. Developers tried to retune WitE supply system for a better compliance with WitW supply system. Now, while a player may have tons of supplies somewhere in Linz or Magnitogorsk, his frontline units have about 0-30% of supplies and 70-100% of ammo. Why was it necessary to change? Players were used to looking at truck pool and supply production - if their ratings were OK, then units would have almost 100% of supply. Also, if you make entrenching cost more supply, then you should insert an "entrench" button somewhere in the interface. Otherwise, I really don't understand how a player can control supply consumption, since entrenching is automatic.

4. Latest innovations of supply build-up - has there been anyone with whom the developers tested this properly? I haven't played as Axis player, but I think the game will finish in 15 turns. Before these innovations the picture had been somewhat clear - you made the supply difficult for Axis, you would lose a couple of divisions, but then you had one turn for rest and entrenchment. Now, however, an Axis player can do a supply build-up at the turn of advance, and can have 46-48 movement points even if Soviet player will hinder German supply lines. Also, Soviet divisions with good CV (3-8) are quite scarce and you can't afford losing a lot of them. Fresh divisions (CV 1-2) just can't do a thing and are totally worthless.

5. Air combat aspect of the game is still a mess. I don't know where the developers got their data about air production, but in reality, up to April 1943 the Axis usually had the advantage in air fighting or at the very least the sides were equal. In current version of WitE you can destroy Luftwaffe by the winter of 1941. To cure this, developers must severely lower the fatigue build-up of Axis pilots, then it won't be so easy for Soviets to bomb the hell out of their airbases. Currently, after 3-4 turns of intensive air combat and fatigue build-up (more than 40 points), Axis pilots begin to miss attacks on their airbases. With current ratings of aircraft production and impossibility of increasing the number of fighter airgroups (if you change CAS airgroups into fighter airgroups, they will be dead quickly) Axis army begins to suffer heavy losses from Soviet Il-2 (300-1000 men per sortie in 1942-1943, which is more than ground combat elements can inflict in the same battle).

6. Something was done for lowering Axis retreat losses in the winter of 1941. Previously, an Axis tank division was losing all of its AFVs, now it loses about 50-60 units. What makes me uneasy is that even with massed Soviet attacks (20-30 attacks per turn) almost all Axis losses are capped at 700-800 men, up to 30 artillery and about 30 AFVs. This, coupled with huge spread of CV, makes me think that something was done with the engine and formulas of the game.

7. Now, if you click the "choose the exact route of supply" button, you can choose the colour of units. The former is critical for sieges (for example, Siege of Leningrad), while the latter is unneeded.

8. The rule of field upgrade of weapons and equipment is quite controversial too. While playing as Soviets, I got hundreds of replaced 76-mm AA guns (they were removed from infantry divisions). Instead, the game keeps producing 85-mm. The engineers '39 are replaced by engineers '41 - why? The growth of Red Army is now slower (BTW, 85-mm AA guns fought in separate units - not in infantry divisions).

9. Interface. Well, it's my personal opinion of course, but before the latest patches I (as Axis player) always looked at what my industry was producing. Now, after the implementation of a detailed report, I stopped looking at it at all. It's too cumbersome and overloaded with unneeded information.

10. WitE was made after 10 years of developer group's efforts, latest patches are done by one man in 2-3 months. Before them, Matrix forums and Russian community had a lot of AARs. Now they have 3-6 AARs and even those are decreasing under the weight of bugs and errors. Too bad, it was an exceptional game".

Don't shoot the messenger :)
Post #: 1
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/4/2015 7:59:58 PM   
RedLancer


Posts: 4084
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
I'll make the classic observation about causality and correlation. Is the forum quieter because of WitE changes or the release of WitW?



_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to Konrad_Novak)
Post #: 2
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/4/2015 8:28:25 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6854
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
1) This has always been in but now you are able to change it upon game start.
2) AFAIR the CV value has always been rather low for the early soviet divs because of both low experience/morale or lack of proper heavy equipment.
3) There were a lot of problems in the supply system which had been fixed in 1.08 and some issues will again be fixed in 1.08.02.
4) He has abviously not properly tested the new HQ Buildup, in 1.08.02 there will be more fixes/restrictions to it. BTW the saper known here was also known to abuse HQ buildup from recently captured ports to achieve a lightning fast advance
5) Air combat had always been rather limited in WitE, not easy to improve without braking other stuff. aircraft production should be pretty historic for both sides.
7) Reminds me of a bug fixed in .01
8) The 76mm gun had always been replaced by the 85mm gun, just the upgrade speed seems faster now. Engineers are upgraded becasue the old version gets out of production pretty early and runs into scrapping. This actually saves armament points.

Seems the one complaining did not have all facts right although some complaints seem valid or have already been fixed (or or to be fixed in .02).

BTW 1.08 is still in Beta so all problems encountered while testing should actually be reported to the devs, not posted elsewhere in the net.

(in reply to RedLancer)
Post #: 3
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/4/2015 8:45:08 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 942
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline
1. WITE forums are quieter because of lack of interest, for whatever reason.
2. Sapper is right about HQBU, see "Oshawott" AAR early after .08 release.
3. Most comments about WITE problems are done for a constructive purpose.

4. I am playing .08.1 beta vs axis AI, the swamp hex next to the Lgrad backdoor is at 1 entrenchment, plus 10%, and has been for many turns, now t 9, high construction value units have been there since turn 1

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 4
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/4/2015 8:53:01 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6854
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
From 1.08 changes:
quote:

39. Changed fort construction rules. Fort level 5 can be built only in cities with large port containing a fort unit. Fort level 4 can be built only in big cities (city, light urban or heavy urban terrain) or towns with port containing a fort unit. Fort level 3 can be built only in big cities, towns with port, in hexes with a fort unit or adjacent to an enemy. Fort level 2 can be built only next to a fort unit, in coastal zones or up to 3 hexes from a supplied enemy unit. Fort level 1 can be built only up to 20 hexes from a supplied enemy unit. In swamp terrain the fort cannot be larger than 2

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 5
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/4/2015 9:04:15 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 942
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline
Denniss, my mistake on forts, had forgotten about the new rule. Other points still stand.

thx for responce.

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 6
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/5/2015 12:44:38 AM   
BrianG

 

Posts: 4151
Joined: 3/6/2012
Status: offline
The new fort rules are way to restrictive compared to how they were earlier.

Maybe they should have gone to size 2.5 and size 1.5 forts instead of 2 and 1. Also, the minimum hex length to enemy unit does not allow for proper set up of fort zones. Go to 40 or 50 hexes. The Germans can easily move tanks 30 hexes in 2 turns.

Or make forts a lot cheaper AP (like 1 ap) and combine this for the Russians with a much smaller gun component.

Limit on total number seems fair.

imo

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 7
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/5/2015 6:50:57 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11753
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Part of his criticisms are related to overall design of the game, and can't be changed. Part relate to things he and the patch team see differently, so they were not changed to his liking. Obvious bugs like the one with setting color overriding setting air supply range are fixed as soon as they are found and reported (though the delivery to players take time in the standard patching model). HQBU is still tweaked, as no one wants it to bee too powerful. .02 will be better than previous v8 incarnations, but it's still called beta. .01 is just an interation on the way.

However, I agree with Red Lancer, that most players have moved to WitW and that's understandable. What we're doing here is using defibrillator to keep WitE alive and interesting. Changes make the game more interesting due to removal of old exploits (that everyone knows and uses, which is becoming boring) and ineviteabe introduction of new exploits (as some changes have unforeseen consequences) that have to be discovered first, which changes the game on meta level. People who like to repeat the same moves every game (at least for the first few crucial turns) may feel unhappy with the changes. However, it levels playing field a bit for newcomers, as veterans have to adjust, and for a while everyone is (nearly) equal. All in all I think those changes bring more positive things than negative, while at the same time I can't wait to get my hands on Wite 2.0 :)

(in reply to BrianG)
Post #: 8
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/5/2015 8:37:27 AM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 942
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline
Hi M,

.08.1 beta, Axis v Sov AI, turn 9 and no partisans have appeared, ???

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 9
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/5/2015 9:01:50 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11753
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
I think its too early to see any active partisans at this time.

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 10
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/5/2015 2:36:09 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
I am just a player, playing my first soviet campaign, so my opinion is worth what it is worth.

1. The same is true for the soviets they have big losses on retreat, and they retreat a lot, at least in 1941. Maybe it is normal i do not know. Germans do not get much retreats results in 1941-42, except during the first winter no?

4. About the fresh soviet divisions who are so called worthless i quite disagree. There are tons of them, and they get more powerful with time. Against the german AI at least, i did use them for good. I cannot say against an experienced player. One must use terrain, fortifications, defense in depth.

Michel.

< Message edited by micheljq -- 2/5/2015 3:37:17 PM >


_____________________________

Michel Desjardins,
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte after the battle of Waterloo, june 18th, 1815

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 11
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/6/2015 6:04:14 AM   
beekeeper

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 2/27/2012
Status: offline
Patch 8.01 was great, german can doing big historikal poket entirely without reloads, but Saper like use reloads :)

Оnly what agrees with him - german air, it died to autumn 41 :(

< Message edited by beekeeper -- 2/6/2015 7:05:15 AM >

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 12
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/6/2015 12:40:51 PM   
darbycmcd

 

Posts: 381
Joined: 12/6/2005
Status: offline
I believe the current beta is a big step forward, but of course needs to be calibrated a bit.

1) HQBU is still too strong. I would be in favor of it going away altogether as I just don't think it has an historical basis given the way supply works in the game (but I know it won't go away... just dreaming )

2) Forts are a problem. The distance restrictions I think are the issue, given the way German motor/mech units can advance, the Soviets need to be able to build up forts further from the front. Which is actually rather historical as well, they constructed large scale defensive positions at great depth some distance from the front (far more than 30 miles) in front of Moscow, Leningrad etc. The old system was more realistic and provided an opportunity for the Soviet player to defend. It is not true that they were unable to put up a fight in the Barbarossa period at the divisional level, but it is difficult in the game the way it is structured. These changes, in my opinion, were answering an unasked question.

3) Air combat, well I don't see these problems because I don't repeat bomb airbases. It is sort of like HQBU, if you are playing against someone who plays to find program derived advantages, well there are going to be problems. Better to find someone who wants to play more 'historically'.

In general though, I think the changes have been fantastic and the game has improved a great deal. The display issue with supply seems to have everyone freaked out, but has been explained so not something to worry about.

(in reply to beekeeper)
Post #: 13
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/6/2015 1:17:55 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11753
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Unit bomb is blocked for used air groups (miles flown > 0). I don't know why it isn't so with airfield bomb. Could be changed, since some people can't restrain themselves. Too late for .02 though.

(in reply to darbycmcd)
Post #: 14
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/6/2015 3:06:44 PM   
VigaBrand

 

Posts: 300
Joined: 12/19/2014
From: Germany
Status: offline
Air base bombing is 33% flight, because of the first turn. Maybe it is an option to change that, with exception of the first turn.
Most player used a houserule, that you can bomb a airbase only three time per turn.

_____________________________




(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 15
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/6/2015 4:43:32 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: beekeeper

Patch 8.01 was great, german can doing big historikal poket entirely without reloads, but Saper like use reloads :)

Оnly what agrees with him - german air, it died to autumn 41 :(

Hi beekeeper,

Do you find that the german AI is better and/or more agressive with this patch? at least in 1941?

Thank you, Michel.

< Message edited by micheljq -- 2/6/2015 5:43:53 PM >


_____________________________

Michel Desjardins,
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte after the battle of Waterloo, june 18th, 1815

(in reply to beekeeper)
Post #: 16
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/7/2015 12:20:02 PM   
beekeeper

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 2/27/2012
Status: offline
i never played with AI :)

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 17
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/8/2015 11:46:48 AM   
von altair


Posts: 316
Joined: 4/27/2004
Status: offline
Air War has never worked correctly in Wite. Those things are quite right in wargaming community statements. Soviets CAN destroy
Luftwaffe in a year. That is a damn stupid balance, I would say. Germans should be superior in East Front air, until late -43.
Equal between late 43-44 summer. Then Soviet Advantage from 44 summer.

< Message edited by von altair -- 2/8/2015 12:47:11 PM >


_____________________________

"An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?"

"Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"

-Axel Oxenstierna

(in reply to beekeeper)
Post #: 18
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/8/2015 11:55:45 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11753
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
German aces were scoring hundreds of kills until the end of the war. But Luftwaffe as a whole could achieve local superiority over just a few places along thousands of kilometers of front at best, from early war. It was too small to offer more than that, meanwhile Soviet VVS was focused on giving ground support, not racking kills.

(in reply to von altair)
Post #: 19
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 11:43:42 AM   
von altair


Posts: 316
Joined: 4/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

German aces were scoring hundreds of kills until the end of the war. But Luftwaffe as a whole could achieve local superiority over just a few places along thousands of kilometers of front at best, from early war. It was too small to offer more than that, meanwhile Soviet VVS was focused on giving ground support, not racking kills.


What this has to do with the problem that the game Air War is messed up? Does it explain horrible
balance between Germany and Russia? At -41 and -42 Soviet fighters did everything to avoid German
fighters. Few even refused to fly. Thats how much they feared German Airpower. Germany Dominated
skies everywhere where they showed up. Germans were superior all the way up to late -43. Thats when
two airforce started to be quite equal.

This is not about what they did. This is about badly designed air balance in 41-43.

In our lovely game Soviet can spam some absolete plane zerg and constant bomb German airfields. 4-8 bombing
runs in a single fighter airbase and it is wiped dry and clean. Wake up.

< Message edited by von altair -- 2/9/2015 1:23:24 PM >


_____________________________

"An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?"

"Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"

-Axel Oxenstierna

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 20
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 1:21:46 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11753
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Air war is messed up indeed. Interceptions are stronger now and Soviet AA is worse, so the balance moved a bit in the direction of LW, but nothing will help to solve problems arising from design. Perhaps just one fix is possible at this time, to block airfield bombings for used air groups, like the other missions are blocked (with the exception of German turn 1).

However

In my book LW did not have overall air superiority. For that you need to control the skies in a way the Allies did in Normandy. Sure, everywhere where Luftwaffe sent a pair of fighters (out of a dozen in working condition per 100-200 km of the front), VVS scattered in panic. However (and it's a recurring theme in diaries of German soldiers) everywhere else Soviet air force bombed land forces at will, with AA being the only defense available. Even if direct casualties were low, the delay, fatigue and disruption effects were having impact on the effectiveness of forces.

Finally

I was happy myself to restrict to 1 bombing per hex with airbases throughout the war in my PBEM. Can't see why the others have such problems. And improved interceptions meant Pe-2 40-60 bombers lost per raid (with escorts).

(in reply to von altair)
Post #: 21
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 3:12:56 PM   
M60A3TTS


Posts: 3028
Joined: 5/13/2011
Status: online
Almost all PvP games are done with house rules that limit bombing of airbases. Usually x3/turn. Issue solved.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 22
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 3:23:32 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 942
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline
Can unescorted LW "bomb unit" missions be fixed??

(in reply to M60A3TTS)
Post #: 23
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 3:25:40 PM   
M60A3TTS


Posts: 3028
Joined: 5/13/2011
Status: online
Shift right click when you bomb units to insure escort fighters are available. Issue solved.

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 24
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 3:26:37 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11753
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
I use manual selection and then I can select fighter cover (or I can see that no cover is available and cancel the attempt).

(in reply to M60A3TTS)
Post #: 25
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 5:45:33 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 942
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline
Thx fellas,

Let's see if I finally have this right. To bomb "something" and get fighter escorts, use manual (shift, rt/clk). Must be the first mission(s) of turn because if the fighters have done anything else then they won't be available. Does this "anything else" also mean no interdiction during the opponent turn and no ground support during opponent turn, if so, then turn GS off and interdiction to "0" when you end your turn?

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 26
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 6:27:14 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 2917
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Must have 0 miles flown to be first mission.

Setting air groups that you want to use for bomb unit missions to Night while moving & fighting in other sections of the map is a way to keep the air groups un-used.

It is an a bit tedious work around and no doubt you will forget to check day/night status before ending turn a couple of times until you include that in your EoT routine. I don't know any other way, though.

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 27
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 7:22:48 PM   
von altair


Posts: 316
Joined: 4/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael
I was happy myself to restrict to 1 bombing per hex with airbases throughout the war in my PBEM. Can't see why the others have such problems. And improved interceptions meant Pe-2 40-60 bombers lost per raid (with escorts).


Yeah house rules can fix this air war. But that is also the way to prove that something is really wrong, if the
game needs house rules. Is it really that hard to balance sides? How about giving a large bombing (airfield) penalty
for russians until late -43? They were not doing them too much anyway (because they were fearing them).

Also German side needs a bit more endurance, so they can fly more sorties in a day. Also German planes
should be a lot more better quality than Russian ones. In other words, less operational losses for them
and a lot of them for Russians. Absolete planes should have even bigger penalties for stats.

< Message edited by von altair -- 2/9/2015 8:28:06 PM >


_____________________________

"An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?"

"Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"

-Axel Oxenstierna

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 28
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 7:42:57 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 942
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline
Gman and others,

So sorry for the pea brain here. Does air activity during the opponents turn interfere with available aircraft during my turn?

Thx

(in reply to von altair)
Post #: 29
RE: 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer - 2/9/2015 7:43:53 PM   
loki100


Posts: 7172
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: von altair

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael
I was happy myself to restrict to 1 bombing per hex with airbases throughout the war in my PBEM. Can't see why the others have such problems. And improved interceptions meant Pe-2 40-60 bombers lost per raid (with escorts).


Yeah house rules can fix this air war. But that is also the way to prove that something is really wrong, if the
game needs house rules. Is it really that hard to balance sides? How about giving a large bombing (airfield) penalty
for russians until late -43? They were not doing them too much anyway (because they were fearing them).

Also German side needs a bit more endurance, so they can fly more sorties in a day. Also German planes
should be a lot more better quality than Russian ones. In other words, less operational losses for them
and a lot of them for Russians. Absolete planes should have even bigger penalties for stats.


you do realise that in the game the German planes are better in terms of raw stats, usually more manouverable, will tend to be able to fire first, should have a large advantage in morale and in terms of experience. All in all the air war works out pretty well.

As above, worth bearing in mind just what was Soviet air doctrine. Air superiority didn't matter, what mattered was to assist (by protecting own bombers) or protect (by disrupting the axis bombers) Red Army ground operations.

If the game requires a simple, easy to apply, house rule then I don't really see that as indication its broken?

_____________________________


(in reply to von altair)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> 1.08.01 criticism from a Russian wargamer Page: [1] 2   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

0.180