Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: German losses?

 
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 >> RE: German losses? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 6:53:56 AM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1245
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
Routing a unit did a surprising low amount of damage, at least to german. I do not understand why such low looses, it is not realistic at all. At least a lot of heavy equipment should be left behind.

It is possible to give good damage to a german unit, but you have to prepare for the target unit a retreat path with multiple enemy zone of control. The more enemy units close to the retreat path, the better for doing damage.



< Message edited by Stelteck -- 8/2/2017 11:30:25 AM >

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 31
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 11:09:54 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3254
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

Routing a unit did a surprising low amount of damage, at least to german. I do not understand why it is not realistic at all. At least a lot of heavy equipment should be left behind.

It is possible to give good damage to a german unit, but you have to prepare for the target unit a retreat path with multiple enemy zone of control. The more enemy units close to the retreat path, the better for doing damage.




Retreat path wouldn't have made much difference if any at all. I have watched German units retreat multiple ZOC and take no extra loses to very minimal as they retreated. As Germany you basically just go balls to the wall forward while protecting your flanks and it isn't much if anything that the Russians can do about it to drive the Germans back. Attack a Germany unit with Soviets (especially prior to Sept 41) take massive Soviets loses with very minimal German loses if any. (this gets a check mark as VERY PRO German). The best defense is a good Offense but that is extremely difficult to mimic in the opening stages of this game as a Soviet player. Correct me if I'm wrong but historically Germans took some serious casualties when the Soviets counterattacked or defended in the early stages of the war if I remember correctly. (i.e. Like the Brest defenders inflicted over 1,000 casualties but you will be lucky to get 100-200 in the game).

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 8/2/2017 11:13:39 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 32
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 11:41:40 AM   
Wheat

 

Posts: 153
Joined: 6/17/2011
Status: offline
Before we get all pro-Soviet on the next round of patches, geez...after Sept 41, WTH! You can get big odds on Russkies and lose more Germans than Russisans. So the big loss thing is turned off and the Soviet fan boys want more.

Yep. Now I have played the original Russian winter rules vs my opponent and I forgot how awful it is. Just wrecked the German army. Although I took Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov in 41, I lost Rostov and Moscow in the winter and doubt I will get either back in 42. So much for even doing what the Germans did in 42 ALTHOUGH I DID BETTER THAN THEY DID IN 41.

Soviets don't need a bunch of fixes imo.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 33
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 1:05:41 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3254
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wheat

Before we get all pro-Soviet on the next round of patches, geez...after Sept 41, WTH! You can get big odds on Russkies and lose more Germans than Russisans. So the big loss thing is turned off and the Soviet fan boys want more.

Yep. Now I have played the original Russian winter rules vs my opponent and I forgot how awful it is. Just wrecked the German army. Although I took Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov in 41, I lost Rostov and Moscow in the winter and doubt I will get either back in 42. So much for even doing what the Germans did in 42 ALTHOUGH I DID BETTER THAN THEY DID IN 41.

Soviets don't need a bunch of fixes imo.



Hahahahhahahahaha, I am actually pro German but my previous post on the loses is correct since it is hard coded into the system to allow it. I don't care either way, I attack and take the loses anyway since a great many Soviets really don't attack much during the early months.

_____________________________


(in reply to Wheat)
Post #: 34
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 1:29:07 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Retreat path wouldn't have made much difference if any at all. I have watched German units retreat multiple ZOC and take no extra loses to very minimal as they retreated.



That is a general problem. Infantry units especially can not really be decisively fixed and destroyed in an engagement, even by mechanized units.


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
As Germany you basically just go balls to the wall forward while protecting your flanks and it isn't much if anything that the Russians can do about it to drive the Germans back. Attack a Germany unit with Soviets (especially prior to Sept 41) take massive Soviets loses with very minimal German loses if any. (this gets a check mark as VERY PRO German). The best defense is a good Offense but that is extremely difficult to mimic in the opening stages of this game as a Soviet player. Correct me if I'm wrong but historically Germans took some serious casualties when the Soviets counterattacked or defended in the early stages of the war if I remember correctly. (i.e. Like the Brest defenders inflicted over 1,000 casualties but you will be lucky to get 100-200 in the game).


casualties or dead? Big difference.

In general isolated units lose too much CV too quickly. A week or 2 of isolation shouldn't lead to the kind of steep decline one sees unless decisively engaged, but the combat model doesn't really allow decisive engagements, so weak (in casualty terms) attacks bleed out too much supply which leads to quick CV collapse.

This contributes to the snowball effect in 41/42 and 44/45.







This is not what a multi divisional engagement where both sides are trying to fight it out should look like. This leads to snowballing encirclements, snowballing moral effects and snowballing territorial gains.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by MechFO -- 8/2/2017 2:08:52 PM >

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 35
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 4:47:34 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3254
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Retreat path wouldn't have made much difference if any at all. I have watched German units retreat multiple ZOC and take no extra loses to very minimal as they retreated.



That is a general problem. Infantry units especially can not really be decisively fixed and destroyed in an engagement, even by mechanized units.


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
As Germany you basically just go balls to the wall forward while protecting your flanks and it isn't much if anything that the Russians can do about it to drive the Germans back. Attack a Germany unit with Soviets (especially prior to Sept 41) take massive Soviets loses with very minimal German loses if any. (this gets a check mark as VERY PRO German). The best defense is a good Offense but that is extremely difficult to mimic in the opening stages of this game as a Soviet player. Correct me if I'm wrong but historically Germans took some serious casualties when the Soviets counterattacked or defended in the early stages of the war if I remember correctly. (i.e. Like the Brest defenders inflicted over 1,000 casualties but you will be lucky to get 100-200 in the game).


casualties or dead? Big difference.

In general isolated units lose too much CV too quickly. A week or 2 of isolation shouldn't lead to the kind of steep decline one sees unless decisively engaged, but the combat model doesn't really allow decisive engagements, so weak (in casualty terms) attacks bleed out too much supply which leads to quick CV collapse.

This contributes to the snowball effect in 41/42 and 44/45.







This is not what a multi divisional engagement where both sides are trying to fight it out should look like. This leads to snowballing encirclements, snowballing moral effects and snowballing territorial gains.



Hmmmmmm, feels like I'm getting schooled here.......lol Must have hit a nerve ;-} Sure, I will be the punching bag, please continue :)



_____________________________


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 36
RE: German losses? - 8/2/2017 10:10:33 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
Old wound...badly healed.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 37
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 1:01:06 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
This is what used to be in 1.07, when the original developers were still taking care of the game.
After that, they leave it to some volunteers to freely do any changes they want. The combat engine has been heavily modified from the original one since then.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by mktours -- 8/3/2017 1:08:01 PM >

(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 38
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 1:15:52 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1245
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
Your example is impressive. (Although it is not a "simple" win for the soviet, as it looks like the enemy have to retreat though enemy zone of control so take additional retreat damage).

It is still impressive and quite different what we are seeing today. I managed to do so much damage to german units only in rare circumstances where the german had a retreat path of 3/4 hex long (due to 3 counter per hex limit), each of them under zone of control of ennemy units. And it was end 1941. It was a miracle.

your example (one retreat only under fire) would be far more common.






(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 39
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 1:19:47 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11745
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Unfortunately these numbers were virtual, hiding true losses behind a simple equation calculating losses as number of men in destroyed elements and half the men in damaged elements, while in fact no men were lost from damaged elements and only some from destroyed elements. Currently the game is displaying actual immediate losses, so they correspond with losses screen, but because of that they are much lower. Think of them as not showing lightly wounded soldiers, which would return to duty in less than 7 days. I measure losses (in terms of loss screen numbers) for each version using the same set of tests, and actually the game is much more bloody now than before, and the ratio is much more realistic.

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 40
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 1:30:19 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

Unfortunately these numbers were virtual, hiding true losses behind a simple equation calculating losses as number of men in destroyed elements and half the men in damaged elements, while in fact no men were lost from damaged elements and only some from destroyed elements. Currently the game is displaying actual immediate losses, so they correspond with losses screen, but because of that they are much lower. Think of them as not showing lightly wounded soldiers, which would return to duty in less than 7 days. I measure losses (in terms of loss screen numbers) for each version using the same set of tests, and actually the game is much more bloody now than before, and the ratio is much more realistic.

Thanks for the reply. I played two campaigns as soviet against Saper222, one in 1.07.11, one in 1.08.04, the second one the soviet transport level was set at 50%, which forced me to stand and fight, the combats were 10% more than the last campaign, the total loss at T15 is 20% less for both sides, (which were shown at the total loss reports page, which should be the true number, I think).
Comparing the two campaigns, soviet won more battles in the second, but Axis loss were 20% less in the display of total loss (the added up number for 15 turns) page in T15.

< Message edited by mktours -- 8/3/2017 1:55:48 PM >

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 41
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 1:30:31 PM   
EwaldvonKleist


Posts: 1914
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline
The low Axis combat losses in early war can be balanced by a tac bos campaign. Most attacks leave the defender with max det level in a hex without fortifications and the chance to do two bombing runs again (circa 120 extra dead + 15 artillery)
This being said, please don't reduce the tac bos. They are the ONLY way to make Germans bleed during early war, blizzard aside.

_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 42
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 1:45:40 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1245
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
The low Axis combat losses in early war can be balanced by a tac bos campaign. Most attacks leave the defender with max det level in a hex without fortifications and the chance to do two bombing runs again (circa 120 extra dead + 15 artillery)
This being said, please don't reduce the tac bos. They are the ONLY way to make Germans bleed during early war, blizzard aside.


But then with a mandatory tactical air campaign you face a gameplay issue. The game (unlike WITP, for example) is not an air war game. Neither the interface nor the mechanism are adapted for massive use of air forces, and so doing a truly effective air campaign require tons of micromanagement which we are not supposed to do, nor did not expect from a game like this.

The game shine with ground combat and shall use its strong points instead of relying with secondary gameplay.
Air war shall stay a secondary, nice to have support of what is happening on the ground.

If we want to increase looses in my opinion the best way would be to increase the damage done by well supplied artillery and heavy equipment during battle phase. (It would also restore the role of artillery support units).

< Message edited by Stelteck -- 8/3/2017 1:48:17 PM >

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)
Post #: 43
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 7:22:44 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1245
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
Whatever our opinion about the proper amount of looses, the current system looks quite consistent. Damages and looses are predictable and we can understand them.

But there is one case where i wonder if maybe there is a technical issue. The case of routed units.

I just had an example here :

This turn i decided to do bad thing to the viking SS motorized divisions, and first hit it with my best cavalry corps.



I got unlucky, and got a fighting withdrawal and not so much looses. The amount of looses is normal for this type of battle. No problem.
But while the ennemy retreated, it was then easy for me to perform another attack while cutting all retreat path, so i did it.



So i sent my tank corps against it, won the fight, and as the unit cannot retreat, i got a rout.

But the damage is really low. I killed less tanks than in previous battle !! I did not even destroyed the 6 tanks i damaged in the previous battle.

It is such a surprise that a rout did not do more damage than a normal retreat (not even normal, a fighting withdrawal !!!), that i may suspect a technical issue or a bug here. Maybe it is just the looses display that are wrong. Maybe calculation for a rout have an issue.
But it is really surprising.

Ps: I just noticed that i got a fighting withdrawal in the second battle too. Did fighting withdrawal allowed when routed ? It is really surprising too.


< Message edited by Stelteck -- 8/3/2017 7:26:10 PM >

(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 44
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 7:45:40 PM   
EwaldvonKleist


Posts: 1914
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline
There should be no fighting withdrawal for a routed unit, I have repeatedly seen this as well. Must be kind of a computer joke.
My exp confirms that something isnt right with routing. A ZOC to ZOC retreat is by definition still a retreat, but seems to cause equal losses to a rout.

In addition losses of artillery, guns and tanks must be separated. Increasing the losses by a generic multiplier might get one area ok while messing up another one.

< Message edited by EwaldvonKleist -- 8/3/2017 7:55:41 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 45
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 8:10:15 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11745
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Fighting withdrawal is disabled for retreating across rivers and through ZOC.

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)
Post #: 46
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 8:43:29 PM   
EwaldvonKleist


Posts: 1914
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline
Maybe I musunderstand things here. My take is: routing>ZOC to ZOC to ZOC retreat or ZOC to ZOC over a river>ZOC to ZOC retreat or retreat over a river>standard retreat

A fighting withdrawal should never happen together with a rout as this contradicts itself.

_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 47
RE: German losses? - 8/3/2017 9:00:34 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11745
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Yes, every hex moved through ZOC or river applies another round of post combat losses. I will have to check routs, technically they may result in less rounds than retreat through multiple ZOC (because there is nowhere to move and unit is teleported to safe hex immediately).

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)
Post #: 48
RE: German losses? - 8/7/2017 7:45:42 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
One thing in "real life" that artificially added casualties were "stand or die" orders. Ordering (whether the orders are followed or not) sacrificing blood for time and space with the much higher risk of rout/shattering. Does the game already calculate this in the battle sequence?
I posted this under German losses because historically this was a cause of additional losses on both sides.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 49
RE: German losses? - 8/11/2017 2:37:52 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

Yes, every hex moved through ZOC or river applies another round of post combat losses. I will have to check routs, technically they may result in less rounds than retreat through multiple ZOC (because there is nowhere to move and unit is teleported to safe hex immediately).


Does this algorithm cover only a unit routed that turn or were you also going to check the retreat of an already routed unit within a pocket? It would seem a Pz div or Russian Tank Corps finding themselves rolling over a routed unit would inflict much higher casualties if not shatter the unit right then and there ..
Not doing so I believe leads to a tactic of isolating routed units and going out of the way not to get near them ..rather than finishing them off ..

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 50
RE: German losses? - 9/4/2017 7:15:16 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1245
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
I have interesting picture showing the effect of a single anti tank regiment in the battle phase.
Quite interesting.

First attack, my brigade + sapper regiment. 2 tanks damaged.
Second attack, same brigade against same panzer division + well trained AT regiment. 6 tanks destroyed and some damaged.



You can also see that CV do not matter in damage. (except if it cause a retreat).

< Message edited by Stelteck -- 9/4/2017 7:45:59 PM >

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 51
RE: German losses? - 9/5/2017 12:00:29 AM   
Nuklearius

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 9/4/2017
Status: offline
I have some really juicy screenshots from my recent campaign against challenging AI but sadly forum will not let me post them . In one battle I got attacked during mud-turn by Axis, managed to hold but lost over 450 KIA while Axis had 10 wounded!
The entire 1941 year was complete nonsense casualty-wise. I eventually had to change difficulty back to normal because half of my divisions where on unready after the first 3 weeks of blizzard counterattack while Axis TOE remained unchanged.

After seeing mktours screenshot I'm almost inclined to downgrade to an older version of the game. In my campaign which is currently in mid 1942 I still did not have a single battle where I destroyed a double-digit number of tanks in battle. Even my 100s of IL2s haven't yet destroyed a single tank!

(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 52
RE: German losses? - 9/5/2017 6:58:00 AM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6703
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
With 'Fog of War' enabled you may not see all casualties in battle reports

(in reply to Nuklearius)
Post #: 53
RE: German losses? - 4/11/2018 6:10:26 AM   
decourcy2

 

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline
The Germans also start with 200,000 free replacements that they did not have. IRL the Germans lost 1.1mil by Feb 28th '42. That lowered them from 3.3mil to 2.2mil. They gained in that time period, including wounded men coming back to the colors, 550,000 men. 2.75mil in time for the spring mud.

However, in this game the average German player is losing a bit more than 600,000 men, 2.7mil at that point and ending up at 3.5mil on Feb 28th. Which is a gain 200,000 replacements that did not exist.

Only real question is did the 550,000 replacements of all types include the 80,000 men poached from the FBDs for the infantry battalions in October, November, December? I don't know and I have never seen convincing evidence either way. Anyway, Germans start with 200,000 free men.

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 54
RE: German losses? - 4/11/2018 7:06:21 AM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6703
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
Per end of 2/42 the overall Wehrmacht losses were 221k KIA, 769k WIA and 58k MIA.
Of these losses in the East: 209k KIA, 738k WIA, 50.k MIA. For Army this excludes losses in Finland.

I have not found any info about percentages of wounded recovered/fit for service again vs permanently disabled/unfit for service.
I would really like to get medical data showing this for both sides so we may adjust the disabled recovery rate + having a small portion going to KIA and a another portion disappear (as unfit).

(in reply to decourcy2)
Post #: 55
RE: German losses? - 4/11/2018 3:17:50 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1816
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
THe problem is the WIA I think are almost being returned automatically to the Germans instead of in a more realistic out of action for 3-6 months after being wounded.

Either way the German losses or replacements are out of whack and have been for a long time...and the soviets are vastly under represented numbers wise. It has led to slow balancing of the game for game play but with really fantasy Army numbers though.

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 56
RE: German losses? - 4/11/2018 8:26:05 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6703
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
Damaged elements returning to pool have 40% of manpower sent to disabled. Disabled pool return rate is AFAIR 0.5% for Soviets and 1% for Germany. Axis minors probably 1% too.

(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 57
RE: German losses? - 4/11/2018 9:00:07 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1816
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
I'm talking about the light wounded that arent factored into the combat system at all really. This issue has been discussed to death in the past, and due to the limitations of the combat system in the current WiTE can't be fixed is what I was told as any attempts to get realistic losses basically made the German army disintegrate over the long game to fast compared to historical.

So the best thing is to get it close enough that game numbers work to give a decent game to both players.

Hopefully in the work on 2.0 WITE they get losses and army numbers closer to correct as the war goes on. Its well documented and even reasonably argued by historians that the Germans lost the war in the winter of 1941 and Stalingrad didn't really even matter....as the attrition rate of German troops and equipment was to high to be able to maintain. The German army never recovered from the first 6 months in Russia due to losses sustained, you will never get that effect in WITE 1.0+ patched.

I think the game has come a long way, but still has alot of issues as well when trying to truly replicate the campaign and conditions both armies fought under.

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 58
RE: German losses? - 4/11/2018 10:23:36 PM   
ericv

 

Posts: 325
Joined: 1/21/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45

I'm talking about the light wounded that arent factored into the combat system at all really. This issue has been discussed to death in the past, and due to the limitations of the combat system in the current WiTE can't be fixed is what I was told as any attempts to get realistic losses basically made the German army disintegrate over the long game to fast compared to historical.

So the best thing is to get it close enough that game numbers work to give a decent game to both players.

Hopefully in the work on 2.0 WITE they get losses and army numbers closer to correct as the war goes on. Its well documented and even reasonably argued by historians that the Germans lost the war in the winter of 1941 and Stalingrad didn't really even matter....as the attrition rate of German troops and equipment was to high to be able to maintain. The German army never recovered from the first 6 months in Russia due to losses sustained, you will never get that effect in WITE 1.0+ patched.

I think the game has come a long way, but still has alot of issues as well when trying to truly replicate the campaign and conditions both armies fought under.


The germans lost the war in june 1941. I don't think there is any way the Germans could have stopped the attrition of their core. Officers, Trained NCO's, material. They were just too unprepared, prepared as they were. As a result much too overconfident and completely mistaken in the willingness of the Soviets to achieve victory at an absurdly high cost.

This game, fun as it is, doesn't reflect the brutality of the actual campaign, the extreme harshness of the terrain, and the subsequent unavoidable attrition of the Wehrmacht in anyway. That's something for WitE 4.0.








(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 59
RE: German losses? - 4/15/2018 12:38:05 AM   
GamesaurusRex


Posts: 505
Joined: 10/13/2013
Status: offline
Yes, 1941 is an non-historical mess.

* "Lvov" pocket in the south.
* "Panzer Ball Madness" in the north and center - Leningrad by turn six and Moskow by turn thirteen. (Yes, you can try to defend... if you want a fast train to a POW camp.)
* "Pocket Insta-Death" - (although this has been improved somewhat in recent patches).

But none of this is the question... the question is, "Is it entertaining ?"

DEFINITELY !

(in reply to ericv)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: German losses? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.199