Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game

 
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 >> Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/18/2020 9:14:04 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
Are the shortcomings of 12.5 enough to warrant starting a new game under 11.3 for the duration? Or would the consensus of the forum be to go with 12.5 anyway?
Post #: 1
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/18/2020 9:20:38 PM   
redrum68

 

Posts: 471
Joined: 11/26/2017
Status: online
My preference is 12.5. There are enough improvements that having played it, its hard to think about going back to 11.3. The main 12.5 issues that I see are:
1. Interception bug - this can either be house ruled around or you just have to ensure airbases within bombing range have fighters stacked on them directly, generally this hurts the Axis air
2. Supply/rail shortage - this is a bit more difficult as I think especially after 41, the soviets are going to struggle to have enough supply/rail to support their army/air. But only a few games have gotten to that point and well by the time you get there, it might already be fixed

There are a few other minor things like it doesn't seem like trucks really matter anymore so probably need to adjust things so more are used or less are produced, retreat pathing being different (some cases where you can argue worse), etc.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 2
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/18/2020 9:42:16 PM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 502
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline
Iíve played only on 12.3-5 for 50 turns and donít see any game breaking things that canít be worked around. The most annoying was refit fort construction mistakenly being quartered but thatís fixed now

Plus youíve been eyeing the game for many weeks now based on your forum activity so might as well start it I will say the Pskov defense is harder given turn 1-2 rail limits of ~20,000. Assume previously you could choose between that and industry.

(in reply to redrum68)
Post #: 3
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/18/2020 10:37:59 PM   
joelmar


Posts: 747
Joined: 3/16/2019
Status: offline
I also agree 1.12.05 is better in playability on many aspects.

Main problems are those already mentionned, but they mostly affect both sides, even if some seem more detrimental to one side or the other.

-Supply seem to be more detrimental to the Soviets, but I can assure you that the Germans also get less, so that can be discussed.
-Interception bug is definitely a pain for the German player, but I've also noticed cases where the Soviet seemed to be on the bad side of this equation too.

New retreat paths are somewhat a matter of taste I think and only require adaptation. I never liked the routing in 1.11.03 and to me the changes in this version make a lot more sense. Again talking playability, not balance.

For balance, I think eskuche for one has shown that both the Axis and Soviets can win. But eskuche is in my opinion among the best players, and I don't think he met his match yet... ;-)

_____________________________

"So much trouble in the world!" -Bob

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 4
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/18/2020 11:07:47 PM   
56ajax


Posts: 1573
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Carnegie, Australia
Status: online
I don't think there is any point in playing as the Soviet under 11.3

_____________________________

I want my football club to be pall bearers at my funeral. They can let me down one final time.

(in reply to joelmar)
Post #: 5
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 12:19:29 AM   
Telemecus


Posts: 4661
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline
Still to play a game from start to 1942 in v1.12 - but some of what we are seeing on the supply effects on the Soviet Union do seem game breaking to me.

For those who have played v1.11.03 we do know it was a mature build and there were long games played in it including Soviet victories in 1944/45. Things like the experience bug are known - and I have seen can badly affect the Germans too as it takes even longer for their lost units to become experienced again.

v1.12 not only might have game breaking mechanics in 1942 onwards (and that is before considering railyard bombing effects), but probably has many other issues which we have yet to evaluate or even yet know about.

_____________________________

Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT

(in reply to 56ajax)
Post #: 6
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 1:15:23 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
Thank you all that replied already.

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 7
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 1:16:16 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

Still to play a game from start to 1942 in v1.12 - but some of what we are seeing on the supply effects on the Soviet Union do seem game breaking to me.

For those who have played v1.11.03 we do know it was a mature build and there were long games played in it including Soviet victories in 1944/45. Things like the experience bug are known - and I have seen can badly affect the Germans too as it takes even longer for their lost units to become experienced again.

v1.12 not only might have game breaking mechanics in 1942 onwards (and that is before considering railyard bombing effects), but probably has many other issues which we have yet to evaluate or even yet know about.



The sentiments that you have on the supply effects is the same sentiment I have.

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 8
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 1:17:44 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 56ajax

I don't think there is any point in playing as the Soviet under 11.3


It is painful but doable if you know what to do.

(in reply to 56ajax)
Post #: 9
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 1:19:35 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joelmar

I also agree 1.12.05 is better in playability on many aspects.

Main problems are those already mentionned, but they mostly affect both sides, even if some seem more detrimental to one side or the other.

-Supply seem to be more detrimental to the Soviets, but I can assure you that the Germans also get less, so that can be discussed.
-Interception bug is definitely a pain for the German player, but I've also noticed cases where the Soviet seemed to be on the bad side of this equation too.

New retreat paths are somewhat a matter of taste I think and only require adaptation. I never liked the routing in 1.11.03 and to me the changes in this version make a lot more sense. Again talking playability, not balance.

For balance, I think eskuche for one has shown that both the Axis and Soviets can win. But eskuche is in my opinion among the best players, and I don't think he met his match yet... ;-)


The Soviets suffer the same interception bug as the Germans or just the Germans. I thought I read just the Germans?????


(in reply to joelmar)
Post #: 10
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 1:21:48 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

Iíve played only on 12.3-5 for 50 turns and donít see any game breaking things that canít be worked around. The most annoying was refit fort construction mistakenly being quartered but thatís fixed now

Plus youíve been eyeing the game for many weeks now based on your forum activity so might as well start it I will say the Pskov defense is harder given turn 1-2 rail limits of ~20,000. Assume previously you could choose between that and industry.


The Pskov defense is not possible at all in 12.X on a rushing German player. As for Soviet Industry you should be able to pretty much get everything out you want and still move units. At least that is what I saw in play testing 12.3 awhile back.

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 11
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 1:24:21 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

Plus youíve been eyeing the game for many weeks now based on your forum activity so might as well start it .


I have a game promised to someone but still on the fence with 12.x.

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 12
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 2:18:34 AM   
56ajax


Posts: 1573
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Carnegie, Australia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: 56ajax

I don't think there is any point in playing as the Soviet under 11.3


It is painful but doable if you know what to do.

I certainly know the painful bit... 12+ fixed the experience bug and gives some chance of holding M&L

_____________________________

I want my football club to be pall bearers at my funeral. They can let me down one final time.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 13
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 2:25:51 AM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 502
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
The Soviets suffer the same interception bug as the Germans or just the Germans. I thought I read just the Germans?????


The same mechanism plagues both but is less noticeable for Soviets. It's partially obscured by the fact that VVS interception isn't that useful unless against naked bombers anyway.

Regarding Pskov, yes, I am trying it against a much more experienced player in another game and it gets surrounded quickly (as can be seen in my game vs. sillyflower as well).

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 14
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 2:30:51 AM   
Telemecus


Posts: 4661
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche
Regarding Pskov, yes, I am trying it against a much more experienced player in another game and it gets surrounded quickly (as can be seen in my game vs. sillyflower as well).


But that would be using exactly the same tactics as could be used in v1.11.03? I do not see v1.12 making any difference there. That would be down to tactical innovation and not patches if I understand it?


_____________________________

Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 15
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 2:31:56 AM   
joelmar


Posts: 747
Joined: 3/16/2019
Status: offline
quote:


ORIGINAL: HLYA
The Soviets suffer the same interception bug as the Germans or just the Germans. I thought I read just the Germans?????


quote:


Morvael's answer:
Found the bug. Intercepts were not calling base resupply routine, that's why there was not enough to launch more aircraft (minimum of resources were granted by other routine, so some flew, but not all).


There is no mention of Germans in specific, he could confirm, but it seems like a general routine. From my own observations it seems that the distance to the supply depot has some impact, so airbases further from the supply depots would be more affected, which might explain why the Germans are hit harder by it in 1941-42, but I also observed some uneven Soviet interception response, often none at all.

I have set up to test that in my current PBEM game in the last turn I sent, the situation on the map was perfect and I mentionned it to my opponent, but he has some health problems and the game has been in hiatus for a few weeks now. But if someone can confirm or disprove before I receive it back, I'd like to know.

For the supply problems, I agree it seems harder on the soviet side in the long run but it's not yet very clear.

< Message edited by joelmar -- 6/19/2020 2:41:48 AM >


_____________________________

"So much trouble in the world!" -Bob

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 16
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 2:33:00 AM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 502
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline
I am unclear of 1.11 mechanics but from what I gathered there was much more rail capacity for units (plus industry, but barred till July) on turn 1 in 1.11.03, whereas in 1.12.xx the split between reserve and non-reserve rail means that you get only the unit share.

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 17
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 6:27:37 AM   
tyronec


Posts: 4211
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline
quote:

The Soviets suffer the same interception bug as the Germans or just the Germans. I thought I read just the Germans?????

I think it effects both sides. What am seeing in my two games playing Axis is that I can do plenty of unit bombing even with the VVS much stronger than the Luftwaffe because the combats don't get intercepted by much.

Coming back to WITE1 after a couple of years away there have been definite improvements in the game and some excellent new features. These more than compensate for the two or three ongoing issues. Retreat paths for example you just have to adapt your play style to take them into account. So no question, 12.05.

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 18
12.5 - 6/19/2020 12:47:44 PM   
BrianG

 

Posts: 4151
Joined: 3/6/2012
Status: offline
i say 12.5 but fixes needed:

clearly rr should not be factor in russian supply %.

less routs, and less shatter chance when in supply

retreat routine where at least first hex retreat move is away from enemy zoc/ then next is lowest mp to supply, then etc

supply points must be placed IMO in port Astrakhan

and also at Batimi so that the Crimea is defended with greater ease and it has too be taken by the Germans. Not isolated.
And (in my case I fear left a big poisoner lot). I already see Tyronec having no intention in pursuing my trapped troops. This must be done. MUST. It will make for a much better game (supply comes in through Persia).

the automatic rr repair in trapped areas.

all hq's future arrival and departure should be in the troops arrival area. Including freezing dates and unfreeze. That way no one, including new players, needs to be surprised. Especially air.

Russians should no longer lose AP for lost units which are getting reformed.

When Russians units can be combined should be listed in the turn log near the weather report.

1941 new rookie Russian troop reinforcements should not be placed in the Urals but much further west, maybe near Kazan

ground interdiction should be limited to closer to the front line

frozen Russian units which are surrounded in turn 1 should be given enhanced mp's and immediately unfrozen. Also, in actually, when units unfreeze needs to be fixed. I say 10 hexes to nearest enemy controlled hex.

Partisans: a few thoughts, way to many and a waste. Game should automatically merged them to make them stronger and auto move them closer to repaired rr hexes.

Thanks




(in reply to tyronec)
Post #: 19
RE: Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game - 6/19/2020 9:22:37 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec

quote:

The Soviets suffer the same interception bug as the Germans or just the Germans. I thought I read just the Germans?????

I think it effects both sides. What am seeing in my two games playing Axis is that I can do plenty of unit bombing even with the VVS much stronger than the Luftwaffe because the combats don't get intercepted by much.

Coming back to WITE1 after a couple of years away there have been definite improvements in the game and some excellent new features. These more than compensate for the two or three ongoing issues. Retreat paths for example you just have to adapt your play style to take them into account. So no question, 12.05.


Thank your Tyronec. I will do the new game in 12.x

(in reply to tyronec)
Post #: 20
RE: 12.5 - 6/19/2020 9:23:33 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BrianG

i say 12.5 but fixes needed:

clearly rr should not be factor in russian supply %.

less routs, and less shatter chance when in supply

retreat routine where at least first hex retreat move is away from enemy zoc/ then next is lowest mp to supply, then etc

supply points must be placed IMO in port Astrakhan

and also at Batimi so that the Crimea is defended with greater ease and it has too be taken by the Germans. Not isolated.
And (in my case I fear left a big poisoner lot). I already see Tyronec having no intention in pursuing my trapped troops. This must be done. MUST. It will make for a much better game (supply comes in through Persia).

the automatic rr repair in trapped areas.

all hq's future arrival and departure should be in the troops arrival area. Including freezing dates and unfreeze. That way no one, including new players, needs to be surprised. Especially air.

Russians should no longer lose AP for lost units which are getting reformed.

When Russians units can be combined should be listed in the turn log near the weather report.

1941 new rookie Russian troop reinforcements should not be placed in the Urals but much further west, maybe near Kazan

ground interdiction should be limited to closer to the front line

frozen Russian units which are surrounded in turn 1 should be given enhanced mp's and immediately unfrozen. Also, in actually, when units unfreeze needs to be fixed. I say 10 hexes to nearest enemy controlled hex.

Partisans: a few thoughts, way to many and a waste. Game should automatically merged them to make them stronger and auto move them closer to repaired rr hexes.

Thanks







Thank you Brian. That is a laundry list of items there

(in reply to BrianG)
Post #: 21
RE: 12.5 - 6/19/2020 9:34:30 PM   
Disgruntled Veteran


Posts: 615
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline
A couple observations of 1.12.05 as a German player.

-Yes, the intercept bug is a problem, but most of you have heard my posts already. The luftwaffe still works, but it cannot defend itself against Soviet airfield bombing. The only defense is to keep your planes way back and use a staging base, but this still uses a lot more miles than it should.

-Forts. This may be a bit overkill, but it does add some realism. I don't know if a Soviet player can lose Leningrad now. I mean its possible, but not against a good Soviet. My usual mass attack attack the river cross square 2 hexes east of Leningrad in my game barely scratched the fort and my opponent repaired the damage over his turn. It would probably take a minimum of 4 attacks, but probably 8-9 (absolute best divisions, tons of pioneers, model commanding etc), but I don't see it working unless the Soviet is careless. Perhaps an attack in spring would work better when the river is frozen, but forts are ridiculous strong now. This adds realism and a bit more balance, but I think it is a touch too strong. The only reason I took Odessa is because my opponent abandoned it (foolish on his part). I don't see me taking sevastopol.

Just a couple observations.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 22
RE: 12.5 - 6/19/2020 9:58:01 PM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 502
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline
Two comments to above:
Interception fatigue is low for miles and much much higher for combat if it occurs. You can fly several unimpeded escorts for 5% fatigue but a battle will kick it up 4-6% each time so really the tradeoff is fine I think.

For forts maybe itís time to reconsider crossing the Neva as a meta? It might be more worth attacking big L head on then getting three hexes from which to attack Pavlov.

(in reply to Disgruntled Veteran)
Post #: 23
RE: 12.5 - 6/19/2020 11:10:40 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

For forts maybe itís time to reconsider crossing the Neva as a meta? It might be more worth attacking big L head on then getting three hexes from which to attack Pavlov.



The way I read Disgruntled Veteran's post is that it is the fort level itself not the meta. Meaning it is a "bitch" to take any high level fort.

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 24
RE: 12.5 - 6/20/2020 12:24:22 AM   
joelmar


Posts: 747
Joined: 3/16/2019
Status: offline
For the fort levels increased resistance, it's greatly offset by the upgraded punch of the engineers and heavy artillery against fortifications. Level 3 forts in urban with no rivers are not so hard to destroy with enough engineers and a few .240+. even .210 can do some damage. Probably even easier than before. But an attack from only 2 hexes against high fortifications across the Neva is another story, a bitch yes.

_____________________________

"So much trouble in the world!" -Bob

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 25
RE: 12.5 - 6/20/2020 12:28:38 AM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 502
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joelmar

For the fort levels increased resistance, it's greatly offset by the upgraded punch of the engineers and heavy artillery against fortifications. Level 3 forts in urban with no rivers are not so hard to destroy with enough engineers and a few .240+. even .210 can do some damage. Probably even easier than before. But an attack from only 2 hexes against high fortifications across the Neva is another story, a bitch yes.


Yeah this is what I was more getting at, sorry if Iím unclear. A moderate organizational effort can commit 3 x heavy howitzer and 15 x 210 mm artillery (plus all the pioneers) on a land-accessible fort such as Leningrad, especially if the Svir can be reached separately. It might be worth revisiting the decision-making process here and elsewhere (Such as rail repair) in 12.xx, which Iím not sure has been publicly done.

(in reply to joelmar)
Post #: 26
RE: 12.5 - 6/20/2020 4:55:03 AM   
tyronec


Posts: 4211
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline
My experience is that the fort mods are working well.
Sevastapol is tough to take but with three good stacks (yes, 3 so that you can get two attacks in turn) it can be taken down in a few turns and if the Soviets don't pull out will cost them their garrison. This feels about right, am using a stronger force than Manstein had and it is still a struggle.
Well defended cities are a real roadblock.
In '42 my line of 2+ level fortifications held by AGN is no real defence against the Soviets, they can gang up on any hex defended by a single division and usually take it out with a couple of attacks. If I went to the effort of building up a line of 3 level forts it wouldn't help much as the Soviets could knock them down with one attack and then punch through with a second or third one. So Axis need a reserve of strength to hold the line. Am not sure how this would pan out against stronger Soviet offensives in '43 or '44 but it looks like it could be tough going for Axis. Again this looks like the fort rules have been an improvement to the game.
I can't speak to Leningrad as both my games I isolated the whole peninsula first, but clearly you would not be wanting to attack the city directly.

< Message edited by tyronec -- 6/20/2020 4:59:24 AM >

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 27
RE: 12.5 - 6/20/2020 6:55:03 AM   
56ajax


Posts: 1573
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Carnegie, Australia
Status: online
@Brian

When Russians units can be combined should be listed in the turn log near the weather report. - Yes there should be an calendar and you get a warning 4 Turns before; I think I mentioned that one in suggestions for WiTE2.

1941 new rookie Russian troop reinforcements should not be placed in the Urals but much further west, maybe near Kazan - totally agree, WiTE2 has theatre boxes

ground interdiction should be limited to closer to the front line

frozen Russian units which are surrounded in turn 1 should be given enhanced mp's and immediately unfrozen. Also, in actually, when units unfreeze needs to be fixed. I say 10 hexes to nearest enemy controlled hex. - Every frozen unit should be unfrozen by paying nominal aps;

Partisans: a few thoughts, way to many and a waste. Game should automatically merged them to make them stronger and auto move them closer to repaired rr hexes. - totally agree, as soon as partisans get close to combat ready they spawn; not worth the flights and supplies.

_____________________________

I want my football club to be pall bearers at my funeral. They can let me down one final time.

(in reply to tyronec)
Post #: 28
RE: 12.5 - 6/20/2020 8:12:23 AM   
tyronec


Posts: 4211
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline
quote:

Partisans: a few thoughts, way to many and a waste. Game should automatically merged them to make them stronger and auto move them closer to repaired rr hexes. - totally agree, as soon as partisans get close to combat ready they spawn; not worth the flights and supplies.

Partisans are a pain in the neck for both players. The most uninteresting part of my move is shuffling garrisons around every turn to make a few available to chase partisans down. Increasing the number of partisans appearing would just increase this tiresome but totally unskilled activity.
If you want to move the game balance towards the Soviets and increase the partisan effect then do it some other way, like increasing city garrisons and having a more severe penalty if they are not met (e.g. a rail modifier for every city left ungarrisoned).
WITE2 has a better system, the impact is there but the players don't have to waste time on it.
Am sure we can all think of games where partisans have a seriously detrimental effect on the player experience.

(in reply to 56ajax)
Post #: 29
RE: 12.5 - 6/20/2020 5:58:43 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3256
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
So these 2 house rules would be good then with 12.x?

* No bombing of Airbases after the first turn plus Soviets can not bomb airbases on the first turn

* No bombing of any hex not attacked by ground forces in the turn. (specifically pertains to "Air Ground Attack", City attack not affected). The only exception to this is U2's which can bomb with impunity at night any hex.

Or what would you do for a house rule.

(in reply to tyronec)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Consensus 11.3 or 12.5 for a new game 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

0.156