Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Mangala Solaris
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
327
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 10:57:00 -
[61] - Quote
Supporting this also.
This whole thing is just a massive fiasco - especially the mutual war side of it which is seeing RvB get into mutual wars with 1 man nobodies we never even wanted to dec in the first place.
And massively increasing war costs too... Mangala is not FC, yet another randomly updated EVE blog.
http://mangala.rvbganked.co.uk/ |
croakroach
World Domination Inc Nobilium Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 15:30:00 -
[62] - Quote
Supporting also.
With the new bounty hunting payouts, wardecs are going to be a strong mechanism for collecting bounties. This issue and the new system and pricing in general has driven out some of the good mercenary corps and alliances.
A simple fix, as probably proposed already, is to lock corporations at war from joining alliances so transfer cannot occur.
However the price of wars also needs to be addressed as many clients cannot afford the costs to obtain their goals, this is another aspect I see that is leading to the loss of many mercs in the market place.
Perhaps bounties will fix that? Especially POS bounties if ever implemented, but the price has to be right; for example, when it costs more to wardec than the cost of the POS, why bother, who would pay to have this removed? IMO bring back the old cost of wars; it worked fine. |
Arduemont
Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans
575
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 15:54:00 -
[63] - Quote
I'm surprised CCP haven't commented on this yet.
It so obviously needs doing. Don't think I've seen anyone disagree yet.
Tobiaz wrote:Locking a wardeccing corporation by making the war mutual is IMHO a very important feature. The 'biting-off-more-then-you-can-chew' risk provides crucial balance to the initiative advantage the aggressor has and THIS NEEDS TO STAY! This is also why it should be possible to hire allies or join an alliance, even in a mutualized war, rewarding those few defending corporations that decide to fight back properly instead of hiding in newbie corporations and whining about it on the forums how wardecss are 'unfair'. As an agressor, being locking into a mutual war with a corp that then goes into hibernation is simply the risk of agression. But I do think mutual wars should be 'confirmed' every month or so, to end wars with corporations that are completely dead. The test-server showed that there are still wars going on from 2005 of corps that are now long dead and forgotten. The fixed need though (and it seems like an easy one) is to simple make the war follow the original defender, extending to any alliance it joins, but not remaining 'copied' there (except for a cool-down period) when the original defender leaves again. Why isn't this fixed yet, CCP?
Also, this ^^. "In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." |
Bethesda
Unknown Test RELOADED DOT
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 14:05:00 -
[64] - Quote
Mangala Solaris wrote:Supporting this also.
And massively increasing war costs too...
I shall laugh if you haven't unclicked auto pay.... |
The Zerg Overmind
Rule Reversal Dec Shield
380
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 20:05:00 -
[65] - Quote
So a new variation of exploit based on dead corporations:
1.) Get a dead corporation into alliance 2.) Have all the wars set mutual in the alliance 3.) Boot dead corp from alliance 4.) Laugh maniacally as everyone is now trapped in mutual outgoing wars against a dead corporation
There is no escape, there is no way to reason or talk your way out of it. You are literally screwed forever and no one but GMs can help you. As of writing this, all 169 wars we're in are at war with a dead corporation, you cannot be set free, ever. Burn Highsec Griefers |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade Intrepid Crossing
463
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 20:13:00 -
[66] - Quote
The Zerg Overmind wrote:So a new variation of exploit based on dead corporations: 1.) Get a dead corporation into alliance2.) Have all the wars set mutual in the alliance 3.) Boot dead corp from alliance 4.) Laugh maniacally as everyone is now trapped in mutual outgoing wars against a dead corporation There is no escape, there is no way to reason or talk your way out of it. You are literally screwed forever and no one but GMs can help you. As of writing this, all 169 wars we're in are at war with a dead corporation, you cannot be set free, ever.
Now, if you want them to fix it, have every one of those 169 corporations/alliances submit a petition to the GM staff. If a flood of "**** you and your game mechanic for this ****" doesn't get their attention, nothing will. Unsub or don't.-á I don't care what your reasons are, and neither does anyone else.-á Just click the button and go away - or don't. |
The Zerg Overmind
Rule Reversal Dec Shield
380
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 20:16:00 -
[67] - Quote
Concord wrote:Corporation you are at war with is joining an alliance From: CONCORD Sent: 2012.11.02 00:04
Barnim Libertines is joining Dec Shield alliance. Since you are at war with Barnim Libertines, in 24 hours you will also be at war with Dec Shield. It seems that CCP did change wardec mechanics slightly recently.
Now when you're at war with a corporation, it'll send you a notification the moment they get accepted into an alliance. We've gotten multiple reports of this today, and I've never seen it before. Pretty sure this wasn't here a few days ago. This was one of our suggested fixes ^^
See, CCP does love us Burn Highsec Griefers |
Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
53
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 04:51:00 -
[68] - Quote
When I first saw Dec Shield I assumed you were just another player trying to break EVE, Kudos for actually trying to fix this issue though +1 and a bump. "Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves." |
Ben Youssef Noban
Sons of the Prophet
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 13:03:00 -
[69] - Quote
The Zerg Overmind wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:Zerg, it's obvious you and your fellows have put a lot of time and efforts into finding and using the broke-ass mechanics CCP has foisted on us (yet again) concerning War-Decs. What I want to know is how long it is going to take them to fix this c-f so that wars can actually be useful again?
Has there been ANY conversation between the CSM and CCP about this? I talked to Veritas and Soundwave in Vegas this last weekend, and went over many of the major loopholes and the such. Soundwave gave me his business card and asked me to email him more information. I'm currently working on a more concise write up so I can mail it off to him, was planning to do so today. As far as urgency, they were all of the mindset that it wasn't a pressing enough issue yet, and there weren't enough complaints or public outcry to warrant shifting gears to address the issues quicker. So at least in the short term I wouldn't expect anything to change, but we'll continue to push for fixes anyways.
Get Goonswarm trapped in Dec Shield mechanic and there will be some kind of a fix within three weeks. |
Musiaba Schenoly
FIRST AID SERVICE GROUP
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 16:10:00 -
[70] - Quote
btw another thread in "Features & Ideas Discussion": https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2131149#post2131149
|
|
Tinja Soikutsu
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
237
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 19:56:00 -
[71] - Quote
is CCP even going to acknowledge this at all? |
The Zerg Overmind
Rule Reversal Dec Shield
380
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 20:25:00 -
[72] - Quote
Tinja Soikutsu wrote:is CCP even going to acknowledge this at all? They've acknowledged it privately, and are actively debating it internally. They did roll out one of the proposed fixes in the last few days, so someone is doing something, we think. I'll send Burn Highsec Griefers |
Nymeria Wolff
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.04 06:17:00 -
[73] - Quote
its sad that legitimate wars are being ruind because of this group tbh |
Musiaba Schenoly
FIRST AID SERVICE GROUP
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.04 09:15:00 -
[74] - Quote
The Zerg Overmind wrote:Tinja Soikutsu wrote:is CCP even going to acknowledge this at all? They've acknowledged it privately, and are actively debating it internally. They did roll out one of the proposed fixes in the last few days, so someone is doing something, we think. I'll send
It seems more, that they don't want to know anything about this, I assume now. Customer service says thats everything working like intended and forum posts where devs are maybe watching were deleted ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2132121#post2132121) |
The Zerg Overmind
Rule Reversal Dec Shield
393
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 10:17:00 -
[75] - Quote
Exploit of the day:
Building off the previous bug of allowing dead corporations into alliance, apparently you can make identical copies of those corporations at the same time.
Step 1.) Make a corporation Step 2.) Apply to join alliance Step 3.) Alliance hits accept on your application Step 4.) Disband the corporation Step 5.) Reform the corporation with identical name, ticker, etc Step 6.) Repeat steps 2-5 as many times as desired Step 7.) Enjoy your clones
The test corp used was "Unstable Mitosis [XPLTR]" founded by "The Cloner"
http://mobileinfantry.free.fr/pics/would-you-like-to-know-more.jpg Burn Highsec Griefers |
Nymeria Wolff
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:46:00 -
[76] - Quote
after waiting 4 days for my petition to be answered (i know of others that were sent after mine but answered sooner) i get this
Hi
The tactics used to generate perpetual wars using the mutual war option are at this time considered a normal use of the game mechanics and not an exploit or harassment.
If you feel this is a matter that needs to be addressed, your best route is to either make a post in the Features and Ideas Discussion section of the EVE Online forums, or you can bring the matter up before the CSM in the Assembly Hall section. We realise this is not an ideal solution, however we are unfortunately not able to discuss ideas and suggestions for game improvement via the petitions system.
Best regards,
as i responded...
so disbanding my corp to get out of a war dec isnt against the rules??? thats not what ive heard ..... so to avoid a "working" mechanic is to break a rule?
I dont need the bs response as i know that they have admitted to war decs being broken and missused....
their response....
While players may say they are exploiting or abusing game mechanics, CCP is the ultimate authority on what consists of an exploit or abuse of game mechanics. At this time, the mutual war declaration mechanics are not broken and using them in this manner is not an exploit.
As this is the case, there is no further action we may take in this instance. You may leave the war through normal game mechanics by either offering surrender terms or, if your surrender is declined, you may unconditionally surrender by disbanding your corporation; this will end the war immediately, and afterwards you may re-form the corporation under the same name. Leaving a war by this method is fully permissible by the game mechanics and is not an exploit.
Best regards,
Doing a bit of research of my own it has been stated that it is ok to disban abd reform up with the same corp name etc etc.... this is some talk about it being done too much can result in hammers dropping.... So pretty much CCP has made it undesireable to war dec anyone which in turn means if you want to fight go to low and null sec or wait for some random corp to war dec you then just join dec shield for a day...
As the GM closed this petition i didnt get a chance to go into the fact that we cant join an alliance and are getting spammed by newb corps joining dec shield to catch other corps in this trap.... So please hurry up and catch goons in this trap so it can be considered an exploit...... Better yet, CCP put in a damn retract war option..... how hard is it? |
Musiaba Schenoly
FIRST AID SERVICE GROUP
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 06:28:00 -
[77] - Quote
Nymeria Wolff wrote: as i responded...
so disbanding my corp to get out of a war dec isnt against the rules??? thats not what ive heard ..... so to avoid a "working" mechanic is to break a rule?
I dont need the bs response as i know that they have admitted to war decs being broken and missused....
their response....
While players may say they are exploiting or abusing game mechanics, CCP is the ultimate authority on what consists of an exploit or abuse of game mechanics.
Fail! The customer is the "ultimate authority" @ccp
And more and more I begin to regret for paying my accounts in the light of such answers concerning obvious exploits of one of the most importat game mechanic and denying of all what about addon Inferno was annouced before. |
The Zerg Overmind
Rule Reversal Dec Shield
415
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 08:01:00 -
[78] - Quote
I actually don't advise cancelling your accounts. CCP are working on the issue, and they do intend to stop me. They will fix wardecs "soon". They're just working hard to make sure the Retribution expansion goes off without any major bugs before they start tweaking interrelated game mechanics that could interact in unexpected ways. One step at a time, and it's likely that we're the next step. Burn Highsec Griefers |
Musiaba Schenoly
FIRST AID SERVICE GROUP
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 08:14:00 -
[79] - Quote
The Zerg Overmind wrote:I actually don't advise cancelling your accounts. CCP are working on the issue, and they do intend to stop me. They will fix wardecs "soon". They're just working hard to make sure the Retribution expansion goes off without any major bugs before they start tweaking interrelated game mechanics that could interact in unexpected ways. One step at a time, and it's likely that we're the next step.
Maybe they work on this issue, maybe not - but they are unable to comunicate with the comunity about such an important and obvious issue, ...again after Incarna |
Reppyk
The Black Shell
200
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 09:54:00 -
[80] - Quote
The Zerg Overmind wrote:I actually don't advise cancelling your accounts. CCP are working on the issue, and they do intend to stop me. They will fix wardecs "soon". They're just working hard to make sure the Retribution expansion goes off without any major bugs before they start tweaking interrelated game mechanics that could interact in unexpected ways. One step at a time, and it's likely that we're the next step. Oh cool, new exploits incoming \\// |
|
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc
495
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 11:24:00 -
[81] - Quote
Ben Youssef Noban wrote:The Zerg Overmind wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:Zerg, it's obvious you and your fellows have put a lot of time and efforts into finding and using the broke-ass mechanics CCP has foisted on us (yet again) concerning War-Decs. What I want to know is how long it is going to take them to fix this c-f so that wars can actually be useful again?
Has there been ANY conversation between the CSM and CCP about this? I talked to Veritas and Soundwave in Vegas this last weekend, and went over many of the major loopholes and the such. Soundwave gave me his business card and asked me to email him more information. I'm currently working on a more concise write up so I can mail it off to him, was planning to do so today. As far as urgency, they were all of the mindset that it wasn't a pressing enough issue yet, and there weren't enough complaints or public outcry to warrant shifting gears to address the issues quicker. So at least in the short term I wouldn't expect anything to change, but we'll continue to push for fixes anyways. Get Goonswarm trapped in Dec Shield mechanic and there will be some kind of a fix within three weeks.
more like within three days |
Jason Quixos
Dead Pod Syndrome MORE.DPS
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 13:57:00 -
[82] - Quote
Any chance ccp going to fix this war system?
Seems like petitions get ignored, posts get deleted/edited, and seems like political answers from GM's.
Is this kind of thing CCP endorsed then? |
AssassinationsdoneWrong
The Nexus 7's
18
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 14:42:00 -
[83] - Quote
Jason Quixos wrote:Any chance ccp going to fix this war system?
Seems like petitions get ignored, posts get deleted/edited, and seems like political answers from GM's.
Is this kind of thing CCP endorsed then?
Yes. Petitions get answered "Contact the CSM" which kind of makes it a "closed loop" process because the CSM won't even make their own comment about it.
EVELOAN -áchannel is no longer attended. Contact me directly over secured loans needed. AdW
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3301
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 17:41:00 -
[84] - Quote
Hello guys, thanks for the mail, and I'm happy to give you an update on the situation here. Essentially the issue is this - the team that was responsible for the wardec system overhaul was never allowed the room in their sprint schedule for proper through on the wardec system following Inferno's release. They were assigned Bounty Hunting as the headline feature for Winter, and the pressure on them has been to finish and deliver Bounty Hunting first and foremost.
This leaves wardecs in a completely unacceptable state in the meantime, and this has been a major point of contention between the CSM and CCP, ever since they were given their assignments this fall. We've asked time and time again when this issue was going to be addressed, and basically told the same thing each time, priority was finishing the new items (Bounty Hunting, salvage drones, and microjumpdrives) before wardecs would be revisited. Obviously this is not the priority the CSM would have preferred, as it is a poor example of CCP following through on their commitment to iteration before new features. Not to mention many of us still think microjumpdrives are useless.
So in otherwords, for most of the summer and fall, there really hasn't been any news to report other than "We're aware of the issue and speaking to CCP about it". Is that the answer anyone wants to hear? Of course not, as reflected by your current email. But its the truth nonetheless, we've just been up against a resource allocation issue that was beyond our ability to control.
That is not to say in any way that the fight is over, recently Alekseyev Karrde successfully landed a 1 on 1 meeting with CCP Soniclover to review this situation and once again deliver the message that wardecs are in a completely unacceptable state and that the situation continues to worsen and threaten the usefulness of even having a wardec system in the first place. Aleks felt the session was productive, in terms of making sure that the development team understands exactly what needs to be done, but this doesnt resolve the short-term issue of lack of time being devoted to fixing this.
Since Retribution is about at the "hardening" phase where its all about polishing finished code, it's extremely unlikely this will be addressed in the Dec. 4 release. From the meeting with CCP Soniclover, Aleks was able to confirm that not only is wardecs #1 on the teams own backlog, but that they will attempt to work on this in point releases following Retribution's initial release. We'll keep you posted as things develop, but thats about all there is to share on the news front where wardecs are concerned.
I appreciate everyone's patience, this affects all of us (most of us on the CSM are involved in this through one war or another) and I know how frustrating it is to not have an end in sight. Just understand that we've been in the dark as much as you regarding when this will be addressed, and are continuing to hammer this as one of the most critical pieces of unfinished business from the last couple of expansions.
At the upcoming summit, we'll not only bring up this issue once again, but will also be emphasizing the importance of follow-through on broken systems in the future, as this is one of the low points in the road to iterative development when compared to say, Faction Warfare, where proper resources have been allocated to add the needed polish for the system to function properly.
Don't hesitate to contact us if you have any further questions, email is fastest as the Assembly Hall is essentially a redundant version of Features and Ideas discussion section of the forums, and we've been long lobbying for them to remove it completely and consolidate the two so players aren't posting in a relatively inactive part of the forum.
o7 Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
DeT Resprox
T.R.I.A.D
76
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 17:53:00 -
[85] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Hello guys, thanks for the mail, and I'm happy to give you an update on the situation here. Essentially the issue is this - the team that was responsible for the wardec system overhaul was never allowed the room in their sprint schedule for proper through on the wardec system following Inferno's release. They were assigned Bounty Hunting as the headline feature for Winter, and the pressure on them has been to finish and deliver Bounty Hunting first and foremost.
This leaves wardecs in a completely unacceptable state in the meantime, and this has been a major point of contention between the CSM and CCP, ever since they were given their assignments this fall. We've asked time and time again when this issue was going to be addressed, and basically told the same thing each time, priority was finishing the new items (Bounty Hunting, salvage drones, and microjumpdrives) before wardecs would be revisited. Obviously this is not the priority the CSM would have preferred, as it is a poor example of CCP following through on their commitment to iteration before new features. Not to mention many of us still think microjumpdrives are useless.
So in otherwords, for most of the summer and fall, there really hasn't been any news to report other than "We're aware of the issue and speaking to CCP about it". Is that the answer anyone wants to hear? Of course not, as reflected by your current email. But its the truth nonetheless, we've just been up against a resource allocation issue that was beyond our ability to control.
That is not to say in any way that the fight is over, recently Alekseyev Karrde successfully landed a 1 on 1 meeting with CCP Soniclover to review this situation and once again deliver the message that wardecs are in a completely unacceptable state and that the situation continues to worsen and threaten the usefulness of even having a wardec system in the first place. Aleks felt the session was productive, in terms of making sure that the development team understands exactly what needs to be done, but this doesnt resolve the short-term issue of lack of time being devoted to fixing this.
Since Retribution is about at the "hardening" phase where its all about polishing finished code, it's extremely unlikely this will be addressed in the Dec. 4 release. From the meeting with CCP Soniclover, Aleks was able to confirm that not only is wardecs #1 on the teams own backlog, but that they will attempt to work on this in point releases following Retribution's initial release. We'll keep you posted as things develop, but thats about all there is to share on the news front where wardecs are concerned.
I appreciate everyone's patience, this affects all of us (most of us on the CSM are involved in this through one war or another) and I know how frustrating it is to not have an end in sight. Just understand that we've been in the dark as much as you regarding when this will be addressed, and are continuing to hammer this as one of the most critical pieces of unfinished business from the last couple of expansions.
At the upcoming summit, we'll not only bring up this issue once again, but will also be emphasizing the importance of follow-through on broken systems in the future, as this is one of the low points in the road to iterative development when compared to say, Faction Warfare, where proper resources have been allocated to add the needed polish for the system to function properly.
Don't hesitate to contact us if you have any further questions, email is fastest as the Assembly Hall is essentially a redundant version of Features and Ideas discussion section of the forums, and we've been long lobbying for them to remove it completely and consolidate the two so players aren't posting in a relatively inactive part of the forum.
o7
Well said :)
DeT Resprox T.R.I.A.D CEO Ushra'Khan 2nd -áIn Command Founding Member of Ushra'Khan INGAME CHANNEL: TRIAD AGENCY |
qDoctor Strangelove
TaskF0rce Executive Vice Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 18:20:00 -
[86] - Quote
So.. As long as you START no wars, there is no trappings and no issues, right? |
Tinja Soikutsu
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
248
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 19:34:00 -
[87] - Quote
qDoctor Strangelove wrote:So.. As long as you START no wars, there is no trappings and no issues, right? Yes, as long as none of the companies in your entire alliance starts a war, you're safe..... |
Thorvik
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
48
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 20:22:00 -
[88] - Quote
+1 to get rid of current system |
Brib Vogt
DC-centre Destiny's Call
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 20:31:00 -
[89] - Quote
DeT Resprox wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Hello guys, thanks for the mail,............rt of the forum.
o7 Well said :)
Well said? Kidding me? Do you mean his pronunciation? This is crap.
My whole alliance is stuck. The "Major" improvement of the last patch keeps us nothing else but waiting. High sec mining, industry and incursions are forbidden. Billions of ISK lost every day. My members became told by any GM to disband the alliance and reform a new corp.
What should i say. F.uck off came in my mind. I seriously think about answering for a reimbursement of lost playtime for every char stuck in my alliance. This is not a play for free game. I pay for everything they announce. Fixing the War-Dec system was the bigtime project of last summer. I extended my Accounts because i was happy to read this. Now i spend my money to NOT play the game properly.
Every time you point out that the problem is the copy mechanism of the wars a GM tells you that the mutual war is okay and then they close the petition. No one answers me directly about the copying. As i stated before, CCP Wrangler said about the last dec shield that the multiplication of wars can end in a ban and is not accepted at all.
TO CCP:
Before you add new crap FIX the old stuff!!!! |
Musiaba Schenoly
FIRST AID SERVICE GROUP
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 21:11:00 -
[90] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Hello guys, thanks for the mail, and I'm happy to give you an update on the situation here. Essentially the issue is this - the team that was responsible for the wardec system overhaul was never allowed the room in their sprint schedule for proper through on the wardec system following Inferno's release. They were assigned Bounty Hunting as the headline feature for Winter, and the pressure on them has been to finish and deliver Bounty Hunting first and foremost.
This leaves wardecs in a completely unacceptable state in the meantime, ... o7
Ok, first of all ty for an update on this issue finally. Second: This all seem reflect (once again), that ccp dont understands what could happen:
Not only the most advertised feature of Inferno addon but also a key gamemechanic of Retribution is obviously a "trap" for everyone in this mmo who wants to use it:
So fixing it not till Retribution would be rediculous and cant be intended seriously.
This - in combination with an completely floping "customer support" would even mean that ppl cant use key-properties of eve-online for more than a half year.
After presenting this in our circles I heard for the first time of my 4 years eve carrer more than one thinkings about demanding back money through complaints for these months till it would be fixed finally.
Brib Vogt seems to foretell already something like that, too.
Ppl WILL unsub if they get furtherhin suggested to reform their corps for every war which they have to declare as mercs for the next time. Not the mechanics of mutual wars is the problem thereby, but the fact that there is so less to fix to get it running well combined with ccp's behavior and prioritys makes so many ppl angry and frustrated again.
After 6 weeks of no information there IS no patience anymore tbh - everybody is thinking hard about his next steps. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |