Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
259
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 11:57:00 -
[181] - Quote
Sounds good to me. Some of my votes are likely to go to you. Remove insurance. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7190
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 12:03:00 -
[182] - Quote
Skippermonkey wrote:I'll vote for you as long as you promise to hit Trebor over the head with a rolled up newspaper if he pulls the 'spam all the inboxes' trick to get himself elected again
Duly promised. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Ymir Esubria
Concordiat Black Core Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 13:40:00 -
[183] - Quote
I've been lurking the eve forums since 2008/2009, and Malcanis has always been a thoroughly enjoyable read. I still hear Malcanis' Law being used as a fixed term for EVE. Most importantly, Malcanis is passionate about EVE and not just his niche of EVE. I can't think of a candidate I'd rather support. You have my vote. http://evebyymir.blogspot.nl/ |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
349
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 13:48:00 -
[184] - Quote
I'm looking forward to malcanis winning because then I won't have to think for myself about eve problems for a year knowing that my general views are well-represented
which, of course, means more time for p0rn |
Syaran
Bad Company DBD Initiative Mercenaries
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 15:44:00 -
[185] - Quote
You have as many votes of mine as I can muster. I've been away from the game for an extended period if time (around 2 years) and I'd like to think this affords me a more objective view on certain mechanics of this game. The solutions you propose are well thought out and even if they should prove not to be actual working solutions, in what I've read of your posts you display exactly the frame of mind that I look for in people: a level-headed attitude and the ability to look beyond your own personal wishes and instead towards the greater goal of 'finding the truth'. That, and the willingness to actually change your stance on an issue if you come upon a piece of information or an argument that shows you that you might be wrong.
This last part is actually what I like about you the most: you encourage people to think for themselves and form their own opinions based on that. Good luck on your campaign! |
Golar Crexis
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
46
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 16:02:00 -
[186] - Quote
So first of all I hope you get in to CSM 8, You have always advocated in a sensible, logical way and that is something that is always needed on the CSM.
Now for a policy question.
What are your thoughts on the new Rat AI? Do you think its ok for people who live in null-sec and particularly gurista's space to get a free concord?
What I'm referring to is the rats attacking someone trying to kill the ratter. The set up: I jump into a system and immediately appear in local. I start a system scan and start d-scanning. After 10 seconds I can now d-scan anomalies for ratters after determining whether or not there are any within 14au. At this point if I'm extremely lucky there is a ratter withing 14 au and its the very first/only anomaly I have scanned. I can warp to said ratter and expect to arrive on grid within 40 seconds of arriving. If I don't get lucky increase the time by anywhere from 20-60 seconds.
So now I have landed on grid and heres what happens with the new ai. For a Tengu all frigates and some cruisers will swap to me instantly. For a battlecruiser the frigate and cruiser rats swap within almost instantly with there being a split in the battleship rats with the majority of them being on the ratter. For battleships its roughly the same as battlecruisers For carriers (and this is hilariously broken) Its normally an instant switch of every rat in the room. For all ratters de-agression will remove all rat aggro from them within 20-40 seconds depending on rat type.
Now the reason I liken Gurista space to concord is of course because gurista's ewar effect, jamming, but other rat ewar can be just as bad such as Blood raiders neuting out a point.
My proposed fix is to remove ewar against another player from the rat's ai and for the rats to prioritize a target that has/is shooting them over one that isn't.
And finally just for you we shall apply Malcanis' law. We used to use thrashers solo or fast frigates in small gangs to go and gank expensive ships. Our thrasher of choice is a t1 thrasher with auto's and a small tank. something we use to encourage many of our new players to fly, something that's now no longer possible. The rat ai changes give a massive advantage to ratters, combine that with jump bridges, intel channels and of course the ever present local its almost no longer possible for a new player to solo around 0.0 and not get blobbed/fight nothing. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7200
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 16:13:00 -
[187] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:I'm looking forward to malcanis winning because then I won't have to think for myself about eve problems for a year knowing that my general views are well-represented
which, of course, means more time for p0rn
I like it when people think. Hopefullly I'll help get some changes made that will give you something to occupy your mind Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7214
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 20:20:00 -
[188] - Quote
Golar Crexis wrote:So first of all I hope you get in to CSM 8, You have always advocated in a sensible, logical way and that is something that is always needed on the CSM.
Now for a policy question.
What are your thoughts on the new Rat AI? Do you think its ok for people who live in null-sec and particularly gurista's space to get a free concord?
What I'm referring to is the rats attacking someone trying to kill the ratter...
I'm kind of conflicted. On the one hand I can definately see how it would annoy any Pizza, who basically makes their living with such activities. I know it can be frustrating even trying to get on grid with a ratter, never mind then getting popped by rats as soon as you do.
On the other hand.... yeah I don't see why the ratter should be the one who necessarily has to always to deal with the all rats as well as being attacked. I guess I'd go for an interim fix that just gives rats a percentage change (modified by how many rats there are on grid) to attack the new arrival on grid. If that sounds like wishy washy weasel words it's because they are; I just can't think of anything cleverer that that right now. I'll keep thinking about it and if I do, or if someone cleverer than me makes a good proposal I'll revisit this issue.
Long term, the answer is to have better rats that require PvP fits and are optimally dealt with by groups of players. Until then there's no obvious solution that will make everyone happy. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
301
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 20:39:00 -
[189] - Quote
To throw in my two cents, my understanding of that issue (I've run into it myself and it's cost me kills, it's infuriating) is that it's a bug in the AI. But, I haven't really been able to get CCP to comment, either.
If it's intended then it's just dumb. From an RP or simply "this makes sense" standpoint, there's little reason for rats to take a hostile stance towards ANY newcomer when they are quite literally battling for their lives against the ratter, and that even goes for things like mining vessels, salvagers, haulers, etc. Attacking that Noctis that showed up and is literally looting your buddies might be offensive, but you'd think they'd be worried about staying alive first. Attacking a newcomer who's first hostile action is towards the very ship you are yourself fighting is even more daft
Malcanis wrote: Long term, the answer is to have better rats that require PvP fits and are optimally dealt with by groups of players. Until then there's no obvious solution that will make everyone happy.
I'd caution against this, though. The idea of a move towards unification between PvP and PvE is a great one and I've got nothing against that. Grouping, however, should not be mandatory. Optional, yes, to tackle harder sites, but solo content for the more casual type should be available as well.
The trick is balancing reward of solo content vs group content so that one is not heavily deserted for the other. Thus, the reward of group content should exceed that of solo content but not by a whole lot, or alternatively provide a unique reward.
In theory, deadspace complexes fill that sort of niche now, though in practice many of them are soloable and those that aren't can be multiboxed. I'm not sure how much a new AI and more player-like rats would address the latter.
e: I ought to get my own thread started one of these days instead of just waiting until the "official" candidacy period opens... This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7214
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 20:46:00 -
[190] - Quote
mynnna wrote:To throw in my two cents, my understanding of that issue (I've run into it myself and it's cost me kills, it's infuriating) is that it's a bug in the AI. But, I haven't really been able to get CCP to comment, either. If it's intended then it's just dumb. From an RP or simply "this makes sense" standpoint, there's little reason for rats to take a hostile stance towards ANY newcomer when they are quite literally battling for their lives against the ratter, and that even goes for things like mining vessels, salvagers, haulers, etc. Attacking that Noctis that showed up and is literally looting your buddies might be offensive, but you'd think they'd be worried about staying alive first. Attacking a newcomer who's first hostile action is towards the very ship you are yourself fighting is even more daft Malcanis wrote: Long term, the answer is to have better rats that require PvP fits and are optimally dealt with by groups of players. Until then there's no obvious solution that will make everyone happy.
I'd caution against this, though. The idea of a move towards unification between PvP and PvE is a great one and I've got nothing against that. Grouping, however, should not be mandatory. Optional, yes, to tackle harder sites, but solo content for the more casual type should be available as well. The trick is balancing reward of solo content vs group content so that one is not heavily deserted for the other. Thus, the reward of group content should exceed that of solo content but not by a whole lot, or alternatively provide a unique reward. In theory, deadspace complexes fill that sort of niche now, though in practice many of them are soloable and those that aren't can be multiboxed. I'm not sure how much a new AI and more player-like rats would address the latter. e: I ought to get my own thread started one of these days instead of just waiting until the "official" candidacy period opens...
Agreed, grouping shouldn't be required, but on the other hand it shouldn't be penalised either; 90% of EVE's PvE content is optimally rewarded by autistic, solo, repetitive, predictable playstyle. I would rather err on the side of favouring group activity. You'll notice that I said "optimal" not "required". Yes, plexes, but plexes are a minority activity as far as PvE goes. Incursions are an example of required grouping. It's quite easy to imagine a rework of anomalies for instance that splits the anoms into those suitable for a single ship (and therefore not realy worth bothering with for a group) and those suitable for a group (and therefore not really feasible for a solo ship).
There's no reason that all missions, for instance, have to be all solo-orientated. Missions used to be very much a group activity back in the day, but difficulty got nerfed and ships got a LOT better so now it's more efficient to solo them. Reduce or eliminate the penalty for declining a mission, let people cherry pick the ones that suit them, whether solo ones or group-orientated ones.
Or better yet: tiercide missions. Turn level 1 missions into the "solo friendly" ones, level 4s into the "better bring some friends", (With level 2/3 being the intermediate steps) and have the agents increase the difficulty of the missions & the reward they give you based on your completion stats.
Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
301
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 20:54:00 -
[191] - Quote
Well put. :)
You can't fully tiericide missions though. Or rather, some level system as we know it now must remain for newbie progression. But the idea can still apply - newbies can run their level 1s solo, or group up with other newbies to either run higher tier level 1s, or to run lower tier level 2s, for example. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1026
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 20:58:00 -
[192] - Quote
mynnna wrote:To throw in my two cents, my understanding of that issue (I've run into it myself and it's cost me kills, it's infuriating) is that it's a bug in the AI. But, I haven't really been able to get CCP to comment, either. If it's intended then it's just dumb. From an RP or simply "this makes sense" standpoint, there's little reason for rats to take a hostile stance towards ANY newcomer when they are quite literally battling for their lives against the ratter, and that even goes for things like mining vessels, salvagers, haulers, etc. Attacking that Noctis that showed up and is literally looting your buddies might be offensive, but you'd think they'd be worried about staying alive first. Attacking a newcomer who's first hostile action is towards the very ship you are yourself fighting is even more daft Malcanis wrote: Long term, the answer is to have better rats that require PvP fits and are optimally dealt with by groups of players. Until then there's no obvious solution that will make everyone happy.
I'd caution against this, though. The idea of a move towards unification between PvP and PvE is a great one and I've got nothing against that. Grouping, however, should not be mandatory. Optional, yes, to tackle harder sites, but solo content for the more casual type should be available as well. The trick is balancing reward of solo content vs group content so that one is not heavily deserted for the other. Thus, the reward of group content should exceed that of solo content but not by a whole lot, or alternatively provide a unique reward. In theory, deadspace complexes fill that sort of niche now, though in practice many of them are soloable and those that aren't can be multiboxed. I'm not sure how much a new AI and more player-like rats would address the latter. e: I ought to get my own thread started one of these days instead of just waiting until the "official" candidacy period opens...
As for the CCP comment, it was in the original testserver/F&I post (don't recall which forum it was). CCP Foxfour said it wasn't a bug, perhaps not intended, but to HTFU. He said those looking to gank ratters would just have to adapt or bring friends. It shouldn't necessarily be a solo endeavor to kill a ratter. As to the RP version, if you were in a fight and couldn't kill the giant carrier taking out your friends, and some other guy in a frigate warped in, wouldn't you want to take something out before dying?
As to the whole make pve use pvp fits, that'd be great if the ships were being balanced that way, and the missions were being redesigned to accomplish that goal. As CCP Foxfour isn't even on either team anymore as far as I can tell, this is just another thing that someone had a vision for, and was then abandoned as they got moved to do something else.
|
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
402
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 21:12:00 -
[193] - Quote
Color me persuaded.
Campaing boost added to sig.
Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.
Malcanis for CSM8 |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
302
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:17:00 -
[194] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote: As for the CCP comment, it was in the original testserver/F&I post (don't recall which forum it was). CCP Foxfour said it wasn't a bug, perhaps not intended, but to HTFU. He said those looking to gank ratters would just have to adapt or bring friends. It shouldn't necessarily be a solo endeavor to kill a ratter. As to the RP version, if you were in a fight and couldn't kill the giant carrier taking out your friends, and some other guy in a frigate warped in, wouldn't you want to take something out before dying?
As to the whole make pve use pvp fits, that'd be great if the ships were being balanced that way, and the missions were being redesigned to accomplish that goal. As CCP Foxfour isn't even on either team anymore as far as I can tell, this is just another thing that someone had a vision for, and was then abandoned as they got moved to do something else.
Well when I go back out it'll be in a dual prop cynabal instead of a triple LSE fit so I can flip the AB on to speed tank both the rats and the ratter, so HTFU challenge accepted I guess. That doesn't mean I don't think it's dumb.
PvP/PvE unification would be a pretty long term goal anyway though, that's a given. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
326
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:22:00 -
[195] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Well put. :)
You can't fully tiericide missions though. Or rather, some level system as we know it now must remain for newbie progression. But the idea can still apply - newbies can run their level 1s solo, or group up with other newbies to either run higher tier level 1s, or to run lower tier level 2s, for example.
Actually, you could: Just have the rats take note of the number and class of ships that land at any given time. If it's a solo newbie frigate, eh, send some rookies and another frigate as a "commander." If it's a marauder, send the kitchen sink. If it's a Tengu, run and hide. ;-) Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
13692
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:28:00 -
[196] - Quote
I don't normally vote mate, but will for you.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7221
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:29:00 -
[197] - Quote
Mag's wrote:I don't normally vote mate, but will for you.
I'm just pleased you're voting.
(Slightly more pleased you're voting for me ofc) Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
13692
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:31:00 -
[198] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Mag's wrote:I don't normally vote mate, but will for you. I'm just pleased you're voting. (Slightly more pleased you're voting for me ofc) You're welcome bud. It's more the fact that your right for the job with common sense, which isn't all that common these days.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Jarkovii
7 Corners Trading
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:42:00 -
[199] - Quote
I humbly support Malcanis' run for CSM 8! He's a true Eve visionary! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7221
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 22:45:00 -
[200] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Malcanis wrote:Mag's wrote:I don't normally vote mate, but will for you. I'm just pleased you're voting. (Slightly more pleased you're voting for me ofc) You're welcome bud. It's more the fact that your right for the job with common sense, which isn't all that common these days. Anyway I blame Tippia, his sig made me do it.
Tippia is a menace to all right thinking citizens, and should be made to drink a cup of hemlock. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
|
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
408
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 23:04:00 -
[201] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Kinis Deren wrote:Would you care to reveal your thoughts concerning moon goo (specifically, from tech moons)? Do you think the alchemy changes went far enough, do you think a geographical redistribution of tech moons is warranted or do you have something else in mind? The current situation with tech moons is still DumbGäó Obviously alchemy has helped to mitigate the issues, but the fundamental problems are still there, most specifically the terrible distribution of Technetium moons. What I'd really like to see is the solution proposed by a clever person whose name temporarily escapes me, which is to basically completely redo the distribution of the R64s, so that each R64 is heavily concentrated in a single quadrant of the map. And then to redo the moongoo requirements for tech 2 items such that each race relies on a different R64. So it might be possible for a coalition to dominate the R64 for Caldari ships or Minmatar ships, but it would require them to control the whole of 0.0 to monopolise the top earning moons in the way that we see now. In any case, the top-earning moons still earn far too much. Alliances should derive their wealth from the activity of their memberbase, not from lifeless structures which are milked by an elite few. Kinis Deren wrote: Are you in favour of "wormhole stabilizers" or other such mechanics to grant WH access to large fleets?
No I am not. To me they directly destroy one of the things that makes W-space distinct from 0.0. If you want big fleet action, then you should be looking at sov null. Building might empires and having epic huge space battles between them is what sov 0.0 is for. Bringing big fleet action into W-space would change it as radically as bringing CONCORD into lo-sec. Amen. It was this post, BTW, which persuaded me.
Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.
Malcanis for CSM8 |
JamesCLK
269
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 23:10:00 -
[202] - Quote
A vote for Malcanis is a vote well spent. Malcanis for CSM8! Malcanis, Mynnna and Ripard Teg for CSM 8! |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
805
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 04:02:00 -
[203] - Quote
awesome news
what's your stance on making industrial structures (after buffing them ofc) :accessible: to enemy forces ? (read: thievery) We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
(BANNER WAS USED FOR THIS POST) |
Ghazu
501
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 07:46:00 -
[204] - Quote
Do you pledge to sorry SOL all the goddamn emoting loving barbie freaks? http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984 |
Chokichi Ozuwara
Lucky Dragon Convenience
478
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 07:59:00 -
[205] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:One thing that I am particularly concerned to do is to raise the perceived value of the CSM in the eyes of the players. That's hard to do because democracies are typically built around race, culture, language etc.
It's very hard to erect a [sic] functioning democracy from scratch.
Also, the game is very anarchistic, and the effects of the CSM are very limited. Not to mention, the CSM doesn't actually wield any obvious political power. Normally voting blocks form around special interests.
I dislike government and politics, but I admire the guys who run for CSM (most of them) because it's not a high profile, high reward job. But for those same reasons, it's difficult for the CSM to really gain much stature, which suits my anarchist nature just fine.
That said, I wasted 3 votes on Trebor the spammer last go around, and this time, you'll get all 3 unless someone else blows me away.
Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
3373
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 08:16:00 -
[206] - Quote
This pleases me to no end.
You have my support. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Xander Phoena
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 08:45:00 -
[207] - Quote
Malcanis, most of the announced candidates for CSM8 (Marc, Ripard, Mike, Mangala) have already taken me up on a one-on-one interview on Crossing Zebras. I'd love to add your name to the list too. Details can be found here:
http://crossingzebras.com/post/40699271518/electioninterviews |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7231
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 11:13:00 -
[208] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:awesome news
what's your stance on making industrial structures (after buffing them ofc) :accessible: to enemy forces ? (read: thievery)
Please expand on this: what do you mean, exactly? Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7231
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 11:15:00 -
[209] - Quote
Sure OK.
I suppose I knew that doing this would mean getting a microphone. Might as well get it over with now. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7232
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 11:47:00 -
[210] - Quote
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:Malcanis wrote:One thing that I am particularly concerned to do is to raise the perceived value of the CSM in the eyes of the players. That's hard to do because democracies are typically built around race, culture, language etc. It's very hard to erect a [sic] functioning democracy from scratch. Also, the game is very anarchistic, and the effects of the CSM are very limited. Not to mention, the CSM doesn't actually wield any obvious political power. Normally voting blocks form around special interests. I dislike government and politics, but I admire the guys who run for CSM (most of them) because it's not a high profile, high reward job. But for those same reasons, it's difficult for the CSM to really gain much stature, which suits my anarchist nature just fine. That said, I wasted 3 votes on Trebor the spammer last go around, and this time, you'll get all 3 unless someone else blows me away.
No, it's hard to do for some more specific reasons:
(1) General faith in our RL political culture is pretty low. People have difficulty in restraining themselves from applying that cynicism to internetpixelspaceship politicians as well. Ankhgate, Larkgate and Mittengate did not help in this respect.
(2) The CSM gets caught up in the forum metagames; hi-sec vs 0.0, bears vs gankers and so on. The forum warriors do not recognise neutrality.
(3) The CSM is still a very young and evolving institution. Each one has been significantly different from the previous one. There's not really a perception of continuity, and I think people don't really feel confident in what they're supposed to expect. and confused expectations are very hard to live up to.
(4) The internet. The constant drive towards the lowest common-denominator one-liner discourse. It's simly just easier to write off the CSM with "Just a PR stunt" or "Just nullsec puppets" or whatever. Despite the easily available evidence to the contrary, these lines still get thrown out because people simply can't be bothered to deal with a more complex reality. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |