Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Morphisat
Millard Innovation Inc The 20 Minuters
55
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:03:00 -
[241] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:LHA Tarawa wrote:So, let me see if I understand.
1) The 10% for NPC stations means all manufacturing at station is dead. Nothing with any reasonable volume is going to sell with enough of a markup to be profitable at that price. How do I know this? Because I would start making manufacturing the item at a POS and scoop the profit.
Because a POS doesn't cost money to run, right? Right? RIGHT?!
Not when you mine the Ice yourself ! Kappa |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
435
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:06:00 -
[242] - Quote
Morphisat wrote:TigerXtrm wrote:LHA Tarawa wrote:So, let me see if I understand.
1) The 10% for NPC stations means all manufacturing at station is dead. Nothing with any reasonable volume is going to sell with enough of a markup to be profitable at that price. How do I know this? Because I would start making manufacturing the item at a POS and scoop the profit.
Because a POS doesn't cost money to run, right? Right? RIGHT?! Not when you mine the Ice yourself ! Kappa
Wait...free ice??? Where! |
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
925
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:07:00 -
[243] - Quote
Temenus Alexander wrote:I've certainly not seen any advantage to justify 300-500M/month in added costs.
Are you kidding me?
Compression array: Smash your high sec plag, kern and other Mex producing ores, and sell to null corps for mark up. Mex is in short supply in null and their ability to buy compressed high sec ores will be a boon.
Refining array: Now can get 100% refine without worrying about NPC corp standings. Way faster to warp to POS, warp backto belt to unload, then to warp, doc, unloadm undock, warp. Especially if you put your POS close to most belts. And since you're going to be doing your manufacturing at POS, from copied BPCs... no more hauling the ore to POS.
Manufacturing: 10% fee for stations? If you are not doing 5 billion a month in manufacturing then you're not really an industrial corp. This is not the markup, but the total price. To make a billion ISK a month, we have to turn 20 billion a month in minerals into ships, mods and ammo since most items sell for about 5% markup. That 20 billion a month equates to a MINIMUM of 2 billion from the station fees.
(yes, most industry corps make their real profit from buying mins/ores from members for below market cost. Themembers do not have to hassle with moving taking below market buy orders, or putting up sell orders and waiting for someone to buy. II count that as market profit or hauling profit, NOT manufacturing profit.)
Copying: This will be huge as corps switch to manufacturing from BPC to protect the BPO from corp theft?
Combining all this, I do not think there will be much, if any, industry (other than BPO ME/TE research) in stations.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7144
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:09:00 -
[244] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote: Manufacturing: 10% fee for stations? If you are not doing 5 billion a month in manufacturing then you're not really an industrial corp. This is not the markup, but the total price.
nope Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
Nalha Saldana
DEAD JESTERS The Harlequin's
795
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:09:00 -
[245] - Quote
I really hope the prices in W-space will be decent even without having stations.. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
103
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:12:00 -
[246] - Quote
Quote:Taxes: NPC-owned facilities will levy a 10% tax on top of everything else. This will be at least absent in player-owned facilities, and if we have time, we will allow players to set whatever arbitrary tax rate they like on their own facilities, the proceeds of which (the tax specifically, that is) will go directly into their own (or their corporation's in most cases) coffers.
what about NPC 0.0 stations? will they be "taxed" like in empire or like in 0.0 outposts? |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:12:00 -
[247] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Some general points:
- On "we don't know yet", this is a natural consequence of getting blogs out earlier rather than later. We can wait until we know everything, but then there's no time to make changes. Right now we're releasing blogs for things that are "mostly" done designing, in that the core stuff is solid and in implementation but a lot of the consequences are still being tidied up.
- More specifically, starbases. I'm being vague in no small part because this is something we're having continuing conversations about but we haven't really nailed down our approach yet, or figured out what will end up being possible in the time available.
We are totally open to suggestions for what to do with starbases as they relate to industry. In particular, if anyone who does starbase work can spend a few minutes outlining the *simplest* changes they think would be sufficient to keep starbases in a reasonable place for this release, we're very interested in hearing them. Yes, we know "throw it out and start over" would be great, but we're not getting that done between now and the summer release, no matter how much we'd like to.
CCP Greyscale wrote:We have to release the patch to find out whatGÇÖs in it
LOL |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
650
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:14:00 -
[248] - Quote
Abla Tive wrote:Given that the price of a blueprint run is 2% of production object has anyone worked out the implications for invention?
I.e. Will this significantly change the costs of invention?
I often deal with max run copies as a part time inventor.
I haven't done numbers. But I think the fee will be based on the T1 item, since you are doing a research job using a T1 BPC.
GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥
-Grath Telkin, 2014. |
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
925
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:15:00 -
[249] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:LHA Tarawa wrote:So, let me see if I understand.
1) The 10% for NPC stations means all manufacturing at station is dead. Nothing with any reasonable volume is going to sell with enough of a markup to be profitable at that price. How do I know this? Because I would start making manufacturing the item at a POS and scoop the profit.
Because a POS doesn't cost money to run, right? Right? RIGHT?!
To attract/retain members, Industry corps are going to have a POS for refining (no need to grind NPC corp standings. We used to get one guy to perfect refine, then he'd have to refine everyone's ore. No more!) and compression array (to shrink your mex/trit producing ores for shipment to null), and probably for copy slots. Combine that with the manufacturing savings, and you will have to have a POS.
If you don't have a POS, then you won't be doing any manufacturing, and probably won't have any miners, because you won't have any members. |
Abla Tive
Serpent.Sisters.of.Eve
50
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:15:00 -
[250] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Abla Tive wrote:Given that the price of a blueprint run is 2% of production object has anyone worked out the implications for invention?
I.e. Will this significantly change the costs of invention?
I often deal with max run copies as a part time inventor. I haven't done numbers. But I think the fee will be based on the T1 item, since you are doing a research job using a T1 BPC.
Yes, but it will be based on hundreds or thousands of T1 items. This is going to add up. |
|
Fuzzy Monkei
Monkei Buisness
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:16:00 -
[251] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Some general points:
- On "we don't know yet", this is a natural consequence of getting blogs out earlier rather than later. We can wait until we know everything, but then there's no time to make changes. Right now we're releasing blogs for things that are "mostly" done designing, in that the core stuff is solid and in implementation but a lot of the consequences are still being tidied up.
- More specifically, starbases. I'm being vague in no small part because this is something we're having continuing conversations about but we haven't really nailed down our approach yet, or figured out what will end up being possible in the time available.
We are totally open to suggestions for what to do with starbases as they relate to industry. In particular, if anyone who does starbase work can spend a few minutes outlining the *simplest* changes they think would be sufficient to keep starbases in a reasonable place for this release, we're very interested in hearing them. Yes, we know "throw it out and start over" would be great, but we're not getting that done between now and the summer release, no matter how much we'd like to.
My suggestion is simple and keeping in line with everything else. Give POS and POS modules Workforce cost multipliers just like stations. So each assembly array has a .98 workforce modifier. If I stack like 40 assembly arrays on a POS I can push costs down to compete with the best stations. The modifier can be different for different arrays so the Hydo lab could have a modifier of .9 to make it very powerful and keep demand up.
The ability to have low workforce costs and low base % at the same time will make POS useful and of set fuel costs while keeping with the risk/reward. POS will be better than Stations, but at higher risk. |
Tenchi Sal
Dust Bunnies 514
192
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:17:00 -
[252] - Quote
seems i got a forum error and what i typed didnt come out.
i primarily live out of a starbase. i usually build large ships that have crazy production time. i wouldnt mind seeing the production time further reduced from the .75 time multiplier. this would help justify the extra costs from taxes and the obvious fuel price jump thats going to occur.
also maybe structures that give bonuses to other activities might help deal with the extra cost. for example maybe a structure that gives a small mining bonus or shield tanking bonus against gankers. maybe small ratting bonuses for others who live out of poses. not everything has to be industry related to get a little more out of your more expensive pos. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
457
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:20:00 -
[253] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Counting facilities at a starbase is somewhat computationally expensive right now, as we don't keep track of which structures are associated with each control tower in the DB. The "obvious solution" (ie what you've described, and what's in the original design) requires us to do some legwork to track that properly, which as I alluded to earlier is not particularly conceptually complex but requires a reasonable amount of work that we may or may not have time to do.
This sounds familiar; the data exposed by the API makes it difficult (but not impossible) to determine what POS modules are associated with which control tower.
Keeping this in mind, how about this: Scale costs based on the total number of manufacturing/research POS modules (whichever is appropriate for the type of RAM activity you're doing) owned by your corporation (alliance?) in the system, regardless of what control tower they are at. This is not a perfect approximation, but it gets pretty close, and it should be a lot cheaper to calculate, if I'm understanding the way Eve works internally. You don't have to do it constantly, either, if it's too expensive; the calculations could occur at downtime or even less frequently. You can handwave the delay by saying "it takes time for people to immigrate to the control tower and man the facilities" or some such. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
mkint
1166
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:22:00 -
[254] - Quote
Sounds to me that this pretty much obsolete's all POSes in empire space, barring RE. What a plan... instead of fixing them, break them so hard that nobody wants them.
At least this will remove the pretense that lowsec industry is a thing, by killing it off entirely. After this expansion the ONLY reason for lowsec industry will be for building capitals. And for some reason, I don't think anyone will care. Lowsec will become that much more boring, but nobody will even be there to notice.
The whole system-wide bonuses instead of station bonuses, seems messed up to me. Since manufacturing in a system with a crapload of stations doesn't even care how much of them have facilities, you get a bonus period. And for some reason I suspect there has been absolutely zero investigation as to how balanced that is game-wide. Consider Sinq Laison has a total of 6 systems with more than 7 stations. Citadel has well over 20. I'm not sure who's getting screwed over by this point of lack of balance, but I suspect it's everybody. And even given that it's probably incredibly unbalanced, even more, it's incredibly boring. There's no data points to making a decision, no trying to balance wait times to travel times, no getting a feel for a system's slot availability over time, no setting up a home at a strategic location close to plenty of slots. Now it's just move to where there's lots of stations. There are no other relevant variables. Maxim 34: If you're leaving scorch-marks, you need a bigger gun. |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
650
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:22:00 -
[255] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:NPC corp taxes at a POS makes no sense at all. Simply set the tax to the owning corp's tax rate. Or better yet, have specific tax rates that can be set by personnel with the relevant roles.
This will allow manufacturing corps to tax their members at a reasonable rate, or for solo players with lots of alts to simply set it to 0 and maximize their gains.
I seem to recall being told that arrays don't track to which corp they belong, which woul make this problematic. But that begats another question: how does the array know to which corp hanger and wallet divisions you have access? Clearly, the answer is that the game is looking at the accessing player's corp, roles, and accesses.
Assuming I'm correct, then is it not simple to do the same thing in order to assess the correct corp tax rate, since the accessing player must by default belong to the owning corp? No more remote alliance access is possible due to remote research being removed.
GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥
-Grath Telkin, 2014. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
435
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:25:00 -
[256] - Quote
Querns wrote:... Keeping this in mind, how about this: Scale costs based on the total number of manufacturing/research POS modules (whichever is appropriate for the type of RAM activity you're doing) owned by your corporation (alliance?) in the system, regardless of what control tower they are at. This is not a perfect approximation, but it gets pretty close, and it should be a lot cheaper to calculate, if I'm understanding the way Eve works internally. You don't have to do it constantly, either, if it's too expensive; the calculations could occur at downtime or even less frequently. You can handwave the delay by saying "it takes time for people to immigrate to the control tower and man the facilities" or some such.
That's pretty much what I was driving at before...one calculation at patch time, then only recalculate POS bonus if a POS setup is changed. I'm thinking POS will be pretty static in their setup. This uses the data already available too so is easier and seems to be a reasonable approximation of a corps system S&I capability. It makes sense too in that the POS labs can communicate with each other in system to run research, collate results etc etc, just treat extra manufacturing bonus as other arrays taking up slack and ferrying the goods around in the background for simplicity |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
650
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:27:00 -
[257] - Quote
Querns wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Counting facilities at a starbase is somewhat computationally expensive right now, as we don't keep track of which structures are associated with each control tower in the DB. The "obvious solution" (ie what you've described, and what's in the original design) requires us to do some legwork to track that properly, which as I alluded to earlier is not particularly conceptually complex but requires a reasonable amount of work that we may or may not have time to do.
This sounds familiar; the data exposed by the API makes it difficult (but not impossible) to determine what POS modules are associated with which control tower. Keeping this in mind, how about this: Scale costs based on the total number of manufacturing/research POS modules (whichever is appropriate for the type of RAM activity you're doing) owned by your corporation (alliance?) in the system, regardless of what control tower they are at. This is not a perfect approximation, but it gets pretty close, and it should be a lot cheaper to calculate, if I'm understanding the way Eve works internally. You don't have to do it constantly, either, if it's too expensive; the calculations could occur at downtime or even less frequently. You can handwave the delay by saying "it takes time for people to immigrate to the control tower and man the facilities" or some such.
^Or this.
GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥
-Grath Telkin, 2014. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7146
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:27:00 -
[258] - Quote
Allowing the bonus to be scaled by amount of arrays in system, instead of ONLINE in system, is hilariously exploitable. I don't know if it will be worth it to exploit that by anchoring one million offline arrays, but I'd consider it. Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
Dei
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:27:00 -
[259] - Quote
How did the whole 'forget about POS owners' get through the CSM? Surely someone should've mentioned something that a huge percentage of high sec POSes are lab based. These changes mean that there's no reason to have a POS any more!
A corp can't even charge a public member for use, but with unlimited slots at a station, I don't think anyone would even want to put one up for that anyway. Not to mention that now you can't create jobs remotely and have to have all the materials and BPs at the lab. This makes no sense at all, it's like they just forgot about the majority of high sec industry.
I'm not a fan of the whole NDA until 2 months before release thing either. How can we give feedback to the CSM if we don't know what the changes are until CCP have ****** it up and stated that it's too late to make big changes? What a waste of manpower...
The UI and most of the changes are fine, but this one issue changes the high sec industry dynamic massively and they have no idea what they're doing about it.
Whatever the changes are to starbases, they need to compensate over 400bil isk per month at least. Material and time efficiency bonuses are the obvious choice here.
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2829
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:28:00 -
[260] - Quote
So Greyscale gives an example of the cost of building a T1 200M ISK BS in high. Great.
Now how about he do an analysis of building the same ship 3 systems away from VFK? How about do the same analysis for a Damage Control II? How about an Anshar?
I already know that mission runners, actually anyone who uses LP to buy BPC's, is absolutely crushed by these changes, but those high sec players don't count. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7146
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:29:00 -
[261] - Quote
mkint wrote:Now it's just move to where there's lots of stations. There are no other relevant variables.
i am constantly astounded by how bad people are at figuring these changes out
the much more significant variable is how many people are there
man, you can tell how broken industry has been for ages by how bad people are at figuring out change Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
457
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:29:00 -
[262] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Allowing the bonus to be scaled by amount of arrays in system, instead of ONLINE in system, is hilariously exploitable. I don't know if it will be worth it to exploit that by anchoring one million offline arrays, but I'd consider it. Hah, yeah, I meant to only count online POS modules. I've edited the post to reflect this. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Vesan Terakol
Sad Face Enterprises
63
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:30:00 -
[263] - Quote
I see this as a great conflict driver - declare war to other known users of the same installations to interdict their supply chains and drive down the prices to build in the system :) https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4259327 - more suff in the Zero.Zero collection |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
154
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:31:00 -
[264] - Quote
gascanu wrote:Quote:Taxes: NPC-owned facilities will levy a 10% tax on top of everything else. This will be at least absent in player-owned facilities, and if we have time, we will allow players to set whatever arbitrary tax rate they like on their own facilities, the proceeds of which (the tax specifically, that is) will go directly into their own (or their corporation's in most cases) coffers. what about NPC 0.0 stations? will they be "taxed" like in empire or like in 0.0 outposts? all in all, 10% of the building price is waaaay too much. i think this and the reprocessing nerf will send some BIG shock waves all around the universe. maybe will be better to do this in small steps, and see how things work out... p.s; i wish you guys all the luck with this implementation and i hope to be wrong, but remembering "the united inventory thing" i can't but brace myself and wait for the storm Yes I'd like to add this too. NPC 0.0 stations should have some advantage over LS and HS. As I don't think the multiplier is going to be able to reach the levels of high sec given the sparsity of stations in 0.0. |
Abla Tive
Serpent.Sisters.of.Eve
50
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:32:00 -
[265] - Quote
I note with interest that CCP says they want industrial type people to spread out. However, their use of the square root function in the pricing calculation *dramatically* levels the field and contradicts their stated objective.
Two systems that have a factor of 100 difference in terms of usage get leveled to only a factor of 10 difference in pricing.
Furthermore, they will institute floors on activity (0.0001 -> which roots to 0.01) so that extreme cases are still leveled.
Then, they add back in a bunch of things like station facility adjustments to level it some more.
Finally, there is the future "work team" devblog which is supposed to encourage coming together and no doubt further "leveling".
Simply put: Don't believe CCP when they say they want people to spread out.
*dons tin foil beany*
This may be because a general spreading out would reduce opportunities for "emergent game play "
|
Eurynome Mangeiri
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:36:00 -
[266] - Quote
Abla Tive wrote:I note with interest that CCP says they want industrial type people to spread out. However, their use of the square root function in the pricing calculation *dramatically* levels the field and contradicts their stated objective.
Two systems that have a factor of 100 difference in terms of usage get leveled to only a factor of 10 difference in pricing.
Furthermore, they will institute floors on activity (0.0001 -> which roots to 0.01) so that extreme cases are still leveled.
Then, they add back in a bunch of things like station facility adjustments to level it some more.
Finally, there is the future "work team" devblog which is supposed to encourage coming together and no doubt further "leveling".
Simply put: Don't believe CCP when they say they want people to spread out.
*dons tin foil beany*
This may be because a general spreading out would reduce opportunities for "emergent game play "
this whole summer update as only one goal:
create inflation, and a big one
so the plex price increase, thus making more $$ in CCP pocket.
beware tho CCP, ppl unable to keep plexing will just leave |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
154
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:37:00 -
[267] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Two step wrote:If you want to use km value, you NEED to add an API endpoint to give people this value. I'll talk to some people. Yes this needs to be done if that variable will be used. |
mkint
1166
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:39:00 -
[268] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Steijn wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Yes, someone with unlimited ISK to throw at a particular system has the ability to cause a huge mess with office slots. We want to take another look at the office slot system at some point, but at the same time the ability to burn huge amounts of cash on economic warfare is not entirely a negative thing. that just sums up what a lot of people are thinking about these changes, they are mainly an Isk sink and if things become more expensive, thats good as far as you are concerned. EDIT: just seen your reply to the other question I asked. It might not be part of the design process, but from an outsiders viewpoint, making isk sinks seems to be a primary process in these changes. Ok, well let me try and alleviate that concern by again saying no design decision that I've been party to has been changed in any way by considerations involving ISK sinks. The reasoning for why we've gone down this road was laid out at the start of the blog, and that's the truth. It's of course up to you whether you choose to believe me or not :)
Hmm... in the frame of isk sinks... who does this punish most? Does this incentivize doing industry or doing PVE? It reduces isk pool growth, so it should make PVE more lucrative, right? At least initially, and especially since the average industrialist has low expectations up until they quit the game. I highly doubt it'll even come close to balance out the reprocessing nerf, so nerfs for everybody! Hooray! Maxim 34: If you're leaving scorch-marks, you need a bigger gun. |
Home Starrunner
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:39:00 -
[269] - Quote
So to build a titan, you will first need to make a copy of the BPO.
Say the price for Titan is set at 80b
@ 2% of the finished product for copy costs, we are looking at 1.6b just to make a copy? Copying the component prints also equals around the same price, so we are looking at 1.6b in copy fees for the component prints.
This adds an instant 3.2b to the cost of a Titan.
That doesn't include the copy price on all of the components etc...
Maybe copy pricing should be greatly reduced to be more reasonable, even when needing to use max run copies for invention it makes things cost a lot more.
Seems a bit excessive to me.
Then you run into the issue where characters are limited to 11 slots, which means since we are moving to a bpc based manufacturing system, there's going to be a need for hundreds of alts just to keep up the pace of copying prints for production.
You are going to need to change the skill modifiers to allow for more slot use from characters, and also even new skill to increase the numbers more like we do with trading. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
168
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:44:00 -
[270] - Quote
Copying: Max is 14% in Vuorrassi, 10th is 9%, 50th is 6%, and we drop below 5% at 95th.
TE: The same numbers are 13% in Nomaa, 9%, 6%, 90th.
ME: 10% in Abudban, 7%, 5%, 79th.
Invention: 12% in Nomaa, 9%, 7%, 119th.
Reverse Engineering: 35%(!) in Droselory, 17%, 6%, and there are sufficiently few systems doing reverse engineering when the snapshot was taken that the bottom one is still above 5% of output value.
From the DevBlog. Some system names seem to be missing.
Also why are there varitions between Me/Te/Inv/Re I thought this were getting mashed together into research |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |