Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
733
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:03:38 -
[991] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote: truly your eft warrioring has swept my legs out from under me
this increasingly shorter procession of effective ranges is bound to slay me eventually
i am continually wetting my pants in trepidation for your next post, most likely a blaster brutix
You've yet to show why a sniper corm won't kill an Inty, thus you have no legs to stand on. All of your posts lack substance, so either you're trolling or intentionally spamming up the thread to hide the fact that the inties are in fact counterable. It' basic PVP, if someone is too far away, load longer range ammo. If someone is closer, load higher damage/better tracking. So tell me, how are these mythical trollceptors going to take over all of null if a 15m cormorant can kill them or drive them off? I hope you aren't pretending to be ignorant. Because this has been said many times before. It's not just that those things are almost impossible to catch and destroy in practice (your cormorant hypothesis is revealing of your continued ignorance of reality) it's also that they are cheap, easy to get into and does not really translate into a commitment into contesting sovereignty. It isn't that those won't end up dead in some cases, it's that those ships dying does not matter. They are dirt cheap. They are easy to obtain and sic upon a whole region. This is the problem. If you want to be able to contest, you should be committing in the real sense.
100m is dirt cheap? Then how will making them a battlecruiser only mod, or something else like that as other have suggested, change anything?
They'd go from 100m to 150m per ship, that's not significant.
What would you do to prevent entosis link ships from being "cheap" and being able to drop on the whole region? I'm listening.
Also, accusing someone of ignorance is unbecoming. It does nothing to reinforce your ideas.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
534
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:04:10 -
[992] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid. ... The restrictions and penalties on the Entosis Link should be as simple and understandable as possible. ... All in all, I want to make it very clear that we are going to make adjustments to the Entosis Link in order to get the best possible gameplay and to match these goals as well as possible.
We would like this thread to become a place of discussion around the Entosis Link mechanics, the ships that you expect to use them on, and the tactics you foresee becoming popular. What issues do you foresee popping up? How do you think these goals should be adjusted or refocused? Which of the many module balance dials do you think would be the most intuitive?
Please keep discussion calm and reasonable. Remember that even though we're not making knee-jerk reactions, we are definitely listening and working to get this balance right.
Thanks -Fozzie
Fozzie for the love of god you need to define the mechanics of the Entosis Link more clearly so that we have a starting ground for how we should approach the discussion of module balance!
For example we dont even know if the modules warp prevention mechanic is retained upon a broken lock or not. This simple facet of the mechanic is a fundamental aspect of its balance that you've yet to define and gives us no real area to start a true and proper discussion on this area of the module balance.
I'd say more than half of this discussion is based on pure conjecture and total assumptions purely down to your lack of will or desire to nail down specifics.
So for gods sake grow some balls and put some specifics on the table so we can better critique and offer accurate descriptions of potential issues, rather than just some complete sociopathic "lets watch the mouthbreathers fight over the candy" style freak show that's currently going on.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4105
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:07:12 -
[993] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:For the love of god do not allow us such a tool because we will abuse it and make life for everyone else miserable. I think if one were to take only one thing from this discussion, this would be it.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6595
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:07:26 -
[994] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid. ... The restrictions and penalties on the Entosis Link should be as simple and understandable as possible. ... All in all, I want to make it very clear that we are going to make adjustments to the Entosis Link in order to get the best possible gameplay and to match these goals as well as possible.
We would like this thread to become a place of discussion around the Entosis Link mechanics, the ships that you expect to use them on, and the tactics you foresee becoming popular. What issues do you foresee popping up? How do you think these goals should be adjusted or refocused? Which of the many module balance dials do you think would be the most intuitive?
Please keep discussion calm and reasonable. Remember that even though we're not making knee-jerk reactions, we are definitely listening and working to get this balance right.
Thanks -Fozzie
Fozzie for the love of god you need to define the mechanics of the Entosis Link more clearly so that we have a starting ground for how we should approach the discussion of module balance! For example we dont even know if the modules warp prevention mechanic is retained upon a broken lock or not. This simple facet of the mechanic is a fundamental aspect of its balance that you've yet to define and gives us no real area to start a true and proper discussion on this area of the module balance. I'd say more than half of this discussion is based on pure conjecture and total assumptions purely down to your lack of will or desire to nail down specifics. So for gods sake grow some balls and put some specifics on the table so we can better critique and offer accurate descriptions of potential issues, rather than just some complete sociopathic "lets watch the mouthbreathers fight over the candy" style freak show that's currently going on. a ceptor is capable of denying you "effective military control of the grid" so where's the problem?
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12092
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:08:07 -
[995] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote: Now if Goons had a reasonable proposition that doesn't a) have multiple counter tactics and b) ends up wasting more of the attackers time than the defenders? Then sure we'd agree.
Ha ha, what? You're actually straight up admitting that you only want something that does not have counters. You know, by rejecting anything that would, and I ******* quote your very sentence, "have multiple counter tactics".
So unless it's absurdly overpowered with no reasonable way for a defender to deal with it, you don't want it.
Thanks for that, you just screwed your whole side in this argument.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6595
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:08:21 -
[996] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:baltec1 wrote:For the love of god do not allow us such a tool because we will abuse it and make life for everyone else miserable. I think if one were to take only one thing out of the discussion, this would be it. It's a lie.
We're afraid massadeath of moa will abuse it and take away our innocence as sov havers
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1445
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:08:42 -
[997] - Quote
Gonna quote myself here; please don't judge me too harshly.
Querns wrote:This issue is so fundamental that it poisons any other potential discussion on the topic of New Sov. Without a clear position on this one subject, none of the rest of the work that has been done has any fundamental meaning. This is a very harsh thing for me to say, but I can't really put it any more gently than this. For this, I apologize, but it has to be said for any forward progress to be made.
It looks like here on page 50 or 51 that this is exactly what is occurring GÇö-áthe conversation is completely stalled and impotent because no details were provided.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
350
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:08:59 -
[998] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Now if Goons had a reasonable proposition that doesn't a) have multiple counter tactics and b) ends up wasting more of the attackers time than the defenders? Then sure we'd agree.
Ha ha, what? You're actually straight up admitting that you only want something that does not have counters. You know, by rejecting anything that would, and I ******* quote your very sentence, "have multiple counter tactics". So unless it's absurdly overpowered with no reasonable way for a defender to deal with it, you don't want it. Thanks for that, you just screwed your whole side in this argument. Sorry, grammar error, I'll fix that for you.
edit: Fixed, please reabsorb, it was a convoluted sentence structure and I screwed up a double negative ^^ |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6595
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:09:43 -
[999] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Now if Goons had a reasonable proposition that doesn't a) have multiple counter tactics and b) ends up wasting more of the attackers time than the defenders? Then sure we'd agree.
Ha ha, what? You're actually straight up admitting that you only want something that does not have counters. You know, by rejecting anything that would, and I ******* quote your very sentence, "have multiple counter tactics". So unless it's absurdly overpowered with no reasonable way for a defender to deal with it, you don't want it. Thanks for that, you just screwed your whole side in this argument. Well yeah, thanks for reminding us the whole objective is to end our 0.0 dream
massadeath say something, i can't believe you'd just give up on taking away our sov like that, be the hero we deserve and fight for the tools that will let you rip through the sovvvvvv
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
650
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:10:07 -
[1000] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:baltec1 wrote:For the love of god do not allow us such a tool because we will abuse it and make life for everyone else miserable. I think if one were to take only one thing out of the discussion, this would be it. It's a lie. We're afraid massadeath of moa will abuse it and take away our innocence as sov havers his sov and optimisim: gone |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12092
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:10:40 -
[1001] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Now if Goons had a reasonable proposition that doesn't a) have multiple counter tactics and b) ends up wasting more of the attackers time than the defenders? Then sure we'd agree.
Ha ha, what? You're actually straight up admitting that you only want something that does not have counters. You know, by rejecting anything that would, and I ******* quote your very sentence, "have multiple counter tactics". So unless it's absurdly overpowered with no reasonable way for a defender to deal with it, you don't want it. Thanks for that, you just screwed your whole side in this argument. Sorry, grammar error, I'll fix that for you.
Sure. I believe the heck out of that. I believe it so hard, Bill Clinton really didn't have sex with that woman.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6595
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:10:55 -
[1002] - Quote
Querns wrote:Gonna quote myself here; please don't judge me too harshly. Querns wrote:This issue is so fundamental that it poisons any other potential discussion on the topic of New Sov. Without a clear position on this one subject, none of the rest of the work that has been done has any fundamental meaning. This is a very harsh thing for me to say, but I can't really put it any more gently than this. For this, I apologize, but it has to be said for any forward progress to be made. It looks like here on page 50 or 51 that this is exactly what is occurring GÇö-áthe conversation is completely stalled and impotent because no details were provided. Well yeah but gotta stay the course and just ram it all the way in
all the way.... into our sov...
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
734
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:11:22 -
[1003] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:baltec1 wrote:For the love of god do not allow us such a tool because we will abuse it and make life for everyone else miserable. I think if one were to take only one thing out of the discussion, this would be it. It's a lie. We're afraid massadeath of moa will abuse it and take away our innocence as sov havers
This kind of posting is why CCP don't actually read the threads.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Tycho VI
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:12:05 -
[1004] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:baltec1 wrote:For the love of god do not allow us such a tool because we will abuse it and make life for everyone else miserable. I think if one were to take only one thing from this discussion, this would be it.
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
350
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:12:16 -
[1005] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Now if Goons had a reasonable proposition that doesn't a) have multiple counter tactics and b) ends up wasting more of the attackers time than the defenders? Then sure we'd agree.
Ha ha, what? You're actually straight up admitting that you only want something that does not have counters. You know, by rejecting anything that would, and I ******* quote your very sentence, "have multiple counter tactics". So unless it's absurdly overpowered with no reasonable way for a defender to deal with it, you don't want it. Thanks for that, you just screwed your whole side in this argument. Sorry, grammar error, I'll fix that for you. Sure. I believe the heck out of that. I believe it so hard, Bill Clinton really didn't have sex with that woman. Really, you think I'd say something nonsensical (that it doesn't have valid counters??? have you read the last 50 pages?)
And are claiming a slight typo as backing up of your argument.
Smacks of desperation. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
292
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:14:41 -
[1006] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Alp Khan wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote: truly your eft warrioring has swept my legs out from under me
this increasingly shorter procession of effective ranges is bound to slay me eventually
i am continually wetting my pants in trepidation for your next post, most likely a blaster brutix
You've yet to show why a sniper corm won't kill an Inty, thus you have no legs to stand on. All of your posts lack substance, so either you're trolling or intentionally spamming up the thread to hide the fact that the inties are in fact counterable. It' basic PVP, if someone is too far away, load longer range ammo. If someone is closer, load higher damage/better tracking. So tell me, how are these mythical trollceptors going to take over all of null if a 15m cormorant can kill them or drive them off? I hope you aren't pretending to be ignorant. Because this has been said many times before. It's not just that those things are almost impossible to catch and destroy in practice (your cormorant hypothesis is revealing of your continued ignorance of reality) it's also that they are cheap, easy to get into and does not really translate into a commitment into contesting sovereignty. It isn't that those won't end up dead in some cases, it's that those ships dying does not matter. They are dirt cheap. They are easy to obtain and sic upon a whole region. This is the problem. If you want to be able to contest, you should be committing in the real sense. 100m is dirt cheap? Then how will making them a battlecruiser only mod, or something else like that as other have suggested, change anything? They'd go from 100m to 150m per ship, that's not significant. What would you do to prevent entosis link ships from being "cheap" and being able to drop on the whole region? I'm listening. Also, accusing someone of ignorance is unbecoming. It does nothing to reinforce your ideas.
It's not just the cost, cost is only one of the factors. Besides, yes, 100M is cheap. I'd like to recommend you to look at typical sovereign null fleet compositions that are current, you won't see many 100M ships there.
It's speed+mobility+low cost and high availability+evasiveness and almost constant invincibility for small, agile hulls.
Basically, an interceptor becomes the hull of choice with following highlights
a) Evade any gate camp with sub 2.0s align time b) Evade any bubble c) Easy to train for and easy to acquire, extremely low cost d) Can be easily acquired in massive quantities and can be sent to troll entire regions in very little time d) Can disengage safely from almost all possible types of on-grid encounters through overwhelming speed, even during entosis module phase
And people are pushing for a hull like this to be able to contest sovereignty and space assets?
As General McAullife once said, "Nuts!" |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12092
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:15:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote: edit: Fixed, please reabsorb, it was a convoluted sentence structure and I screwed up a double negative ^^
Yeah, see, that doesn't change the underlying message.
You're arguing to get something overpowered, and outright stating that getting something not overpowered isn't acceptable.
That says way more about your side in the argument than you realize.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6595
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:15:12 -
[1008] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:baltec1 wrote:For the love of god do not allow us such a tool because we will abuse it and make life for everyone else miserable. I think if one were to take only one thing out of the discussion, this would be it. It's a lie. We're afraid massadeath of moa will abuse it and take away our innocence as sov havers This kind of posting is why CCP don't actually read the threads. I'm out, if anything changes to the mechanics it'll be posted on TMC or EN24, so I'm not wasting any more of my time on this rabble. But it's true. Look at all the posts pointing out how scared we must be.
Well ok, it might take more than just massadeath, he probably has to get some people from moa to do it, and maybe even a third party. But this is well within the reasonable range of possibilities.
Thus, we are scared.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
350
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:16:04 -
[1009] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:a) Evade any gate camp with sub 2.0s align time b) Evade any bubble c) Easy to train for and easy to acquire, extremely low cost d) Can be easily acquired in massive quantities and can be sent to troll entire regions in very little time d) Can disengage safely from almost all possible types of on-grid encounters through overwhelming speed, even during entosis module phase
And people are pushing for a hull like this to be able to contest sovereignty?
As General McAullife once said, "Nuts!"
e) can easily be countered by one person in a frigate that can be flown from day 1.
Doesn't even need frigate V. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6596
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:16:10 -
[1010] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:It's not just the cost, cost is only one of the factors. Besides, yes, 100M is cheap. I'd like to recommend you to look at typical sovereign null fleet compositions that are current, you won't see many 100M ships there.
It's speed+mobility+low cost and high availability+evasiveness and almost constant invincibility for small, agile hulls.
Basically, an interceptor becomes the hull of choice with following highlights
a) Evade any gate camp with sub 2.0s align time b) Evade any bubble c) Easy to train for and easy to acquire, extremely low cost d) Can be easily acquired in massive quantities and can be sent to troll entire regions in very little time d) Can disengage safely from almost all possible types of on-grid encounters through overwhelming speed, even during entosis module phase
And people are pushing for a hull like this to be able to contest sovereignty and space assets?
As General McAullife once said, "Nuts!" These are the heroes we deserve, who will finally take away our 0.0 dream and drag us into a new world.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12095
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:17:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Alp Khan wrote:a) Evade any gate camp with sub 2.0s align time b) Evade any bubble c) Easy to train for and easy to acquire, extremely low cost d) Can be easily acquired in massive quantities and can be sent to troll entire regions in very little time d) Can disengage safely from almost all possible types of on-grid encounters through overwhelming speed, even during entosis module phase
And people are pushing for a hull like this to be able to contest sovereignty?
As General McAullife once said, "Nuts!"
e) can easily be countered by one person in a frigate that can be flown from day 1. Doesn't even need frigate V.
If by "countered" you mean "both sit on the button until one guy gets bored".
Fozzie's very first objective, broken.
Frigates must not have access to this module.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
536
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:17:57 -
[1012] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: a ceptor is capable of denying you "effective military control of the grid" so where's the problem?
literally shut the f**k up, you're actually more annoying the xenuria. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
350
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:18:22 -
[1013] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Alp Khan wrote:a) Evade any gate camp with sub 2.0s align time b) Evade any bubble c) Easy to train for and easy to acquire, extremely low cost d) Can be easily acquired in massive quantities and can be sent to troll entire regions in very little time d) Can disengage safely from almost all possible types of on-grid encounters through overwhelming speed, even during entosis module phase
And people are pushing for a hull like this to be able to contest sovereignty?
As General McAullife once said, "Nuts!"
e) can easily be countered by one person in a frigate that can be flown from day 1. Doesn't even need frigate V. If by "countered" you mean "both sit on the button until one guy gets bored". Fozzie's very first objective, broken. Frigates must not have access to this module. Forcing a stalemate means the attacker has failed in their objective. Sounds like a counter to me. Do you like chess? |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
913
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:18:22 -
[1014] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:also fyi the timer can only be 40 minutes if the system has an industrial index of 5
there are no regions in the game with an average industrial index above one except providence
That is the choice of the holders. Skewed focus can yield sub-optimum conditions.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4105
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:18:43 -
[1015] - Quote
If there's a "Sov Mechanics" forum at FanFest it's going to be standing room only...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6596
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:19:49 -
[1016] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote: a ceptor is capable of denying you "effective military control of the grid" so where's the problem?
literally shut the f**k up, you're actually more annoying the xenuria. Er, hmm. Not sure how I should handle this.
Let me disengage and move to the next Command Post
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
650
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:20:22 -
[1017] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:also fyi the timer can only be 40 minutes if the system has an industrial index of 5
there are no regions in the game with an average industrial index above one except providence That is the choice of the holders. Skewed focus can yield sub-optimum conditions. so you would say that our focus is "not skewed" when sov havers force their line members to excavate massive piles of ore
are you aware how much mining need occur before that particular index goes up |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
650
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:21:10 -
[1018] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote: a ceptor is capable of denying you "effective military control of the grid" so where's the problem?
literally shut the f**k up, you're actually more annoying the xenuria. oof, forums burnout
i think you broke this one Alavaria Fera |
Lienzo
Amanuensis
46
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:21:10 -
[1019] - Quote
It will be interesting to see what the change of direction will be if half the stations are freeports by December. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
293
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:22:23 -
[1020] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid. ...
And how would you define effective military control, Fozzie?
It seems to me that you are just throwing around buzzwords to be able to curtail massively negative player reaction against a half-baked proposal that we would have hoped to carry substance, detail, consistency and an understanding of life and realities of sovereign null after many years of waiting.
For the sake of this game, I'm hoping to be proven wrong here. But remembering how you skirted around the statistics to cover your back in the 'Where we stand' devblog, just to be able to claim some sort of partial success, I'm afraid that I will end up being disappointed. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |