Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
jbob2000
Gallente KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 13:53:00 -
[31]
How are we supposed to kill motherships and titans (who stay logged on) if we can't bump them?
Worst rant I've ever heard. ________________________________ KIA Recruitment
|
Kalixa Hihro
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:07:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Izzy Pol In my opinion its not lame or an exploit. Can we agree to disagree?
QFT
Not an exploit, it's a tactic. Just like police bumping a car to spin it out in the road during a pursuit. /*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ My opinion in no way represents that of my corp or anyone I am associated with, and is probably entirely wrong. |
mizz yaya
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:12:00 -
[33]
Bumping should inflict damage!
|
Elgar Lightfoot
Lightfoot Industries
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:16:00 -
[34]
Just to clarify, no I've not lost anything to bumping. I've never been in a combat situation where I was being bumped. I have read a lot of comments on the issue and felt it was one which needed bringing to the topic of the day ;).
Take a real life example if you will.
A row boat bashes into a cross channel ferry. The row boat breaks, while the ferry is not even scratched. There's no noticeable influence on the ferry at all. Two ferries collide and both sink. Equal mass = an equal reaction to the impact. A freighter with a mass of 1,175,000,000 kg should not be affected when ran into by a frigate with a mass of 1,100,000 kg. It would be like a mouse throwing itself in the path of a car to deflect it.
In EVE we don't have any feasible way to implement physics damage without too many other problematic factors interfering.,but it's not needed. We have weapons to generate damage.
The use of bumping to prevent warp is clearly an exploit in that it's not the intended use of the game mechanic. It's exploiting the physics system so that you can achieve the same results as a scrambler without having to have the skills or even a scrambler fitted. You can't bump Stations, you can't bump asteroids or stargates. You cant even bump cargo containers. Bumping is clearly not an intentional means of preventing warp. Skills and equipment are. I trained those skills so I could perform that duty, I don't expect to be up against others who use bumping instead.
Spamming cans is an exploit as I believe is bumping.
*Snipped* - 27/3/07 My first mod edit. Now you have your second - please dont discuss modding in your siggy =) Tim |
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:22:00 -
[35]
Collision damage now!
Also Known As |
Elgar Lightfoot
Lightfoot Industries
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:24:00 -
[36]
Originally by: jbob2000 How are we supposed to kill motherships and titans (who stay logged on) if we can't bump them?
Worst rant I've ever heard.
I don't believe they should be 100% EW resistant, They should require a LOT of scrambling, but thats a topic for another thread .
|
Verone
Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:40:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tonkin i love the bump. but it would be awful if they took that off and damage was introduce if we collide, lol there be no fleet fights due to the fleets killing them selfs.
lol, introducing colission damage would be sweet... it would stop people from blobbing so badly
NEWEST MOVIE : RECRUITMENT 2007
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:42:00 -
[38]
/signed 100%.
I've never lost a ship to bumping, but just knowing the explot is out there is enough to want it stopped.
Oh, and for those that say it's not an exploit, you don't know the definition of a game exploit. Here is a wikipedia link.
Basically, an exploit is defined as using a game mechanic to gain an unfair advantage in a manner not intended by the game developers.
Obviously bumping gives an unfair advantage because there is no way to counter it. We can also tell it was not intended for use in this manner because the game developers have already provided a method of preventing a warp escape in the form of Warp Scramblers and Statis Webbifyers. Thusly we can fairly conclude that bumping to prevent warp is indeed an exploit.
Unfortunately it is rather difficult to punish as it is very difficult in most situations to tell if it was intentional or not.
However there is a simple and easy fix to permanently prevent it without causing other game breaking issues. Simply TURN OFF CLIPPING once warp is initiated by the user, if no warp scramblers are preventing warp.
They already do this with stations and planets once warp is already well along, (otherwise you would smash into planets and stations as you warp through systems) so it should be a very small thing indeed to have the "noclip" option turned on a bit earlier. I bet it's a less than one-line change to the code, and would permanently fix the bumping problem.
|
Dread Operative
SniggWaffe Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:46:00 -
[39]
Collision damage = The outside of Jita 4-4 a lot more interesting.
I really don't see any decent argument for why bumping should be changed.
By the way, who are all these whiners? Show your corp and alliance tags
|
Chronus26
Gallente Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 14:56:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Chronus26 on 29/03/2007 14:53:22
Originally by: jbob2000 How are we supposed to kill motherships and titans (who stay logged on) if we can't bump them?
Worst rant I've ever heard.
err nvm, I R dumbass. -----
|
|
Dampfschlaghammer
Minmatar Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:05:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Dampfschlaghammer on 29/03/2007 15:03:44
Originally by: Elgar Lightfoot A row boat bashes into a cross channel ferry. The row boat breaks, while the ferry is not even scratched. There's no noticeable influence on the ferry at all. Two ferries collide and both sink. Equal mass = an equal reaction to the impact. A freighter with a mass of 1,175,000,000 kg should not be affected when ran into by a frigate with a mass of 1,100,000 kg. It would be like a mouse throwing itself in the path of a car to deflect it.
May I remind you that a crow travelling at 5000 m/sec has kinetic energy equivalent to 5% of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb? Cannot believe that the full release of this energy would not have an impact on a modern supertanker (~half the mass of EVE freighters).
So bumping things with this kinetic mass seems about right. Only problem is the collision aspect, but it should be no problem to find some pseudo-scientific forcefield absorbing this energy and releasing it as kinetic energy again.
Quote: Obviously bumping gives an unfair advantage because there is no way to counter it. We can also tell it was not intended for use in this manner because the game developers have already provided a method of preventing a warp escape in the form of Warp Scramblers and Statis Webbifyers. Thusly we can fairly conclude that bumping to prevent warp is indeed an exploit.
You are quite quick to fling exploit accusations around, aren't you. First of all warp scramblers and bumping are far from being substitutes. They require different setups and each method has a niche where it is superior to the other one.
Are dictor bubbles an exploit because mobile warp bubbles exist ingame?
Unlike in many games where characters bumping into each other have no elastic collision, CCP designed EVE's physics specifically to be that way.
|
Brother Funkyshades
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:11:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Brother Funkyshades on 29/03/2007 15:07:43 sorry if i spam, i havent read the thread entirely... three things bug me: 1) some guy from ccp posted a tactic to kill a ms. it contained quite some bumpage. im pretty sure, somebody already mentioned this.
2) the collision damage: i agree there are too many factors to be taken into account when calculating collision damage. id even go so far to say its nigh impossible to implement it properly and satisfying, but i dont want to go into details.
3) the mass: however im convinced that mass should play a major role. a frig bumping a freigher the way it is able to now just looks silly.
if people want to bump big ships properly, they should bring big ships for it, too. oh yeah, and i think cargomass should be added to ship mass as well.
from a gamedesign pov its a lot more complex i believe.
|
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:13:00 -
[43]
Definitely an awful rant.
Make bumping a "bannable offense" indeed.
Please. That's going way beyond the realm of reason.
- - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - or automatic signatures - - - - - - - - "Your weapons deactivate as the eve servers begin to explode." |
Elgar Lightfoot
Lightfoot Industries
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:29:00 -
[44]
Your cow example is quite interesting, but you seem to be misunderstanding the physics of Mass and Kinetic energy.
If a cow traveling at 500m/s were to hit the side of a super tanker, it would splatter the cow all over the side. It may even dent the hull a little, but it wouldn't influence the tankers heading. Nothing which would be noticable anyway.
If the same cow were traveling at 5000m/s and it colided with the same super tanker, it's likely to penetrate the hull and make a nice mess, but it would still fail to influence the tankers heading.
If that cow approached the tanker and applied force over a sustained duration it would stand a better chance of affecting the tankers heading.
This web page will best explain the physics behind collisions.
Momentum
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:30:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Dampfschlaghammer
You are quite quick to fling exploit accusations around, aren't you. First of all warp scramblers and bumping are far from being substitutes. They require different setups and each method has a niche where it is superior to the other one.
Are dictor bubbles an exploit because mobile warp bubbles exist ingame?
Unlike in many games where characters bumping into each other have no elastic collision, CCP designed EVE's physics specifically to be that way.
Ok, your arguments make NO SENSE.
Interdictor Bubbles are were specifically designed to interrupt warp. Thusly the explanation in the ship description. How in the world you can jump to an absolutely unfounded conclusion like that is beyond me, other than as a lack of critical thinking on your part.
I am not "quick to fling accusations". I even provided a link to back my argument up. Using a game mechanic in a way not intended to gain unfair advantage IS an exploit.
The bumping nature of ships in EVE has already been explained by devs in their blogs as a mechanism to avoid the constant collision damage that would occur without it. Can you imagine Jita on a busy day if collision damage was implemented? There would be nothing but smoking wrecks!
Obviously it's unrealistic to have ships just bounce off each other, but it is a necessary addition to prevent other game-breaking problems. HOWEVER, this DOES NOT mean that the Devs intended it to be used to prevent ships from warping.
As I noted before, the Devs have already created mechanisms by which we may prevent others from warping. Warp scrams, warp bubbles, and Interdictors are all excellent examples of this. These methods also have game balancing counters, such as warp stabilizers and built-in stabilizer benefits to some ships. The idea being that teamwork and proper use of mod fits would allow you to either prevent someone from warping, or escape from a warp-bubble trap. That is the way the game was designed.
For some reason you seem to think that because one mechanic was put into the game to solve a specific issue, that it is then OK to use that mechanic to gain an unbeatable advantage over others in a way it was not intended to be used.
I ask you: How is someone supposed to counter anti-warp bumping? Is there a mod I can fit that will keep you from bumping me? Is there ANYTHING I can do within the game mechanics that will allow me to escape a dedicated anti-warp bumper other than luck?
You know there isn't.
Frankly, I view bumping in the same way I view logoffski. It's an unintended use of a game mechanic that gives one person an unfair advantage over others. Both are exploits, both are wrong, and both need to be eliminated.
Defending either one is a clear indicator of selfishness. You don't care about the overall health of the game, as long as you get your guaranteed advantage. Poor form my friend. Poor form indeed.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:37:00 -
[46]
Before reading this thread I was mildly contraty to bumping, after reading the lame excuses pro bumping I am strongly contrary to it.
About the exploit thing, some time ago there was a CCP reply saing that bumping someone by a ship not at war with the one targeted, to block the one targeted so that other ships could kill him is an exploit.
|
Lemen Meringue
Cult of Lemen
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 15:55:00 -
[47]
Hell, bumping should abort the warp entirely. Make bubbles more effective against supercaps.
Down with a bump nerf.
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:00:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Dampfschlaghammer Edited by: Dampfschlaghammer on 29/03/2007 15:10:29
Originally by: Elgar Lightfoot A row boat bashes into a cross channel ferry. The row boat breaks, while the ferry is not even scratched. There's no noticeable influence on the ferry at all. Two ferries collide and both sink. Equal mass = an equal reaction to the impact. A freighter with a mass of 1,175,000,000 kg should not be affected when ran into by a frigate with a mass of 1,100,000 kg. It would be like a mouse throwing itself in the path of a car to deflect it.
May I remind you that a crow travelling at 5000 m/sec has kinetic energy equivalent to 5% of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb? Cannot believe that the full release of this energy would not have an impact on a modern supertanker (~half the mass of EVE freighters).
It's the momentum, not kinetic energy you should be considering. A lot of people fall into this trap, looking at the kinetic energy of say, a large calibre projectile, then wondering why two WWII era battleships colliding at slow speed causes more damage than the single shell that has more kinetic energy.... ----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Dampfschlaghammer
Minmatar Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:08:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Bish Ounen
Obviously it's unrealistic to have ships just bounce off each other, but it is a necessary addition to prevent other game-breaking problems. HOWEVER, this DOES NOT mean that the Devs intended it to be used to prevent ships from warping.
Bumping ships out of warp has been done as long as I can remember, has been discussed as tactic on the forums during this time without ever being moderated and it has even been suggested by a dev as a tool to prevent ships from entering warp!
This all as been pointed out in the thread already. In the light of these facts, how can you honestly continue to ignore the obvious flaw in your exploit analogy?
Originally by: Bish Ounen As I noted before, the Devs have already created mechanisms by which we may prevent others from warping. Warp scrams, warp bubbles, and Interdictors are all excellent examples of this. These methods also have game balancing counters, such as warp stabilizers and built-in stabilizer benefits to some ships. The idea being that teamwork and proper use of mod fits would allow you to either prevent someone from warping, or escape from a warp-bubble trap. That is the way the game was designed.
Ok so what? Is the magic number of anti-warp mechanisms three? Why not have a fourth mechanism? You might notice there is no direct counter to warp bubbles as well. Teamwork will help, of course, but you can also use teamwork to web that naughty bumping ship, so I don't see the singular problem with bumping here.
Originally by: Bish Ounen
I ask you: How is someone supposed to counter anti-warp bumping? Is there a mod I can fit that will keep you from bumping me? Is there ANYTHING I can do within the game mechanics that will allow me to escape a dedicated anti-warp bumper other than luck?
There are certain things in-game that cannot be countered by one ship alone for a reason. Is there a simple counter to focus fire in fleet battles? No, because we want fleets to wreak havoc on other ships. Is there a simple counter to a bubble camp? No, because we want alliances to be able to exert territorial control. Is there a simple counter to bumping? No, because we want combat to occur.
Originally by: Bish Ounen
Defending either one is a clear indicator of selfishness. You don't care about the overall health of the game, as long as you get your guaranteed advantage. Poor form my friend. Poor form indeed.
To me, it is quite clear that aligning is an exploit. It allows big battleships to warp out almost as quickly as small frigates - certainly not intended by the devs. If they fix this exploit then we can, for the sake of balance and game health, discuss changes to the efficiency of bumping.
|
Cloora
APEX Unlimited
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:17:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Tonkin i love the bump. but it would be awful if they took that off and damage was introduce if we collide, lol there be no fleet fights due to the fleets killing them selfs.
No way! You mean it would get RID of blobs and promote the idea of flying in formations? 0.0
SIGNED!
I agree with the OP ======================================== Production Assistant of APEX Unlimited
I don't want to be forced to Jet Can mine or buy a hauler alt to mine effectivly. BIGGER CARGO HOLDS IN BARGES NOW! |
|
Luigi Thirty
Caldari FIRMA
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:18:00 -
[51]
BUMPING IS HAX:(((( ---- DOMINIX IS INVINCIBLE:(((( |
Hydraxian
Gallente Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:28:00 -
[52]
I dont really have a problem with bumping (and yes ive killed and been killed by the tactic). I would just like to point out that when asked by a player (on the forum) how would you kill a logged in Titan/MB, one of the Devs (cant remember who) specifically stated that he would use a mixture of multiple dictors and bumping Naglfar's to hold it in place while other dreads killed it
|
Badhands
Gallente DarkStar 1 Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:28:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Badhands on 29/03/2007 16:30:13
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari Being warp scrambled by an enemy and thus popping = fair
Being bumped/blocked whilst trying to MWD away from scramble range cause enemy forgot to fit a web = lame.
being bumped out of alignment just to stop you from warping without a proper scrambler = even more lame.
Seriously, if you're going to stop someone from warping/running away, fit proper tackle equipment. Bumping someone to stop him from aligning without properly locking him down with counters already provided for by CCP is just lame on a level that borders on brain-death.
Fit some goddamed tackling mods and do it right for once.
Are you all aware that this has been declared valid and acceptable by the devs many times?
Are you also aware that this is the ONLY way to kill motherships and titans?
(Yes, yes, I read the rest of the thread, but since it was obviously ignored by the mass of slobbering, ranting children hollering, "zOMG SPLOITHAXORS WTF!" I decided to say it again, in the simplest terms I could manage)
|
Hamfast
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 16:47:00 -
[54]
I was going to try the mathà Weight has no bearing, only massà Speed also has no bearing, only relative velocityà Point of Impact (PoI) and Angle of Impact (AoI) would also be important in the mixà
Lets take the Crowà flies at the 500 m/s and runs into the super tanker full of crude going 300 m/sà relative velocity is between 200 to 800 m/sà dependent on angle of impactà Due to the mass of the Tanker it will have no effectà so lets make the Crow a bigger boat (and not a small black bird)à the Ferry is sailing at 500 m/s and runs into the tanker amidshipsà there would be little if any affect on the headingà but if the PoI was bow or stern, the heading could be greatly affectedà that is, if the AoI is close to 90 degreesà or headway if it was closer to 0 degrees (head on) or 180 degrees (from behind)à If you are flying a Freighter, how much cargo is in it? That adds to the mass of the ship, an empty freighter would be more affected by bumping then a full one as the Cargo adds to the massà
None of this takes into account the damageà just movementà
I think to correct the Bumping issue requires a code changeà easy change is once warp is initiated, the warping ship ôLeaves normal spaceö and can no longer be affected by other shipsà the other option would be to add the math so that the mass, velocity, Angle and point of impactà while a computer could do the calculations, there would be a lot of them to doà
Damage is another issueà an Armored Frigate moving at high speed will have a greater effect then an unarmored ship with the same impact on the targeted shipàthe Armored Frigate will also be damaged differently then the unarmored shipà dependent on the armor of the targeted shipàagain, the easy answer is no damage, as it is now, I would also think this is the best answer as most bumping is unintentionalà intentional bumping to cause damage would be aggression, with all its effects.
Noob in training...
|
Sile Suirghiche
Gaidhlig Technology
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 17:02:00 -
[55]
Scrams <-> WCS Bubble <-> MWD Bumping ->
That's the problem, no counter.
Originally by: Elgar Lightfoot However a very simple fix would to be to auto warp after a set time.
/signed
If Capitals are therefore problematic then that should be addressed as well, not provide the justification for this "tactic".
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 17:04:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Dampfschlaghammer
a bunch of nuttiness
Damp, it's obvious you aren't much of a critical thinker, just another exploiter looking to justify your exploit so you can keep your "I Win" button.
Absolutely NONE of your arguments stand up. They rely on a series of logical errors, strawmen and flimsy examples, none of which hold up under any serious scrutiny.
The strongest argument you can bring to bear is that a Dev once suggested bumping as a tactic to use. That is all. Of course, you cite no sources to back up your claim, I simply have to take it on faith that you are not lying through your teeth.
I, on the other hand, cite numerous examples of game design which belie the idea that bumping would be intended to prevent warping (the presence of specific modules meant to do this same thing, the obvious non-counterability of this tactic, etc.)
Incidentally, I know of a SINGLE instance of a Dev suggesting Bumping. The Dev was suggesting the use of bumping as a method of determining if someone was macromining. One would bump the suspected macrominer's mining barge, and see if they react. The Dev IN NO WAY suggested or implied that Bumping is a valid and appropriate tactic for use in a Battle situation!
I do know that in a back issue of E:ON magazine that one of the Devs said that they don't think bumping as an anti-warp tactic was appropriate, and that they would be looking into doing away with it with the graphical update. I can't remember which issue right now and my wife just tossed my back issues (GRR!) So I can't look it up right now, or I would give you a specific citation. (Perhaps someone with back-issues could look it up for me?)
Keep in mind, just because ONE Dev suggested using it in a specific manner does not mean that they approve of it's use for other things. One of the Devs was recently caught cheating on BOB's behalf. Does this therefore mean that all Devs approve of this behaviour, or think everyone should cheat? Of course not. One example does not an argument make.
I have provided multiple examples and evidence which point to the conclusion that bumping to prevent warp IS indeed an exploit, and not intended to be used in that manner.
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 17:11:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Sile Suirghiche Scrams <-> WCS Bubble <-> MWD Bumping ->
That's the problem, no counter.
Actually Sile, it used to be:
Scrams <-> WCS Bubble <-> MWD Bumping -> Logoffski
Of course, Logoffski was removed because it was an obvious exploit. Now we just need to get the other half of that equation removed and we are good to go!
This Space Reserved until my sexy new sig is completed. :) |
Aindrias
Amarr Fomus-Amarr Industrial Novus Ordos Seclorum
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 17:36:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Badhands Edited by: Badhands on 29/03/2007 16:30:13
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari Being warp scrambled by an enemy and thus popping = fair
Being bumped/blocked whilst trying to MWD away from scramble range cause enemy forgot to fit a web = lame.
being bumped out of alignment just to stop you from warping without a proper scrambler = even more lame.
Seriously, if you're going to stop someone from warping/running away, fit proper tackle equipment. Bumping someone to stop him from aligning without properly locking him down with counters already provided for by CCP is just lame on a level that borders on brain-death.
Fit some goddamed tackling mods and do it right for once.
Are you all aware that this has been declared valid and acceptable by the devs many times?
Are you also aware that this is the ONLY way to kill motherships and titans?
(Yes, yes, I read the rest of the thread, but since it was obviously ignored by the mass of slobbering, ranting children hollering, "zOMG SPLOITHAXORS WTF!" I decided to say it again, in the simplest terms I could manage)
This is teh funny...
I guess Devs are ALWAYS RIGHT THEN! So all the nerfs that have happened are perfect and w/o flaw because they have forethought to anticipate all the Exploit-monkeys out there.... People will always find a ***** in the armor of a Rules Set.. it's actually quite a "Criminal Mindset"... yes.. I have experience with criminals.
WRONG
Use the "The Devs said it's ok" arguement when it fits your thoughts it laughable at best.
Bumping wasn't anticipated by the Devs as a warp inhibitor, just because someone thought of the idea and implemented it means that it's not an Exploit... someone using it doesn't MAKE them an "exploiter" per se. It's just something that has to be addressed.
It would be odd for a ship to not turn into the direction it would warp, but since direction faced matters little in space.. it shouldn't be a big deal.
Oh.. ya.. bumping = so much skill... Just hit the move towards target button... terribly difficult..
Aind
|
Melisa Zeal
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 18:38:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Astorothe Edited by: Astorothe on 29/03/2007 09:35:39 =)
Good topic - I personally believe bumping is an exploit.
My reason for thinking that is that I dont understand how a small ship can "bump" a much larger one? I know real world physics do not apply here - but it makes no sense.
However, I dont think its a bannable offence in anyway - its just a crappy game mechanic that hasnt been fixed yet.
My 2c - carry on!
I pretty much agree with this, seems like a lame thing to do but I dont think anyone should be banned for it
|
Marketcheck2
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 18:46:00 -
[60]
Why do so many people want to remove the small amount of skill and timing needed in EvE?
Oh noes my ship was bumped out of warp, heaven forbid! I can't be 100% safe with my rack of stabs! Once I hit the warp button I should be immune to all!
Try warpscramming a mothership some time
This is one of those try 'WoW' posts for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |