Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 14:18:00 -
[121]
ôSince the problem is cap and recharge speed, could a large shield booster + a PDU II give you "the best of both worlds" in addition to all passive mods?ö 1 PDU II might work on a scorp due to the extra shield cap as 5% to that large shield is a lot. But on a Domi the PDU 5% hitpoints boost and 8.5% shield recharge gives less hitpoints per second then 1 shield relay at 20%. I used to use 2 PDU just for a decent shield recharge but now I swapped ammo so I donÆt use PDUÆs.
Has anyone with a scorp or Raven tested 1 PDU over 1 shield relay? If its going work its going be on those two ships.
_________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 14:18:00 -
[122]
ôSince the problem is cap and recharge speed, could a large shield booster + a PDU II give you "the best of both worlds" in addition to all passive mods?ö 1 PDU II might work on a scorp due to the extra shield cap as 5% to that large shield is a lot. But on a Domi the PDU 5% hitpoints boost and 8.5% shield recharge gives less hitpoints per second then 1 shield relay at 20%. I used to use 2 PDU just for a decent shield recharge but now I swapped ammo so I donÆt use PDUÆs.
Has anyone with a scorp or Raven tested 1 PDU over 1 shield relay? If its going work its going be on those two ships.
_________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 15:42:00 -
[123]
There is an easy way to tell wether or not to use a shield extender or a recharger. Rechargers give 15% rate increase. The rate increase you get from a shield extender is equivalent to its size vs your current shield size. So if your extender is 15% of your current size, then use the extender. I'd say use it down to about 10% as well since its
a. going to give you more shield up front. b. going to give you a larger sweet spot.
And of course that is why it has more fitting requirements. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 15:42:00 -
[124]
There is an easy way to tell wether or not to use a shield extender or a recharger. Rechargers give 15% rate increase. The rate increase you get from a shield extender is equivalent to its size vs your current shield size. So if your extender is 15% of your current size, then use the extender. I'd say use it down to about 10% as well since its
a. going to give you more shield up front. b. going to give you a larger sweet spot.
And of course that is why it has more fitting requirements. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 16:10:00 -
[125]
Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 27/12/2004 16:12:47 When you say PDU, I assume you mean PDS.
My logic over when to use shield extenders also applies to the PDS.
The PDS gives you 7.5% recharge rate while the relay gives you 20%, so the recharger is ahead by 12.5%. But the PDS gives you 4% shield hp bonus. That is also a 4% recharge rate bonus (If it were not they would have to reduce the recharge rate to compensate, which they do not, so it is ).
So now the recharger is down to 8.5% more recharge rate. But again, the larger shield size gives you a larger sweet spot, and more shield to start out with.
Its hard to argue with 8.5% but its a valid trade off if you can fit stronger weapons since I believe strong offence beats defence in general. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 16:10:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 27/12/2004 16:12:47 When you say PDU, I assume you mean PDS.
My logic over when to use shield extenders also applies to the PDS.
The PDS gives you 7.5% recharge rate while the relay gives you 20%, so the recharger is ahead by 12.5%. But the PDS gives you 4% shield hp bonus. That is also a 4% recharge rate bonus (If it were not they would have to reduce the recharge rate to compensate, which they do not, so it is ).
So now the recharger is down to 8.5% more recharge rate. But again, the larger shield size gives you a larger sweet spot, and more shield to start out with.
Its hard to argue with 8.5% but its a valid trade off if you can fit stronger weapons since I believe strong offence beats defence in general. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 17:59:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem There is an easy way to tell wether or not to use a shield extender or a recharger. Rechargers give 15% rate increase. The rate increase you get from a shield extender is equivalent to its size vs your current shield size. So if your extender is 15% of your current size, then use the extender. I'd say use it down to about 10% as well since its
a. going to give you more shield up front. b. going to give you a larger sweet spot.
And of course that is why it has more fitting requirements.
It's a nice method although you don't use 15%. 15% reduction in time gives you 1/(1-0.15) = 1.176 or 17.6% increase in recharge rate. __________ Capacitor research |
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2004.12.27 17:59:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem There is an easy way to tell wether or not to use a shield extender or a recharger. Rechargers give 15% rate increase. The rate increase you get from a shield extender is equivalent to its size vs your current shield size. So if your extender is 15% of your current size, then use the extender. I'd say use it down to about 10% as well since its
a. going to give you more shield up front. b. going to give you a larger sweet spot.
And of course that is why it has more fitting requirements.
It's a nice method although you don't use 15%. 15% reduction in time gives you 1/(1-0.15) = 1.176 or 17.6% increase in recharge rate. __________ Capacitor research |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 04:54:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 28/12/2004 04:55:49 Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 28/12/2004 04:54:36
Originally by: Dust Puppy
It's a nice method although you don't use 15%. 15% reduction in time gives you 1/(1-0.15) = 1.176 or 17.6% increase in recharge rate.
Ahh so you've done the math then? Because the module description says 'recharge rate' and rate is units/time. If it had said 'recharge time' then I would use your equation. Is the module mis-described?
p.s. i was wrong, rechargers give 10% rate increase not 15%. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 04:54:00 -
[130]
Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 28/12/2004 04:55:49 Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 28/12/2004 04:54:36
Originally by: Dust Puppy
It's a nice method although you don't use 15%. 15% reduction in time gives you 1/(1-0.15) = 1.176 or 17.6% increase in recharge rate.
Ahh so you've done the math then? Because the module description says 'recharge rate' and rate is units/time. If it had said 'recharge time' then I would use your equation. Is the module mis-described?
p.s. i was wrong, rechargers give 10% rate increase not 15%. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 10:21:00 -
[131]
Edited by: Pottsey on 28/12/2004 10:22:57 ôMy logic over when to use shield extenders also applies to the PDSà Its hard to argue with 8.5% but its a valid trade off if you can fit stronger weapons since I believe strong offence beats defence in general.ö I just did some testing on the Domi and I agree shield extenders are better then shield recharges in the mid slots. But PDS are not better in the low slots.
With shield relays its 11602 shield cap with 262 shield recharge giving 106.2 shield points a second.
With 1 PDS I have 12182 shield cap with 299 shield recharge giving 97.7 shield points.
For every PDS I install over a shield relay the shield points per seconds drops. That was also T2 PDS v T1 Shield Relay. I have been trying to get PDS to work and they are useable just not as good as shield relays. I wonder if with 7 PDS's could you run 1 large shield booster? Or perhaps some active hardners.
ôIts hard to argue with 8.5% but its a valid trade off if you can fit stronger weapons since I believe strong offence beats defence in general.ö For me it was fewer weapons as the PDS takes up extra CPU while the relays take up no CPU for named items or 1 per normal module meaning I could not fit my normal load out with 1 PDS installed. Also if we ever get shield relay T2 they boost power grid by 10% per module.
ôp.s. i was wrong, rechargers give 10% rate increase not 15%.ö Are we talking about T1 or T2? Not that it matters as you pointed out before its better to use shield extenders and hardeners in the mid slots over shield recharges.
_________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 10:21:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Pottsey on 28/12/2004 10:22:57 ôMy logic over when to use shield extenders also applies to the PDSà Its hard to argue with 8.5% but its a valid trade off if you can fit stronger weapons since I believe strong offence beats defence in general.ö I just did some testing on the Domi and I agree shield extenders are better then shield recharges in the mid slots. But PDS are not better in the low slots.
With shield relays its 11602 shield cap with 262 shield recharge giving 106.2 shield points a second.
With 1 PDS I have 12182 shield cap with 299 shield recharge giving 97.7 shield points.
For every PDS I install over a shield relay the shield points per seconds drops. That was also T2 PDS v T1 Shield Relay. I have been trying to get PDS to work and they are useable just not as good as shield relays. I wonder if with 7 PDS's could you run 1 large shield booster? Or perhaps some active hardners.
ôIts hard to argue with 8.5% but its a valid trade off if you can fit stronger weapons since I believe strong offence beats defence in general.ö For me it was fewer weapons as the PDS takes up extra CPU while the relays take up no CPU for named items or 1 per normal module meaning I could not fit my normal load out with 1 PDS installed. Also if we ever get shield relay T2 they boost power grid by 10% per module.
ôp.s. i was wrong, rechargers give 10% rate increase not 15%.ö Are we talking about T1 or T2? Not that it matters as you pointed out before its better to use shield extenders and hardeners in the mid slots over shield recharges.
_________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
ELECTR0FREAK
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 10:32:00 -
[133]
Hm. I'm going to go and see what I can achieve on my Hawk Assault Ship. I saw a few people asking about Assault Ships (due to high resistances) and it seems like it would work well. I'll post my results when I get them.
|
ELECTR0FREAK
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 10:32:00 -
[134]
Hm. I'm going to go and see what I can achieve on my Hawk Assault Ship. I saw a few people asking about Assault Ships (due to high resistances) and it seems like it would work well. I'll post my results when I get them.
|
Lupex
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 11:39:00 -
[135]
Edited by: Lupex on 28/12/2004 12:20:00 I don't see any point in mixing shield relays and PDU's since the cap recharge penalties on the relays will cripple the recharge rate after the first unit.
Unfortunately cap recharge is one of those things you have to live without if you passive tank, but thats the trade off and i'm happy to live with it.
My main problem with passive tanking is having enough cpu and cap recharge to run miner II's and tank, this could be a good argument for the pdu option (thx I didn't even consider it)....in theory the tech 2 modules should allow you to free up a low slot or two, and still maintain a very good tank...good news for snipers, and unlike the endless arguments i hear for armour tanking domi's, there is plenty of grid spare for heavy hitting turrets, and the cap will last long enough to get the job done.
Just to put it all in perspective, with all t2 modules and skills in the right places a domi can tank over 200 hp/sec, hit hard at long range, and decimate ceptors with the 'annoying buzzing things'
Its ugly, but you gotta love it
and yes, like any setup in eve it has its downside and weaknesses, and no doubt a perfect counter setup/tactic. But lets face it, we're all dead when that ceptor jams us and signals the bs gank squad....
|
Lupex
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 11:39:00 -
[136]
Edited by: Lupex on 28/12/2004 12:20:00 I don't see any point in mixing shield relays and PDU's since the cap recharge penalties on the relays will cripple the recharge rate after the first unit.
Unfortunately cap recharge is one of those things you have to live without if you passive tank, but thats the trade off and i'm happy to live with it.
My main problem with passive tanking is having enough cpu and cap recharge to run miner II's and tank, this could be a good argument for the pdu option (thx I didn't even consider it)....in theory the tech 2 modules should allow you to free up a low slot or two, and still maintain a very good tank...good news for snipers, and unlike the endless arguments i hear for armour tanking domi's, there is plenty of grid spare for heavy hitting turrets, and the cap will last long enough to get the job done.
Just to put it all in perspective, with all t2 modules and skills in the right places a domi can tank over 200 hp/sec, hit hard at long range, and decimate ceptors with the 'annoying buzzing things'
Its ugly, but you gotta love it
and yes, like any setup in eve it has its downside and weaknesses, and no doubt a perfect counter setup/tactic. But lets face it, we're all dead when that ceptor jams us and signals the bs gank squad....
|
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 12:41:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem
Ahh so you've done the math then? Because the module description says 'recharge rate' and rate is units/time. If it had said 'recharge time' then I would use your equation. Is the module mis-described?
p.s. i was wrong, rechargers give 10% rate increase not 15%.
I checked just in case what the deal is with cap rechargers. On my ferox I have base cap recharge 399 sec recharge time and when I put the t2 cap recharger online ig goes to 399*0.8 = 319 (yeah I now I'm supposed to round it up to 320 but that's how it shows up in EVE). So it is wrong to say that pdu's II boost shield recharge rate by 8.5 it does lower the recharge time by 8.5 which is not the same thing.
The same applies for damage modules which is why many people say that the skill rapid firing gives you the most bang for buck. __________ Capacitor research |
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 12:41:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem
Ahh so you've done the math then? Because the module description says 'recharge rate' and rate is units/time. If it had said 'recharge time' then I would use your equation. Is the module mis-described?
p.s. i was wrong, rechargers give 10% rate increase not 15%.
I checked just in case what the deal is with cap rechargers. On my ferox I have base cap recharge 399 sec recharge time and when I put the t2 cap recharger online ig goes to 399*0.8 = 319 (yeah I now I'm supposed to round it up to 320 but that's how it shows up in EVE). So it is wrong to say that pdu's II boost shield recharge rate by 8.5 it does lower the recharge time by 8.5 which is not the same thing.
The same applies for damage modules which is why many people say that the skill rapid firing gives you the most bang for buck. __________ Capacitor research |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 14:48:00 -
[139]
To Pottsey:
Yes, it was a given that a PDS is going to give you lower shield pps.
pds gives you more "Power," and if you are able to take advantage, us it, if not go back to relay.
The only reason to talk t2 or named items in a technical discussion of one item vs. another would be to brag...Always I talk T1 standard items.
Sorry for the poor forum format but if I use any brackets in my post the server just hangs... ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 14:48:00 -
[140]
To Pottsey:
Yes, it was a given that a PDS is going to give you lower shield pps.
pds gives you more "Power," and if you are able to take advantage, us it, if not go back to relay.
The only reason to talk t2 or named items in a technical discussion of one item vs. another would be to brag...Always I talk T1 standard items.
Sorry for the poor forum format but if I use any brackets in my post the server just hangs... ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 14:56:00 -
[141]
To Dustputty:
I worked out the damage mod ROF effects a few days ago and its not the same. The change is on the numerator, not the denominator.
I just checked the cap power relays and they do alter only the time and not the capacity. Its not the first time CCP has had problems with The King's English... ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 14:56:00 -
[142]
To Dustputty:
I worked out the damage mod ROF effects a few days ago and its not the same. The change is on the numerator, not the denominator.
I just checked the cap power relays and they do alter only the time and not the capacity. Its not the first time CCP has had problems with The King's English... ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 15:15:00 -
[143]
Edited by: Dust Puppy on 28/12/2004 15:16:03 Edited by: Dust Puppy on 28/12/2004 15:15:27 That is because rate of fire on guns is given as the time between shots and not shots per seconds as rate of fire would suggest. Rate of fire on 150mm rails should be 1/4.25 = 0.235 shots per second.
You notice what I was talking about when you calculate damage over time ( damage/(time between shots) ).
So for the 150mm rail you get.
2.75/4.25 = 0.647 dps
5% bonus to "rate of fire" gives you
2.75/(4.25*0.95) = 2.75/4.0375 = 0.681 dps
but a 5% incrase to the dot is only
0.647*1.05 = 0.679 dps
Edit: don't tell the devs though they will nerf it __________ Capacitor research |
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2004.12.28 15:15:00 -
[144]
Edited by: Dust Puppy on 28/12/2004 15:16:03 Edited by: Dust Puppy on 28/12/2004 15:15:27 That is because rate of fire on guns is given as the time between shots and not shots per seconds as rate of fire would suggest. Rate of fire on 150mm rails should be 1/4.25 = 0.235 shots per second.
You notice what I was talking about when you calculate damage over time ( damage/(time between shots) ).
So for the 150mm rail you get.
2.75/4.25 = 0.647 dps
5% bonus to "rate of fire" gives you
2.75/(4.25*0.95) = 2.75/4.0375 = 0.681 dps
but a 5% incrase to the dot is only
0.647*1.05 = 0.679 dps
Edit: don't tell the devs though they will nerf it __________ Capacitor research |
ELECTR0FREAK
|
Posted - 2004.12.29 00:32:00 -
[145]
Well, I'm currently sitting at a Guristas cruiser spawn, with 5 Terrorists (Ospreys) and 1 Ascriber (Blackbird) firing upon my Passively tanked Hawk Assault Ship. As I write this, I can hear the explosions of Scourges hitting me, but I'm not in the least bit worried.
I've been sitting here for a good 20 minutes or so, and my shields are holding steady at about 40-50%. Lowest I've ever seen my shields get is 40%. I can recharge my shields at almost 12 units per second maximum. I'm rather surprised at the effectiveness of this setup. The resistances of my ship combined with the passive tanking allow me to take quite a deal of damage without flinching.
Here is my current setup: 2 Arbalest Standard 2 150mm Railguns 1 Small Shield Booster 1 named Shield Recharger (12%) 2 named Small Shield Extenders 2 Shield Power Relays
I fit the Small Shield Booster because I decided that I might as well not let my capacitor go completely to waste, and I wasn't able to fit any more Extenders or Rechargers (with Engie V and Electronics V). If my shields were to ever get low, I can activate my Small Shield Booster and easily regain a good deal of shields before the cap runs out. I could probably replace the booster with a Shield Hardener for even better resistances. I worked out that with just my normal resistances, the Hawk can absorb somewhere in the area of 55 thermal damage per second. (11 shields per second / .2, because only .2 of any thermal damage fired at me actually makes it through)
All in all, I'm very pleased. I wouldn't do this for PVP, but for fighting NPCs, you cant go wrong. Its nice to be able to go AFK at a spawn and come back later to find my Assault Frigate easily tanking a half-dozen cruisers.
|
ELECTR0FREAK
|
Posted - 2004.12.29 00:32:00 -
[146]
Well, I'm currently sitting at a Guristas cruiser spawn, with 5 Terrorists (Ospreys) and 1 Ascriber (Blackbird) firing upon my Passively tanked Hawk Assault Ship. As I write this, I can hear the explosions of Scourges hitting me, but I'm not in the least bit worried.
I've been sitting here for a good 20 minutes or so, and my shields are holding steady at about 40-50%. Lowest I've ever seen my shields get is 40%. I can recharge my shields at almost 12 units per second maximum. I'm rather surprised at the effectiveness of this setup. The resistances of my ship combined with the passive tanking allow me to take quite a deal of damage without flinching.
Here is my current setup: 2 Arbalest Standard 2 150mm Railguns 1 Small Shield Booster 1 named Shield Recharger (12%) 2 named Small Shield Extenders 2 Shield Power Relays
I fit the Small Shield Booster because I decided that I might as well not let my capacitor go completely to waste, and I wasn't able to fit any more Extenders or Rechargers (with Engie V and Electronics V). If my shields were to ever get low, I can activate my Small Shield Booster and easily regain a good deal of shields before the cap runs out. I could probably replace the booster with a Shield Hardener for even better resistances. I worked out that with just my normal resistances, the Hawk can absorb somewhere in the area of 55 thermal damage per second. (11 shields per second / .2, because only .2 of any thermal damage fired at me actually makes it through)
All in all, I'm very pleased. I wouldn't do this for PVP, but for fighting NPCs, you cant go wrong. Its nice to be able to go AFK at a spawn and come back later to find my Assault Frigate easily tanking a half-dozen cruisers.
|
Ilriac LS
|
Posted - 2004.12.29 11:10:00 -
[147]
Edited by: Ilriac LS on 29/12/2004 11:12:09 Edited by: Ilriac LS on 29/12/2004 11:11:12
Originally by: Pottsey ... With 1 PDS I have 12182 shield cap with 299 shield recharge giving 97.7 shield points. ...
I was wondering when i read these number how many 50% hardener you could fit to acheive such number ?
100 hp/s is sweet, but with crappy resist, this is worse than 40 hp/s with 60+ resist to all (more if your opponents use lasers...)
Players often need to use more than 1 hardener for each damage type (TH/EM, TH/KI) to be able to tank dmg, i wonder if a dominix with all PDU in low slot, a large shield booster II, shield amp/shield extender/hard & 3 hardener (2xEM, 1xTH or 1xEM, 1xTH, 1xKI) should be able to tank a lot more dmg longer (a large SB II could be run quite forever with so many PDU). The fact is that this active setup give passive shield regen on top too. (finally give about 60+ hp/s active regen + around 15-20 hp/s passive regen, but with no cap problem, far better resist, & more flexible fitting, like gunboat, greater tanking with xlarge SB, support role with remote repairer etc..). The resist alone should x the regen/s a lot compared with no-resist passive tanking.
Anyone check out both to make sure that passive is that appealing.
|
Ilriac LS
|
Posted - 2004.12.29 11:10:00 -
[148]
Edited by: Ilriac LS on 29/12/2004 11:12:09 Edited by: Ilriac LS on 29/12/2004 11:11:12
Originally by: Pottsey ... With 1 PDS I have 12182 shield cap with 299 shield recharge giving 97.7 shield points. ...
I was wondering when i read these number how many 50% hardener you could fit to acheive such number ?
100 hp/s is sweet, but with crappy resist, this is worse than 40 hp/s with 60+ resist to all (more if your opponents use lasers...)
Players often need to use more than 1 hardener for each damage type (TH/EM, TH/KI) to be able to tank dmg, i wonder if a dominix with all PDU in low slot, a large shield booster II, shield amp/shield extender/hard & 3 hardener (2xEM, 1xTH or 1xEM, 1xTH, 1xKI) should be able to tank a lot more dmg longer (a large SB II could be run quite forever with so many PDU). The fact is that this active setup give passive shield regen on top too. (finally give about 60+ hp/s active regen + around 15-20 hp/s passive regen, but with no cap problem, far better resist, & more flexible fitting, like gunboat, greater tanking with xlarge SB, support role with remote repairer etc..). The resist alone should x the regen/s a lot compared with no-resist passive tanking.
Anyone check out both to make sure that passive is that appealing.
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.29 11:56:00 -
[149]
Edited by: Pottsey on 29/12/2004 12:06:35 ôI was wondering when i read these number how many 50% hardener you could fit to acheive such number ? 100 hp/s is sweet, but with crappy resist, this is worse than 40 hp/s with 60+ resist to all (more if your opponents use lasers...)ö
That 100+ hp/s was just a test to see if PDS modules are worth using. My combat setup has 2 hardeners and 75 hp/s. I think it was 75 it might be a little higher now I have my new implant with 2% extra cap. It should be possible to hit 80 to 85 hp/s with the best implants.
_________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.29 11:56:00 -
[150]
Edited by: Pottsey on 29/12/2004 12:06:35 ôI was wondering when i read these number how many 50% hardener you could fit to acheive such number ? 100 hp/s is sweet, but with crappy resist, this is worse than 40 hp/s with 60+ resist to all (more if your opponents use lasers...)ö
That 100+ hp/s was just a test to see if PDS modules are worth using. My combat setup has 2 hardeners and 75 hp/s. I think it was 75 it might be a little higher now I have my new implant with 2% extra cap. It should be possible to hit 80 to 85 hp/s with the best implants.
_________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |