Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Raz Lictor
Maximatics Inc Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 23:59:00 -
[91]
The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
|
Keeves
Minmatar Dead Pilots Society Violent Intent
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 23:59:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Keeves on 16/11/2010 00:01:56
Originally by: OT Smithers
Originally by: Bobkate Dobbs WTF?
Id like to see some more info before I completely jump to the conclusion that this is utter BS, but my god.. it walks like a pile of steaming BS, talks like a pile of steaming BS, and certainly stinks like one.
Im sorry but actions like this completly destroy credibility of this game, and everything that makes it fun. Really sad... and really dissapointing.
Only one thing to say really.... VOTE WITH YOUR WALLETS!!
A better solution is to wipe out the corporation that the GM is involved with.
I've already offered to pay for wardecs till the alliance disbands or EVE shuts down; whichever comes first.
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
FA is an alliance full of morons, it won't be an issue.
|
podlol
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:00:00 -
[93]
Originally by: CCP Morpheus Hi, I'm CCP Morpheus, Internal Affairs Specialist at CCP.
I have looked into this matter and found that these GM actions were warranted. There is a paper trail of emails, defects and petitions directly related to this case. I can't go into more detail on a public forum, but the affected parties will have their concerns addressed via petitions. A Senior GM will be replying to your CEO's petition as soon as possible.
Internal Affairs is reachable by email at "[email protected]".
Best regards, CCP Morpheus
YO MORPHEUS.... THE GM'S SAID THEY ****ED UP DUDE.... THEY SENT A DAMN APOLOGY.... HTF CAN YOU SAY THE GM'S ACTIONS WERE "WARRENTED"???? THEY ADMITTED THEY WERE WRONG. THATS "UNWARRENTED" DUDE.
WE DEMAND A PROPER INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATION AND BLOG TELLIN THE COMMUNITY WHAT HAPPENED. CCP MORPHEUS, YOU JUST LIED TO US AND ARE HELPIN THEM COVER THIS UP. ARE YOU ****ING SERIOUS DUDE?????????????? YOU THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS GUY.
|
Aerion Va'rr
Dead Pilots Society Violent Intent
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:06:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
Obviously its inconvenient enough to whine and petition about.
We we're paid to do this, your charismatic presence leaves little to imagine as for the reasoning. Say what you will, but the freighter train that left Jita, the second the dec ended looked to me like we were extremely inconvenient.
|
Raz Lictor
Maximatics Inc Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:06:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Keeves Edited by: Keeves on 16/11/2010 00:01:56
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
FA is an alliance full of morons, it won't be an issue.
Without a doubt, as are most Alliances. But they're not the ones responsible for moving Sovereignty Structures. lolwardec losses are embarrassing sure, but the idea that you have any sort of strategic impact beyond thinning out idiots is laughable.
|
Rommell Drako
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:07:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Rommell Drako on 16/11/2010 00:09:35
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
Guess what. Our little high sec war dec is obviously a thorn in your side if you hade to petition it to a GM as "evidence provided" claims.
The arguement is not about just you anymore. It is about the suggeted and undefended claims of GM abuse of power that was used for your gain.
If FA is not insulted by the fact that a GM helped them or is capable of this then it just proves that you were in on it.
This is an assualt on all of EVE players not just Violent Intent or mercs.
And there ladies and gentlmen is the final piece of evidence proving htat FA has a GM on its payroll. (maybe not even just one as we have seen GMs covering for other GMs.)
Will someone please defend this? Please prove me wrong. There is nothing that would make me happier then to wrong now.
|
Antonius Lee
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:11:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Antonius Lee on 16/11/2010 00:12:21 CCP Morpheus and the GM team,
I think you are accorded the benefit of the doubt considering your position and employment; however, based on the information that I have read in this thread and the short and ambiguous responses of CCP Morpheus, I am forced to assume that there was an embarrassing error on the part of a GM that resulted in an unfair advantage being given to a group of players.
As I understand it, this unfairness was resolved by giving back to the advantaged players what they lost in the first place to valid game mechanics. The fact that the losses of the other party were also refunded is irrelevant, especially considering these losses were minuscule in comparison.
According to what I've learned from this thread, this situation was not only poorly handled to begin with, but the mishandling was then compounded by a frankly deceitful post from CCP Morpheus. Listed below are my concerns with what has transpired (as I have observed from this thread):
1. A CCP Employee failed to understand a basic and rather obvious game mechanic and penalized a group of players for his own failure. 2. The CCP IA team investigated the incident, including going over a "paper trail of emails, defects, and petitions" related to it. None of these documents have been referenced by CCP Morpheus in his responses in this thread. Neither have the names of the GMs responsible for this been mentioned. There is thus no evidence to support any of the claims made by CCP, though ample documentation has been provided by players to show that they followed legitimate mechanics to achieve their goals. 3. The reimbursement that the wronged players received was smaller than that of the players who were given an unfair advantage. In fact, the wronged players were further penalized by CCP in that their enemies (who they fought using legitimate means) were allowed to fulfill their goals.
The only recourse that will show a decent level of honesty and transparency from CCP would be a public apology (in this thread and in a dev blog) from the GM responsible and an explanation of how a similar situation will be avoided in the future and of the punishment that the guilty GM will receive. Such an apology would make me satisfied with the GM team. Anything less would be, according to what I've experienced in the game and in this thread, would leave the player base with a damaging distrust for the GMs and for CCP in general.
A big thank you to Aerion and Violent Intent for bringing this to everyone's attention.
TL;DR: /me is mad, want blood, grrrrr.
|
Keeves
Minmatar Dead Pilots Society Violent Intent
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:12:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Keeves on 16/11/2010 00:12:41
Originally by: Rommell Drako Edited by: Rommell Drako on 16/11/2010 00:09:35
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
Guess what. Our little high sec war dec is obviously a thorn in your side if you hade to petition it to a GM as "evidence provided" claims.
The arguement is not about just you anymore. It is about the suggeted and undefended claims of GM abuse of power that was used for your gain.
If FA is not insulted by the fact that a GM helped them or is capable of this then it just proves that you were in on it.
This is an assualt on all of EVE players not just Violent Intent or mercs.
And there ladies and gentlmen is the final piece of evidence proving htat FA has a GM on its payroll. (maybe not even just one as we have seen GMs covering for other GMs.)
Will someone please defend this? Please prove me wrong. There is nothing that would make me happier then to wrong now.
And there ladies and gentlemen is Rommel giving zero evidence whatsoever. Good job dooshcanoe.
|
Rommell Drako
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:13:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
My evidence.
|
admiral fovios
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:14:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Lubomir Penev So all you need to do if you lose a war is to find an intellectually challenged GM for everything to be wiped out?
This is, actually, the best assessment of what happened.
Read between the lines of Morpheus' post - they found nothing that worried them about the GM conduct (i.e. making a move to help his corp/alliance). Remember, he's NOT making an assessment as to whether the GM made the right move, but rather whether the GM did something corrupt. Notwithstanding the outrage above, outright corruption is unlikely.
After all, why blame on malice what can be attributed to incompetence? Try this: the GM saw the announcements about sovereignty/downtime exploits and figured a wardec was the same. He might not be right, but that's besides the point. The facts here don't fit the above. The dec was live on the target corp days before the downtime. The alliance accepted them in, and maybe lost a little notice because of the downtime. That's bad luck, not an exploit.
Bottom line? The GM didn't do his due diligence. The call on the field was wrong.
But what's the fix? This isn't baseball or football. There's no way to redo it. The best that can be expected is fessing up to the error and making sure that all GMs know it was an error.
|
|
Princess Hotbox
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:15:00 -
[101]
Damn, you guys are some children.
- Dude: The GM did something we didn't like for no reason! Conspiracy! - IA: We looked into it, and it legit, by the book, we don't post Gm correspondence etc - Dudes: Conspiracy! This one goes to the top! - Everybody else:
|
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:15:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Raz Lictor Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
That would sound MUCH more impressive if you were not hiding behind your GM's skirts when you said it. In any case, what impact can anyone have when the GM's will simply reverse your losses.
|
Aerion Va'rr
Dead Pilots Society Violent Intent
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:19:00 -
[103]
Originally by: OT Smithers
Originally by: Raz Lictor Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
That would sound MUCH more impressive if you were not hiding behind your GM's skirts when you said it. In any case, what impact can anyone have when the GM's will simply reverse your losses.
^ This. Nothings funnier then NC Pets acting hardcore. You we're given space when Ev0ke left. You have a huge history or being pets.. for just about anyone that would take you. If you want to impress someone go out and do it on your own, then talk ****, in the meantime you have the same significance as a Jita Spammer.
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium.
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:21:00 -
[104]
Edited by: Evelgrivion on 16/11/2010 00:22:14
Originally by: Rommell Drako If FA is not insulted by the fact that a GM helped them or is capable of this then it just proves that you were in on it.
This statement asserts that because Fatal Ascension has not yet been demonstrably offended over this issue, they must be co-conspirators.
I do believe this particular logical fallacy is known as Square Logic. Am I wrong?
I agree that something very odd is going on here and I would love to see a proper explanation brought to light. However, your arguments are just plain silly.
|
Lubomir Penev
Sausages of Truth
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:32:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Evelgrivion Edited by: Evelgrivion on 16/11/2010 00:22:14
Originally by: Rommell Drako If FA is not insulted by the fact that a GM helped them or is capable of this then it just proves that you were in on it.
This statement asserts that because Fatal Ascension has not yet been demonstrably offended over this issue, they must be co-conspirators.
Actually for a GM to make a mess of the situation someone had to petition, who else but fatal Ascension?
|
Quendishir
Caldari The Immortal Dawn
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:37:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Aerion Va'rr
Originally by: OT Smithers
Originally by: Raz Lictor Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
That would sound MUCH more impressive if you were not hiding behind your GM's skirts when you said it. In any case, what impact can anyone have when the GM's will simply reverse your losses.
^ This. Nothings funnier then NC Pets acting hardcore. You we're given space when Ev0ke left. You have a huge history or being pets.. for just about anyone that would take you. If you want to impress someone go out and do it on your own, then talk ****, in the meantime you have the same significance as a Jita Spammer.
I would argue that a Jita spammer has more significance.
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium.
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:39:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Lubomir Penev
Originally by: Evelgrivion Edited by: Evelgrivion on 16/11/2010 00:22:14
Originally by: Rommell Drako If FA is not insulted by the fact that a GM helped them or is capable of this then it just proves that you were in on it.
This statement asserts that because Fatal Ascension has not yet been demonstrably offended over this issue, they must be co-conspirators.
Actually for a GM to make a mess of the situation someone had to petition, who else but fatal Ascension?
Someone within Fatal Ascension petitioned about it. However, that doesn't mean the alliance's leadership is in on some sort of conspiracy.
The real problem is one that has been plaguing the game for years. Since the job of a Game Master is to act on infractions of the game's rules, they must first decide if an infraction has in fact taken place. However, these decisions are not logged publicly, and if they are logged privately, these decisions do not appear to be looked at as precedent in many cases.
Game Master decisions with Public Repercussions should be made available to the public. We should know what decision was made, why that decision was made, and what actions were taken as a result of these decisions. Dozens of controversies over the game's lifetime could have been averted with this policy. As it stands, the only ways to know if something is against the rules is to read the EULA or petition the Game Masters to ask if it's allowed or not. This correspondence is then placed under a loosely enforced gag order.
It should be painfully obvious by now that there needs to be public correspondence about what decisions the Game Masters make and why they have made them.
|
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:43:00 -
[108]
This stinks. CCP fails again. Guess the new slogan is HTFU (unless you have a CCP employee in your corp.)
I call bull**** on Morpheus' attempt to exonerate his fellow employee. If the facts as presented here are wrong, explain how. Otherwise this behavior by CCP is inexcusable.
|
Eto LabOne
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:49:00 -
[109]
GM's should not be able to play this game outside of test.
I utterly cannot believe that CCP allows its employees to play this game like any normal player. Most free game servers that host games and GMS do not allow their GMS to play on the server to avoid favoritism.
We pay for this game, and to see latent favoritism on many different situations is getting out of hand.
Anyone that has anything to do with the making of this game should not be able to play as a normal character.
|
Quendishir
Caldari The Immortal Dawn
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:51:00 -
[110]
To be honest, this issue is a lot easier to understand, given what we know of CCP.
1.) CCP has been accused in the past of playing favorites, and at times the claims have proven to be true. As such, any claims of favoritism or non-adherence to the stated rules is quickly picked up on by the masses. This becomes the proverbial "snowball effect", and it becomes a roaring inferno from the peanut gallery for answers.
2.) CCP's own rules state that they do not post - or allow the posting - of contact between GMs/developers and players for privacy concerns. Because of this, GMs and IAB can claim that they have "looked into" the matter, while hiding behind the veil of secrecy.
Because of this, CCP is shooting themselves in the foot. By not coming clean, they continue to alienate themselves from the player base. This, in turn, gives rise to a sense of uncertainty, as it is no longer possible to have the faith that should be given in the people who run this company and game. Without that trust and integrity, there is absolutely no reason for people to continue to play the game. CCP, thusly, loses revenue. And if EVE goes down, Dust will never launch like they want.
CCP really only has two options: stop playing the game and only remain as GMs and the like, or break their own rules and start posting logs and what-not. Either way, it's going to be a dirty and hard decision on the part of CCP, but at the very least it will help to alleviate some of the tension.
/2 ISK
|
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium.
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:52:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Eto LabOne GM's should not be able to play this game outside of test.
I utterly cannot believe that CCP allows its employees to play this game like any normal player. Most free game servers that host games and GMS do not allow their GMS to play on the server to avoid favoritism.
We pay for this game, and to see latent favoritism on many different situations is getting out of hand.
Anyone that has anything to do with the making of this game should not be able to play as a normal character.
CCP tried this already in 2006, and the results were less than stellar. You cannot make Eve a good game without knowing how to play Eve and knowing how Eve is played.
|
Tarsas Phage
Just Us Guys In Space
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:59:00 -
[112]
I think we have a case of the GMs passing the buck here.
If there is a scheduled, extended DT and a war is artifically invalidated by a GM because the dec was altered (dec issued, upgraded because corp joined an alliance, etc) just prior to a scheduled, extended DT, then the fault for allowing this apparently invalid action lies directly with game mechanics and by extension, CCP.
This condition could befall anyone, and if it is a condition where a GM can arbitrarily step in to reverse a player-initiated action, then they should fix the mechanics to specifically disallow these situations from happening when an extended DT is looming (ergo, no new decs may be issued for a specified length of time prior to an extended DT, as well as any actions that may broaden an existing war be done, such as a singleton dec'd corp joining an alliance which is the case here.)
Now that CCP Internal Affairs has addressed their part (clearing any employee wrongdoing) I think this still has enough merit to reviewed by a Senior GM. This situation should be handled as a bug in game mechanics and addressed in the server code by the above means or in a similar fashion that is acceptable by the community.
T.
|
Zagdul
Gallente Shadowed Command Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 01:00:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
Quoting this for truth and justice.
I noticed the war dec dropped and didn't know why. Then saw this thread linked in GD.
OP, you honestly think that you are the first alliance to dec us and that we've not adjusted our logistics to support people who are dumb enough to think this has an impact on us?
Feel free to war dec us again. It helps weed out the dummies in empire who shouldn't be there anyway.
As Raz stated, you won't see our "fighters" in empire so dec'ing us doesn't effect our normal operations. Feel free to join us in Cloud Ring for a fight if you'd like one. We're always looking for some pew pew.
Here's a hand on where we reside: http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Fatal_Ascension
|
Ifly Uwalk
Caldari Empire Tax Collection Agency
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 01:00:00 -
[114]
Is there by any chance a thread on a non-EvEO forum mentioning the name of the GM in question?
Don't wanna hate on him - just want to know who to adress my petition to if I should ever find myself in a losing war again.
|
knickersoffalot
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 01:07:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Zagdul
Originally by: Raz Lictor The best thing about this thread is the concept that highsec wardecs affect the operations of nullsec alliances beyond killing off morons who are too stupid to have and/or use neutral haulers.
It's nice that Violent Intent thinks camping trade hubs is such an inconvenience as to somehow interfere with taking sovereignty. I'm sure that makes them feel important.
Come into nullsec and "punish" us if you actually want to have some sort of impact.
Quoting this for truth and justice.
I noticed the war dec dropped and didn't know why. Then saw this thread linked in GD.
OP, you honestly think that you are the first alliance to dec us and that we've not adjusted our logistics to support people who are dumb enough to think this has an impact on us?
Feel free to war dec us again. It helps weed out the dummies in empire who shouldn't be there anyway.
As Raz stated, you won't see our "fighters" in empire so dec'ing us doesn't effect our normal operations. Feel free to join us in Cloud Ring for a fight if you'd like one. We're always looking for some pew pew.
Here's a hand on where we reside: http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Fatal_Ascension
Your the secomd FA moron to come into this thread and have a pop at the OP saying the war dec had little to no effect on your logistics!
NEWS JUST IN MORON. this thread is about how the gm's actions smell like grimsby fkin docks!
|
Aerion Va'rr
Dead Pilots Society Violent Intent
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 01:14:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Zagdul Stuff.. 0.0... this is Dotlan *sigh*... stuff
Thanks for the stereotypical "we're in 0.0" response, we know that this war may have minimal impact on you, we know that several freighters made dozens of trips out of Jita the minute the dec dropped, we know, that killing all your morons in Empire is effectively just helping you weed them out anyway.
What you keep overlooking..WE WERE PAID TO KILL YOUR IDIOTS. We are enjoying it, I'm glad the GM's decided against reimbursing them at our request (we wern't very happy about all that when it was first mentioned). So I'm sure denying you trade hub access in Empire for however long we feel like doing it won't bother you at all.
|
Dodgy Past
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 01:18:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Eto LabOne GM's should not be able to play this game outside of test.
I utterly cannot believe that CCP allows its employees to play this game like any normal player. Most free game servers that host games and GMS do not allow their GMS to play on the server to avoid favoritism.
We pay for this game, and to see latent favoritism on many different situations is getting out of hand.
Anyone that has anything to do with the making of this game should not be able to play as a normal character.
CCP tried this already in 2006, and the results were have been less than stellar. You cannot make Eve a good game without knowing how to play Eve or knowing how Eve is played. Agreed.
Just imagine how much worse the GM'ing of the game would be if none of them played.
|
Noun Verber
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 01:23:00 -
[118]
Once investigations are finished, a small statement by a CCP staff member that states in broad term why there is/is not a problem would go a long way in boosting confidence as well as stopping angry posting.
CCP Morpheus has posted that it is not an IA issue, however left it open to being a simple human error by a GM, which would be nice if a mistake was admitted or if hidden circumstances were revealed (forum propaganda etc. can manipulate opinions).
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 02:01:00 -
[119]
Dude, email the CSM, they will **** **** up for you.
they can't ignore a bunch of players that are slated to go to iceland and meet face to face. that is why they were fromed, to keep this kind of stuff out of the public untill it's taken care of. because a cheating GM is like an exploit.
no but seriously, email the CSM, RIGHT NOW.
|
Roosterton
Eternal Frontier Saints Amongst Sinners
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 02:14:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Roosterton on 16/11/2010 02:15:43 Did anyone actually read my post? Yes, it's a **** up. The GMs forgot the rules, etc. But waving your finger around making accusations that they are cheating and corrupt, without evidence, is extremely childish.
To the person who said GMs don't just end wars without consulting others, how do you know? Have you worked for CCP? Do you have any idea how they operate? Maybe the company trusts its employees to work independently? I have no idea either, but having no idea isn't an excuse for having no evidence. -------- Enemy corps raided into disbandment: Three.
Originally by: Tarminic
OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |