| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dark'tarh
   |
Posted - 2005.03.25 19:56:00 -
[1]
I was wondering does this skill apparently increases your ranger, but say your range is increases from 30k to 40k (top end), does this mean this the closist you can hit soemthing is also increased by 10k for expanse from 20k to 30k |
X'Alor
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 20:37:00 -
[2]
Some say it does not affect your near side accuracy at all.
I have to firmly disagree and have seen it do just as you ar asking. It totally affects your nearside start to miss point a tiny bit.
it applies a bonus.
that range bonus is applied from 0.1km ti it's longest possible KM.
so if that equation is applied to each point from 0.1 km out then it will increase the range of each point a tiny bit.
People will tell you no that aint right or no he is incorrect and show all kinds of pretty pictures and math equations but reality ingame in use.
yes it does slightly affect your nearside accuracy.
unfortunately that is the way they want it. all guns fail at close range with sharpshooter 5 at the same range with a gun/char with same skills barring the sharpshooter skill.
the char without the sharpshooter skill will accell at close range engagements but will never be able to use tech two guns.
|
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 20:47:00 -
[3]
Increasing optimal does not decrease your chances at hitting up close. I'm not gonna show you no figures or fancy math equations that's just the way it works. Just ask yourself this question, does it really make sense that there is a skill out there that makes you worse close range fighter?
__________
Capacitor research |
Weston McArthur
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 22:46:00 -
[4]
Dust puppy is right. Optimal and falloff determine how far out you can hit. Tracking determines how close you can hit. So if you're finding that you can't hit the broadside of a barn fit some tracking CPUs and train motion prediction.
|
Dirtball
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 22:47:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Dust Puppy
Increasing optimal does not decrease your chances at hitting up close. I'm not gonna show you no figures or fancy math equations that's just the way it works. Just ask yourself this question, does it really make sense that there is a skill out there that makes you worse close range fighter?
Some people are skeptical after the big tracking changes some months back, including me.
|
Reiisha
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 21:20:00 -
[6]
Optimal does not affect hitting up close. It merely increases the optimal range of the weapon, in other words, the range at which the weapon theoretically does maximum damage.
Only tracking affects wether you can hit something or not. With sharpshooter at lvl 0 or at lvl 5, you still hit as much times as before at the respective range.
Gamersland.nl, DE site voor PC gaming! |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 22:04:00 -
[7]
ôunfortunately that is the way they want it. all guns fail at close range with sharpshooter 5 at the same range with a gun/char with same skills barring the sharpshooter skill.
the char without the sharpshooter skill will accell at close range engagements but will never be able to use tech two guns.ö
ThatÆs not true and itÆs easy to test. Get someone without sharper shooter to shoot close range then train up the skill and shoot again. Double check results by repeating on the test server.
Training Sharp Shooter had no impact on my close range engagements but it has improved my long range engagements.
If Sharp Shooter was bad for close range then the devs wouldnÆt make it so we have to train it up for use with close range T2 weapons.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
X'Alor
|
Posted - 2005.03.28 17:04:00 -
[8]
see i told ya.
I have tested it with two chars with same skills with same setups upon completing lvl 5 of the sharpshooter skill and both chars exhibited the same ingame affect.
As far as training more skills. hows 8.5 mill skill points in gunnery alone and all that char shoots is lasers. mmmmmmm K. nuff said their. I guess i can train laser spec to 5.
I have seen it and it does affect the near side start to miss point. tach beam proved it.
all other tracking and related gunner skills were at 5 already.
the last to complete to 5 was sharpshooter. was hunting religiously with tach beams with multi's and upon completing the skill i relogged.
Upon continuing hunting, the same rats and targets, the start to readily miss cruiser point was 40/41 km. after the skill i couldn't scratch them at 41 let alone hit them at 44.
I'm sorry to say but the range bonus is set up on a linear value. Due to the range bonus being set up that way it will apply a range bonus to any one pin point spot on that liner equation.
due to that being a linear equation as it appears it is, if your near side start to miss point is 25km before train a lvl of that skill, then you will have to apply the new values to that same range which will extend that point a tiny bit.
Upon the second char completing that skill we were already suspect of this happening so we made a point to thoroughly test it ingame upon completion of the skill to lvl 5.
Does it make sense that the skill works that way ........ ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Would this be the first skillin eve that is fubared and screws some aspect of the game. ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Before anyone discusses anything about tracking computers and tracking equations ........ that's not what i'm talking about.
It's the affect the "range equation" of the "sharpshooter skill" and it's ingame affect with long range guns on near side accuracy.
Why does it affect it........ cuz tracking is a fixed variable in that equation on both sides of it. So due to the fixed tracking speed all guns have and a linear based range equation........ this has to happen to some degree.
like it or not.
if your looking to specialize in close range battles, I would suggest not training this skill to lvl 1.
Good luck, enjoy. I said good'AY!
|
Blacklich
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 03:55:00 -
[9]
X'alor, you are wrong dude.
When a ship is under your optimal range, its the tracking speed of your gun that decides if you hit or not. And if your optimal is high (lets say 24km) from 0-24km you are doing top damage if you hit. But if the ship is very close the transversal velocity is high (if its orbiting that is) there for the tracking of your turret is rarely high enough to track the ship. So Optimal range bonus is simply alowing the trackingspeed to decide in greater range if you hit or not. And a ship at high range CANT move fast (transversal) to you. After optimal range the damage starts decreasing and tracking speed is not taken into account. After Optimal range + Falloff, you have slim to no chance of hitting your target.
0km - Optimal is where you give max damage if you hit, IF your guns can track it. After Optimal you dont even use the tracking speed but have decreasing chance of hitting and you do less damage the further it goes.
|
Caribardi
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 05:05:00 -
[10]
I highly doubt that sharpshooter affects tracking, but to me it seems like there is a certain minimal range below which you cannot hit anything regardless of how low the tranversal velocity goes. This very well could be tied into the optimal range of the weapon.
An easy way to check this might be to install a few tracking comps and approach a giant can from a decent range, firing with the comps activated. Once you miss like crazy stop, turn off the comps and fire again. If suddenly you can start hitting again you'll know something is up, because the tracking comps should have made it easier to hit while they were on. They also increased the optimal range and thus could increase this no-hit distance.
--------------------
This area is a Sun-Tzu-Quote- and Dead-Language-Free Zone. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 09:03:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Pottsey on 29/03/2005 09:04:25
ôIt's the affect the "range equation" of the "sharpshooter skill" and it's ingame affect with long range guns on near side accuracy.ô
DonÆt you think you could have made a mistake in testing? Not only can almost no one repeat what you say but almost everyone else finds sharpshooter makes no difference to near range. If what you said was correct I would not be hitting my targets under optimal range. Even the devs say its has no impact up close and they say you need it for T2 close range weapons.
According to you a T2 150mm railgun would miss at 12km while a T1 would be fine due to the T2 having a longer optimal range and needeing sharpshooter. Yet all the testing I have seen shows T2 not only hits just as much at 12km but it hits harder. In case you dont know a T2 150mm railgun has an 14.4km optimal range before adding on sharpshooter.
If it was as bugged as you say then 1000Æs of people would easily able to repeat that test and get the same result. More would be complaining about T2 close range weapons and lots of us would be completely missing when we are under optimal range but we are not.
ItÆs more likely something else changed in youÆre testing like the rats speed compared to your ship or the angle perhaps it was coming in at more of an orbit angle and not as much as a straight line. That would cause the effect you noticed.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Jennae
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 09:23:00 -
[12]
for all those people who refuse to believe simple physics.
try this. Orbit a target with antimatter at your optimal. shoot 1 gun and track hits and misses.
change ammo to Iron with far superior optimal. Repeat. track hits and misses.
THEY WILL BE SIMILAR! Optimal range has NOTHING to do with accuracy up close.
This post comes from the same people who complained about the "repair duration" skill being bad as it "effects your tank because you no longer can keep your repairer on autorepeat as it cycles faster, and uses more cap/second."
YES. It does affect cap/second. BUT you get more repair per second too. It's not a bad thing. if you can't run your tank, then cycle one on/off. Oh yah, don't train rapid firing either :)
|
B3astage
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 12:36:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Jennae
for all those people who refuse to believe simple physics.
try this. Orbit a target with antimatter at your optimal. shoot 1 gun and track hits and misses.
change ammo to Iron with far superior optimal. Repeat. track hits and misses.
THEY WILL BE SIMILAR! Optimal range has NOTHING to do with accuracy up close.
This post comes from the same people who complained about the "repair duration" skill being bad as it "effects your tank because you no longer can keep your repairer on autorepeat as it cycles faster, and uses more cap/second."
YES. It does affect cap/second. BUT you get more repair per second too. It's not a bad thing. if you can't run your tank, then cycle one on/off. Oh yah, don't train rapid firing either :)
I tried it and no... radio crystals provided me much poorer results than multifrequency
Bio? why... |
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 15:57:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Matthew on 29/03/2005 15:57:44
OK, for all you saying theres a problem here, I'm skeptical, but keeping an open mind. However, if you want anything done about it, and for others to believe you, you're going to have to do a proper test to prove it, and bug-report it. For those that are shooting at random targets and just considering it "seems" worse than before, here's a nice scientific test that can't be argued with, and may give a hint as to where in the calculation the problem lies.
The Experiment
1) Find a safespot, and anchor a giant secure container there.
2) Fit your shortest range ammo, right-click "show info" on the gun, and move out to the range listed there (as close as you can, but do not go over it!
3) Come to a full halt at the desired range - be patient and wait for the [stopped] reading to show up in your speed indicator
4) Fire one gun at the giant secure can - that way we can be sure the combat log will actually catch all the shots. Do this for a significant number of shots (at least several hundred), so that you get a decent sample set. This is Test A
5) Without moving, sneezing, or anything else, switch to the longest range ammo for that gun. Repeat the firing test, again for a significant number of shots. This is Test B.
6) Switch back to your shortest-range ammo. Now, begin to orbit the can at your optimum range. Pay very close attention to the stability of your speed and range as you orbit. If you try too tight or too fast an orbit, your orbit becomes unstable, with highly variable speed and/or range, which is useless for this test. Disable AB/MWD, and manually limit your speed if you have to, but make sure you are orbitting at a constant range and speed before you continue
7) Do another firing test, again with a significant number of shots. This is Test C
8) While remaining in exactly the same orbit, switch to the longest-range ammo, and repeat the firing test. This is Test D.
You should now have a combat log containing all 4 periods of firing. Now to analyse it. You may find the combat log analyser from eve-i.com useful for this.
The analysis
There's two ways of looking at this. You could just go through and count the number of each type of hit you got, and compare. Ideally, these would come out identically, but due to the way random variables work, they won't. There's no easy way to express X "barely scratch" hits as an equivalent number of Y "excellent hit" hits.
So, we really need to look at actual damage numbers. Which is fine, they're all in the log, not that hard to add up. We just need to remember one critical fact: The longer range ammo will have a lower damage total anyway, due to the lower base damage of the ammo. So we have to scale the firing test results by the base damage of each ammo type, to get numbers that are directly comparable. Easiest way is to divide the result of each test by the base damage value of the ammo used in that test, so we get the equivalent results for if each test had been done with an ammo doing 1 point of damage. We also need to scale by the number of shots, unless you managed to get exactly the same number of shots in each test.
The Potential Conclusions
Now, if the combat system is working as it should, we would expect these normalised average damage per shot figures should be about the same. As this is an experiment with random variables, it won't be exact, but anything fairly close would be within statistical acceptability. If you're suitably scholared in probability theory (which I, thankfully, am not, thanks to skipping too many lectures!), then you could calculate how likely it is that a certain discrepancy was due to the nature of random variables, rather than the initial assumption being wrong.
Obviously, if you get wildly different numbers in any of the pairs of tests (A-B or C-D), then it needs looking into further. First step is to repeat the test to show those results are reproducible. If they are, it's time for a bug report. Complete with description of this experiment and the combat logs, of course.
Of course, we can infer some things from which pair of tests the discrepancy shows up in. If it shows up in A-B, then it's something to do with the range calculation - it's unlikely to be a tracking issue, as we deliberately fixed tracking to zero by holding us and the target stationary. We would also expect to see the effect in the C-D pair in this case.
If we get a discrepancy in C-D but not A-B, then the fault is likely to be either in the tracking code, or in the way the tracking and range code interacts.
The above is quite time-consuming, but would at least settle once and for all whether this is a real issue or not.
|
X'Alor
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 19:52:00 -
[15]
Originally by: X'Alor
I said good'AY!
but one last post.
as stated the problem arrises when completing the skill sharp shooter and the way the range bonus is equated as the nearest i can figure it.
has nothing to do with tracking speed, that is a constant figure pending which gun you use. null and void so to speak ....it's a constant.
so the ONLY way to test it has nothing to do with having the same character with the same skills flying in same circles and shooting same guns with and without tracking computers or mods or ammo changes.
if you're already at lvl 5 of the skill you can not test this in any way being you can not make any comparison before and after skill completion and it's bonus.
the only way to test this would be to be able to train the skill. if you can't train it you can't test it.
it's the sharpshooter skill, not motion prediction, not traj analasis ..... "sharpshooter skill" and the affect of it's bonus.
it should show up more in lvl 4 and lvl 5 of the completions of the skill being it is a multiplier for the bonus. thus biggest multiplier will exaggerate this more (ie lvl 5 of the skill).
I would think it be even more appearant in a character with lower tracking speed skills as those guns track slower so this affect I would think would be more prevailant on a char that had no tracking skills.
it would be very neat to see a GM take a char with high lvl gun skills, test him without sharpshooter skill aat all and with sharp shooter 5.
as well as a char with almost no tracking skills with no sharp skill and with sharp 5.
use the extremes and see what numbers they produce.
just the change from one lvl is very minimal but it does change on near side for some reason.
if your in this position of having the ability to train sharpshooter as well as use large beam lasers. test it. the relavant other skills are kinda null and void as your looking to test the sharpshooter bonus and near side affect on gun accuaracy.
you will have to fly in orbits around a large can untill you find your start to miss point and come back just outside that so you start to hit again.
let the skill finish completion.
relog the character to make sure new skills reapply.
and go right back to same distance with same set up, at same orbit speed, and give that can all holy hell.
If your not in a position to complete the skill and do test shooting before and after it's completion ...... then there is no way for you to test it.
we found it on lvl 5 of the skill. not much i can do now.
You can call me mistaken wrong confused or just flat out stupid....... you won't change my mind on this one.
nothing short of a DEV or GM posting results from tests like above especially on the large long range guns.
till then.
I said good'AY!
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 20:10:00 -
[16]
ôas well as a char with almost no tracking skills with no sharp skill and with sharp 5.
use the extremes and see what numbers they produce.ö
Lots of people have done your test and all have reported no change. Lots of us only have sharpshooter at level 3 so we can train it to level 5 on the test server not to mention it doesnÆt take to long to train up an alt on the tester server.
Why do you refuse to believe all the people who have tested the way you have said yet donÆt get your results? If your where right there would be more posts from people who have tested and confirmed your results yet all I see are people not agreeing with your idea.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
RollinDutchMasters
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 18:07:00 -
[17]
Ugh, this same stupid argument by X'Alor.
He's wrong, sharpshooter doesnt affect your near-side tracking.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
Lorth
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 19:36:00 -
[18]
Agree with rollin.
It doesn't affect your near side accuracy at all. I've seen this from personal experiance time and time again.
|
Reiisha
|
Posted - 2005.03.31 16:53:00 -
[19]
TRACKING and OPTIMAL RANGE are 2 entirely different statistics of a gun. Sharpshooter does not affect the hit ratio up close in anyway, only the tracking value of the gun does, and maybe the way you move around the target. Sharpshooter 5 is a skill i have never regret training, and currently i only use close-up weapons, which function just as good as always.
Gamersland.nl, DE site voor PC gaming! |
Val Amon
|
Posted - 2005.04.01 17:36:00 -
[20]
It has too affect it, it says optimal range. Its not right to have to learn Sharp Shooter V to get L Hybrid Specialization since the target being under your optimal is way worse then them being in your falloff(over your optimal).
So for certain blaster users having sharp shooter 1 would be better since its way harder to get under your optimal if you have 20% less optimal range.
Its like the ew skill and cycle times, shorter is better until the next patch.
_
_
How many pilots does it take to wire a Flux Capacitor?
3, 1 to wire it and 2 to talk about how the old one was better. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.04.01 18:27:00 -
[21]
ôIts not right to have to learn Sharp Shooter V to get L Hybrid Specialization since the target being under your optimal is way worse then them being in your falloff(over your optimal).ö
That doesnÆt make sense as long as your tracking is ok being under optimal gives you a 100% to hit. So making your optimal range longer increase the range area that gives you a 100% chance to hit. Being under optimal is way better then being in your falloff if you have good tracking.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.04.01 18:27:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Pottsey on 01/04/2005 18:27:11
EDIT: Double post
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Val Amon
|
Posted - 2005.04.01 20:50:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôIts not right to have to learn Sharp Shooter V to get L Hybrid Specialization since the target being under your optimal is way worse then them being in your falloff(over your optimal).ö
That doesnÆt make sense as long as your tracking is ok being under optimal gives you a 100% to hit. So making your optimal range longer increase the range area that gives you a 100% chance to hit. Being under optimal is way better then being in your falloff if you have good tracking.
That did not seem to be the case on my mega after the tracking nerf and I've had full tracking skills for over a year now. If they redid the hybrids since the nerf I might be wrong, but damage and hitting seems to be way worse when someone is at 10m vs 6000m(3000op 3000falloff) using L blasters.
I'll take your word that you hit 100% but no way I'm using approach with my mega to attack someone.
_
_
How many pilots does it take to wire a Flux Capacitor?
3, 1 to wire it and 2 to talk about how the old one was better. |
Reiisha
|
Posted - 2005.04.02 01:54:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Val Amon
Originally by: Pottsey
ôIts not right to have to learn Sharp Shooter V to get L Hybrid Specialization since the target being under your optimal is way worse then them being in your falloff(over your optimal).ö
That doesnÆt make sense as long as your tracking is ok being under optimal gives you a 100% to hit. So making your optimal range longer increase the range area that gives you a 100% chance to hit. Being under optimal is way better then being in your falloff if you have good tracking.
That did not seem to be the case on my mega after the tracking nerf and I've had full tracking skills for over a year now. If they redid the hybrids since the nerf I might be wrong, but damage and hitting seems to be way worse when someone is at 10m vs 6000m(3000op 3000falloff) using L blasters.
I'll take your word that you hit 100% but no way I'm using approach with my mega to attack someone.
Sigh, people need to READ posts for gods sake.
TRACKING affects your hit percentage, NOT OPTIMAL RANGE!
More optimal is ALWAYS better. There's no single downside to training sharpshooter to 5.
Gamersland.nl, DE site voor PC gaming! |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.04.02 08:13:00 -
[25]
I use to believe that it did affect turrets at close range but I hit just fine with all ammo types at the same range with my medium rails.
On the other hand, I hit better closer range with close-range ammo then I do with long-range ammo at closer range.
I thought maybe the difference in ranges with medium rails werent enough, such a much bigger range difference in big rails..
but the reality is, there were just unlucky and lucky shots. I'm positive neither has anything to do with each other.. especially now that I can hit at 80km with iron on my Ferox and I keep hitting for the same exact damage up until the point of not being able to hit at all.
I am 90% sure about this.. 10% left open just in-case a dev comes to the thread and says "YOU'RE ALL WRONG!" ... or something 
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
meowcat
|
Posted - 2005.04.02 10:38:00 -
[26]
once you are inside you're optimal range, the only things that matter are : Your tracking, and the sig radius/transverse velocity of the target.
~~~~)\~~~~~\o/~~~~
yeah but no but yeah but no but |
Eucarid
|
Posted - 2005.04.19 16:39:00 -
[27]
Sorry for flogging a dead horse...
I was looking at the Dev Blog on the recent gun change. The graphs that were posted show the effect of optimal range. Below optimal range the damage amount is flat, but close to 0m the damage drops off. I have noticed that while shooting structures on missions in deadspace, if I get right next to the target (0m), I can't hit it any longer.
I think the question that started this post refers to this falloff at 0m as shown in the graph by the develpers. Does sharpshooter affect this portion of the graph the same way it affects the falloff at optimal?
|
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 08:30:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Eucarid
Sorry for flogging a dead horse...
I was looking at the Dev Blog on the recent gun change. The graphs that were posted show the effect of optimal range. Below optimal range the damage amount is flat, but close to 0m the damage drops off. I have noticed that while shooting structures on missions in deadspace, if I get right next to the target (0m), I can't hit it any longer.
I think the question that started this post refers to this falloff at 0m as shown in the graph by the develpers. Does sharpshooter affect this portion of the graph the same way it affects the falloff at optimal?
Those graphs are slightly complicated by the fact that in some cases, the tracking and range effects overlap - they're only really seperate in the megapulse graphs that showed the "plateau" in the middle. However, tracking is the domininant effect causing the curve at short range, and optimal/falloff is the dominant effect causing the curve at long range. An increase in sharpshooter skill increases optimal range, which would push the right hand curve to a longer range. The tracking curve would not change. However, due to the way the two overlap, the peak would move to a longer range, and increase (but the performance at the old peak should stay the same). Either that, or a plateau would begin to open up.
The 0m issue is likely one of a singularity in the tracking calculation. Consider the equation for angular velocity (i.e. tracking speed) is
tracking_speed = transverse_velocity/range
This 1/x relationship has the property that, the smaller the value of x, the bigger the effect changing x has. Hence why there is little difference in tracking from being at 70km vs 80km (it changes by about 15%). But making the same 10km move from 30km to 40km gives a much greater change in tracking (about 30%). This goes completely crazy once x gets below 1, rapidly ballooning out of control towards infinity. Of course, if you were truly at 0m, the tracking_speed would become infinity - and is not computable anyway. In fact, the range you see is truncated, the server will be working with much larger floating point numbers, so you're true range would likely be 0.0000025485234, or something like that. Now, the tracking at 0.5m is 2000 times that at 1km (assuming constant transverse velocity). Hence why tracking goes silly at very short ranges.
|
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 13:36:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Dust Puppy on 20/04/2005 13:36:09
Originally by: Eucarid
Sorry for flogging a dead horse...
I was looking at the Dev Blog on the recent gun change. The graphs that were posted show the effect of optimal range. Below optimal range the damage amount is flat, but close to 0m the damage drops off. I have noticed that while shooting structures on missions in deadspace, if I get right next to the target (0m), I can't hit it any longer.
I think the question that started this post refers to this falloff at 0m as shown in the graph by the develpers. Does sharpshooter affect this portion of the graph the same way it affects the falloff at optimal?
Have a play with this guide. Play around with the numbers in the last bit. See what happens when transversal velocity is 0 and when you have very large optimal range and high tracking (similar to the megapulse as Matthew pointed out).
__________
Capacitor research |
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 14:29:00 -
[30]
Nice post Matthew.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |