Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Lakarin G'Kar
Bolt Hole Cartel
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 13:48:00 -
[361] - Quote
Batelle wrote:Lakarin G'Kar wrote: The concept of balance is a fools endeavour....
If CCP attempts to start this process with their game to try and attract new player or to please the PVP crowd. They will drive their game into the ground.
Have you been living under a rock for the last two years?
I am still quite new as far as the game goes, so its quite possible. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1437
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 15:00:00 -
[362] - Quote
Lakarin G'Kar wrote:Batelle wrote:Lakarin G'Kar wrote: The concept of balance is a fools endeavour....
If CCP attempts to start this process with their game to try and attract new player or to please the PVP crowd. They will drive their game into the ground.
Have you been living under a rock for the last two years? I am still quite new as far as the game goes, so its quite possible.
They've been doing a full balance pass, ship class by ship class for quite a while now, and its been a resounding success so far, with nearly universally positive feedback. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
493
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 15:27:00 -
[363] - Quote
Andrea Keuvo wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Andrea Keuvo wrote: Nothing should ever be nerfed because its too good at PvE. PvE is at best tertiary content (behind PvP and industry and hell probably even scamming) in this game and has clearly been an afterthought of the devs since WH space was introduced. The Domi isn't even close to OP in pvp and this was a completely unnecessary nerf that raped the ships that were previously "rebalanced" with drones as a primary weapon system but not given a range/tracking bonus to the hull.
I'm not sure I agree with that. Given that we have the ability to slave sentry drones to a SEBO'd FC in a cruiser I'd say that a domi fleet is the fastest way to burn through an opposing fleet of the same size at any range below 140km. Even 2 domis or ishtars with a TP amongst them are deadly to any HAC within 100km. if they are so OP then trade in your HAC for Domis and a drone bunny cruiser.
I was flying sentry domis before they were cool.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
kurage87
EVE University Ivy League
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:40:00 -
[364] - Quote
Andy Landen wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Andy Landen wrote:The passive mid slot omnis are becoming active with scripts, so how about giving us a low slot passive omni without scripts? TCs already have TEs for turrets. Give drone boats some love too with similar modules.
And how about giving us a feature for allowing the use of sentries while maintaining alignment, just like every other combat ship can already do? Sentries that warp to your ship like fighters when you leave grid or sentries that can attach to the ship's hull, if desired, and while attached can travel with the ship in alignment and warp in that way. That would probably be strongly OP. Moving sentries would become incredibly tanky, and having battleship dps with pimped-vargur-tracking won't help that. With that, sentries would just surpass EVERY other weapon system by a huge margin... Well if the current stated intentions of making sentries identical to turrets in DPS/tracking/effectiveness are implemented then no not at all ... sentries will then be the same as turrets. Agreed. Sentries can be killed. No other weapon system matches that. Sentries cannot return to a ship more than 2500m away. All other weapon systems travel with the ship and are protected by the ship. With these changes, it is seeming like we need to have all other systems drop their weapons in space before being able to use them and allowing those weapons to be targeted. Captain: Target the weapons systems. Gunner: Ready to fire, captain. As it is, EVERY other (non-drone) weapon system in the game is more tanky than drones, because they can't be targetted. Beat that for tankiness. Let drones attach to the ship's hull so that drone ships can maintain alignment when needed/desired. Let fighters guard and assist other ships. Let us have Omni Enhancers like the turret's TE's. No other weapon has high slot anti-EWAR and tank modules.
My point being, that if you want to take the fact that drones can be targeted as a weakness, you have to take the fact that there are strengths to them being targeted as well. Your ship isn't taking that damage or EWAR that the drone is. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
640
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:08:00 -
[365] - Quote
kurage87 wrote:My point being, that if you want to take the fact that drones can be targeted as a weakness, you have to take the fact that there are strengths to them being targeted as well. Your ship isn't taking that damage or EWAR that the drone is.
Well, to a point. A de-fanged drone boat can then be killed at leisure. It's advantageous to off drones, generally. You can DPS tank their damage.
They're not free "ablative" screening, their loss manifestly hurts the owning ship.
The bigger issue though, is the inability to manage velocities like a 'regular' turret ship can. No amount of manual piloting, none, can help sentries track. This is something constantly overlooked when modules etc are compared to turret ships.
Certainly an argument can be made that they are too binary - they track or do not - and that perhaps, they track too well but that is definitely a wider piece. Additionally, sight cannot be lost of the fact they are immobile. Superior tracking at a cost of being stationary, thus unable to pilot your way to better hits as well as all the other inherent weakness of being stationary, seems a reasonable trade.
The bigger issue is capitals using sentries thus eliminating much of their key weaknesses (immobility and a very finite resource) - that is a hull issue though not a good reason to have a scathing nerf of sentries across the board rendering unbonused boats pretty awful. |
kurage87
EVE University Ivy League
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:03:00 -
[366] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:kurage87 wrote:My point being, that if you want to take the fact that drones can be targeted as a weakness, you have to take the fact that there are strengths to them being targeted as well. Your ship isn't taking that damage or EWAR that the drone is. Well, to a point. A de-fanged drone boat can then be killed at leisure. It's advantageous to off drones, generally. You can DPS tank their damage. They're not free "ablative" screening, their loss manifestly hurts the owning ship. Of course, but it isn't trivial to kill them either. With proper drone management and replacements it's almost, but not quite, an exercise in futility. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
640
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:30:00 -
[367] - Quote
You might find it easier with the shield regen nerf too. They're more likely to come back out damaged. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1442
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:45:00 -
[368] - Quote
kurage87 wrote: They're not free "ablative" screening, their loss manifestly hurts the owning ship.
Of course, but it isn't trivial to kill them either. With proper drone management and replacements it's almost, but not quite, an exercise in futility.[/quote]
Futile for carriers, and maybe a bit for those domis that go with 3 sets of sentries. Not so much for nearly ANYTHING else, unless you have a big bay filled with light drones doing piddly damage.
If drones are like ammo as people continue to claim, then t2 drones need to both be both way cheaper and way smaller (smartbomb meta \o/). Then the downsides of being anchored to them won't be such a big deal, and they can be more balanced in performance compared to other weapons that don't have those same downsides. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Nash MacAllister
Anomalous Existence Surely You're Joking
115
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 20:21:00 -
[369] - Quote
kurage87 wrote: Of course, but it isn't trivial to kill them either. With proper drone management and replacements it's almost, but not quite, an exercise in futility.
While I agree it is easy to protect your drones, it is not easy to justify doing so from a tactical standpoint. A drone boat with no drones out is applying zero dps and is therefore useless, so what exactly would be the point of keeping the drones alive? Slowcats clearly counter this rule by having essentially limitless drones available for throwing at the enemy. Far different from piloting a subcap drone boat into PVP. Regardless, these changes further challenge the use of drone boats when pre-1.1 they were already difficult (albeit fun) ships to fly in both PVE and PVP situations.
The enemy of my enemy is... -ájust another guy that needs killin' |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1444
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 21:34:00 -
[370] - Quote
Fozzie, this change is significant enough to deserve a devblog. A lot of people feel blindsided, and given that there was no deblog covering any of the Rubicon 1.1 balance changes at all, I think they're justified in feeling that way. Furthermore, to the rest of us that were not blindsided, your original post was all fact, and rather light on analysis. The most analysis we got was a sentence indicating that it was intended to be a nerf (obvious). People (myself) are also worried that this copy&paste job will just be a balance bandaid that will justify allowing the outdated drone interface to limp along for another few years while CCP focuses on other stuff. This is a lot more complicated than "sentries op, nerf omnis, everything is fine."
As of two days ago, more people were using sentries as a primary weapon system than ever before. Please give us a devblog explaining whats going on here. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
|
Mazer Rackahm
Beta Toaster's
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:58:00 -
[371] - Quote
My two isk: (keep in mind I haven't read all 18 pages as of the time of this post) I got my first look at the changes to omni's today (took forever to patch) Having to use 3 omnis now to get (almost as good) stats as two omnis before... bothersome but okay. Not having skills that increase tracking for drones and then bringing the omnis "in line" with tracking computers... Seems like a problem to me. Not having low slot options like gun boats also a problem. I guess I can sacrifice tank to make my boat usable again at 120k like it was. Yay for nerfs that aren't called nerfs. Whatever. I'm just grumpy. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
237
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 00:02:00 -
[372] - Quote
Nash MacAllister wrote:[quote=kurage87]
Slowcats clearly counter this rule by having essentially limitless drones available for throwing at the enemy.
Well in theory you could have extra sentries on a BS (or more choice of sentries) by deploying a mobile depot and moving drones from your hold to the drone bay (I assume this is possible never tried it) but in practice a mobile depot plus a flight of drones would take up half your cargo bay in one swoop. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
991
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 00:26:00 -
[373] - Quote
I'm slow at math so this took me a while, but earlier in the thread it was stated that since scripts help reduce stacking penalties you could at some point get more bonus per mod used at some point. How does that work when the range bonus is lower than the old omnis? Shouldn't the new ones stay inferior mod for mod even with script? |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
237
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 00:59:00 -
[374] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:I'm slow at math so this took me a while, but earlier in the thread it was stated that since scripts help reduce stacking penalties you could at some point get more bonus per mod used at some point. How does that work when the range bonus is lower than the old omnis? Shouldn't the new ones stay inferior mod for mod even with script?
you are correct ... however may have missed the point
I think what might have been said was there is no point at all with old omnis in fitting 5 or more. However with the new omni it may well be worthwhile deploying a mobile depot and swapping out you prop mods for more up to 5 or 6 omni temporarily.
Yes ... the end result of 5 new omni (say 3 range and 2 tracking) will clearly be inferior to 5 (or in fact even 3) of the old omnis.
However that is not the point. We are in a new regime now. Five of the new omni split between two scripts will be far better than just three of the new omni. There is actually some point in fitting 5 omni now whereas 5 omni was a fail-fit previously.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
991
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:11:00 -
[375] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:I'm slow at math so this took me a while, but earlier in the thread it was stated that since scripts help reduce stacking penalties you could at some point get more bonus per mod used at some point. How does that work when the range bonus is lower than the old omnis? Shouldn't the new ones stay inferior mod for mod even with script? you are correct ... however may have missed the point I think what might have been said was there is no point at all with old omnis in fitting 5 or more. However with the new omni it may well be worthwhile deploying a mobile depot and swapping out you prop mods for more up to 5 or 6 omni temporarily. Yes ... the end result of 5 new omni (say 3 range and 2 tracking) will clearly be inferior to 5 (or in fact even 3) of the old omnis. However that is not the point. We are in a new regime now. Five of the new omni split between two scripts will be far better than just three of the new omni. There is actually some point in fitting 5 omni now whereas 5 omni was a fail-fit previously. Wut?
I don't follow here. I mean, I follow the actual statements presented, but the conclusion, I'm not sure what the conclusion is. That omni all the mids is the new thing to do? I'm not sure of a single issue that solves or explains though. |
Mazer Rackahm
Beta Toaster's
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 04:03:00 -
[376] - Quote
Yeah numbers are making me grumpy. 5x FN omnis 3x range and 2x tracking gives better tracking and worse optimal than 2x omni II's used to give. 3x range 1x tracking and 1x unscripted gives a 44k optimal where I used to have a 45k and better tracking but that means getting rid of pretty much everything in the mid slots which isn't going to happen. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
239
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 10:10:00 -
[377] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:I'm slow at math so this took me a while, but earlier in the thread it was stated that since scripts help reduce stacking penalties you could at some point get more bonus per mod used at some point. How does that work when the range bonus is lower than the old omnis? Shouldn't the new ones stay inferior mod for mod even with script? you are correct ... however may have missed the point I think what might have been said was there is no point at all with old omnis in fitting 5 or more. However with the new omni it may well be worthwhile deploying a mobile depot and swapping out you prop mods for more up to 5 or 6 omni temporarily. Yes ... the end result of 5 new omni (say 3 range and 2 tracking) will clearly be inferior to 5 (or in fact even 3) of the old omnis. However that is not the point. We are in a new regime now. Five of the new omni split between two scripts will be far better than just three of the new omni. There is actually some point in fitting 5 omni now whereas 5 omni was a fail-fit previously. Wut? I don't follow here. I mean, I follow the actual statements presented, but the conclusion, I'm not sure what the conclusion is. That omni all the mids is the new thing to do? I'm not sure of a single issue that solves or explains though.
Nothing too profound.
Just the simple point that with a Mobile Depot at your disposal you COULD when sniping at range swap in all omnis and it would serve some purpose. Previously fitting all omnis was pointless.
I agree that aside from PvE missions in a sniping Domi you are rarely if ever going to want to do this. |
Hexatron Ormand
Aperture Deep Space BORG Alliance
38
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 10:11:00 -
[378] - Quote
Also quite find it sad that we have to refer to 3rd party tools, to find out the optimals and tracking of our drones. As there is no ingame way to see what the modules add. Not even to the drones while in bay. (Only shows the hull bonus on the drones there). Launched drones show nothing at all - basic stats without skill/hull
Things that need to be addressed. I want to see what happens to my drone out there, when i change my script.
|
Trimmaloth
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 12:24:00 -
[379] - Quote
Hexatron Ormand wrote:Also quite find it sad that we have to refer to 3rd party tools, to find out the optimals and tracking of our drones. As there is no ingame way to see what the modules add. Not even to the drones while in bay. (Only shows the hull bonus on the drones there). Launched drones show nothing at all - basic stats without skill/hull
Things that need to be addressed. I want to see what happens to my drone out there, when i change my script.
I am completely agreed too this. I wouldn't be mad at this change that much, if this would have been adressed. This part is quite outrageous.
Seriously Fozzie, how dare you not answering any of these issues?
|
Andrea Keuvo
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
247
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 16:29:00 -
[380] - Quote
Trimmaloth wrote:Hexatron Ormand wrote:Also quite find it sad that we have to refer to 3rd party tools, to find out the optimals and tracking of our drones. As there is no ingame way to see what the modules add. Not even to the drones while in bay. (Only shows the hull bonus on the drones there). Launched drones show nothing at all - basic stats without skill/hull
Things that need to be addressed. I want to see what happens to my drone out there, when i change my script.
I am completely agreed too this. I wouldn't be mad at this change that much, if this would have been adressed. This part is quite outrageous. Seriously Fozzie, how dare you not answering any of these issues?
CCP doesn't really care about its customers?
|
|
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1468
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 17:53:00 -
[381] - Quote
Andrea Keuvo wrote: CCP doesn't really care about its customers?
They're just extremely resistant to do things that are hard. Fixing drones in a competent and comprehensive manner is hard.
Considering they only now are announcing hull repair drones, and the length of the little things thread, they're apparently also extremely resistant to doing things that are easy. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2171
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 18:30:00 -
[382] - Quote
What I find also a joke, a bad bad joke, is if this crap about making modules able to be overheated, then why was the Drone Nav Computer also not nerfed...I mean, changed to a non-passive module, with wrecked..I mean "balanced" stats, to make drone speeds "highly competitive with other weapon systems".
I mean, my god, warriors can go faster than torpedo's.....that will never do.
This was simply a direct attack against the effective DPS of Gardes in non range-bonused hulls, and does nothing to truly impact on the 1000 Domi doctrine. But it sure as hell puts a huge dent in the PvE capabilities of mission runners and anom runners who don't use Ishtars and Domi's. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
245
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 22:29:00 -
[383] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:What I find also a joke, a bad bad joke, is if this crap about making modules able to be overheated, then why was the Drone Nav Computer also not nerfed...I mean, changed to a non-passive module, with wrecked..I mean "balanced" stats, to make drone speeds "highly competitive with other weapon systems".
I mean, my god, warriors can go faster than torpedo's.....that will never do.
Good point, we should make DDAs and DLAs active as well ... keep those evil AFK drone users clicking away that will teach them.
Hey ... here is a thought why limit to drones :S Lets make armor plates and shield extenders active as well. That will give people more stuff to click.
|
NotContinuum
Ars ex Discordia RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 22:48:00 -
[384] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:What I find also a joke, a bad bad joke, is if this crap about making modules able to be overheated, then why was the Drone Nav Computer also not nerfed...I mean, changed to a non-passive module, with wrecked..I mean "balanced" stats, to make drone speeds "highly competitive with other weapon systems".
I mean, my god, warriors can go faster than torpedo's.....that will never do.
This was simply a direct attack against the effective DPS of Gardes in non range-bonused hulls, and does nothing to truly impact on the 1000 Domi doctrine. But it sure as hell puts a huge dent in the PvE capabilities of mission runners and anom runners who don't use Ishtars and Domi's.
It's annoying for us with Domis and Ishtars, too. I used warping in at range to help mitigate some of the damage I took. Now, I have to warp in closer. I guess it just slows things down now that I have to use Bouncers or Wardens, which CCP is happier with. I am, though, quite unhappy at how I can't figure out the new optimal range in game. That's quite a stupid mistake to make.
BTW, you know how when you use a tracking computer, you can move your cursor over the module and it will tell you how much the module and its script is improving a trait? Why can't it do that for the omnidirectional link now? |
ashley Eoner
250
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 00:51:00 -
[385] - Quote
NotContinuum wrote:.
BTW, you know how when you use a tracking computer, you can move your cursor over the module and it will tell you how much the module and its script is improving a trait? Why can't it do that for the omnidirectional link now? Because CCP didn't copy paste that part of the code. |
Lea Jane Hemanseh
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 12:09:00 -
[386] - Quote
Patch Notes for Rubicon 1.1 31.01.2014 11:21 Patch notes for EVE Online: Rubicon 1.1.3 Released on Wednesday, January 31st 2014
FIXES World Building
Some of the capital wrecks from the colossal battle of B-R5RB have been pulled into a stable low orbit by the gravity of the nearby planet. CONCORD has established a landmark beacon among the wrecks to commemorate the battle, which is now visible to all capsuleers in the B-R5RB system
... CCP directly **** on us players more than normaly... its anoying they just dont fix bugs... someone please say: Allahu Akbar and go blow up your self into CCP office... |
Novah Soul
79
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 12:23:00 -
[387] - Quote
Lea Jane Hemanseh wrote:
someone please say: Allahu Akbar and go blow up your self into CCP office... or maybe Breivik could do some bonus points there...
Wow.. hmm... that's a bit... excessive....... |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
498
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 12:24:00 -
[388] - Quote
NotContinuum wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:What I find also a joke, a bad bad joke, is if this crap about making modules able to be overheated, then why was the Drone Nav Computer also not nerfed...I mean, changed to a non-passive module, with wrecked..I mean "balanced" stats, to make drone speeds "highly competitive with other weapon systems".
I mean, my god, warriors can go faster than torpedo's.....that will never do.
This was simply a direct attack against the effective DPS of Gardes in non range-bonused hulls, and does nothing to truly impact on the 1000 Domi doctrine. But it sure as hell puts a huge dent in the PvE capabilities of mission runners and anom runners who don't use Ishtars and Domi's. It's annoying for us with Domis and Ishtars, too. I used warping in at range to help mitigate some of the damage I took. Now, I have to warp in closer. I guess it just slows things down now that I have to use Bouncers or Wardens, which CCP is happier with. I am, though, quite unhappy at how I can't figure out the new optimal range in game. That's quite a stupid mistake to make. BTW, you know how when you use a tracking computer, you can move your cursor over the module and it will tell you how much the module and its script is improving a trait? Why can't it do that for the omnidirectional link now?
PVE domi?
use garde IIs, 2 omnidirectional tracking computers (range), 2 cap rechargers, 1 MWD, 1 DCII, 2 EANMs (1 if you have fleet boosts), 1 reactive armour hardener, 2 drone damage augmenters, 1 large armour repper, 5 250mm railguns (T2 ammo) and a drone link augmenter. Fit cap, nano pump or drone damage rigs as you prefer. When you have fleet boosts replace 1 eanm with a drone damage augmenter.
carry some ogres to kill frigates (switch the omnis to tracking).
you can now kill everything with max dps from 0 to 70km.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Waitingpls wtf
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 14:52:00 -
[389] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote:Will ship bonus to sentry range apply to falloff as well? No, although there will always be the option of adding drone falloff bonuses to ships/rigs/other modules in the future.
CCP,
sorry, but you decreased omnidirectional module efficiency above 50%.
What ever scripts we apply the fact is 50% reduction. (why so drastically? I think above 15-25% decrease would be better)
I have a problem to hit a cruiser on rattlesnake at 5.8km in angular 0.033 with Garde II (+ 3x omni II with tracking script!!!).
And you ruined federation navy omnidirectional link totally. 53 mil is not worth 1% difference between tech II module ( 1mil cost on market. )
I think you have to change at least stats for tracking and optimal on sentries to compensate 50% loss in efficiency. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1491
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 16:07:00 -
[390] - Quote
Waitingpls wtf wrote: And you ruined federation navy omnidirectional link totally. 53 mil is not worth 1% difference between tech II module ( 1mil cost on market. )
Just to point out, the reason faction tracking computers are expensive is because they're good on dreads/titans. So yeah, these things are now worthless. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |