Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Geanos
V I R I I Triumvirate.
21
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:20:10 -
[841] - Quote
Sorry if somebody already brought it up: the part with the exploding TCU is problematic. It will turn the sov capturing into a race of who can drop first the TCU from cloaked blockade runners. It doesn't matter if you where defeated on the battlefield, you where a faster clicker than the other guy and managed to keep sov... |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
137
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:20:15 -
[842] - Quote
Rendiff wrote:I like where they're going with this, but they need to make each system able to sustain the activity of a larger number of players.
If a system can sustain ratting/mining/etc for more players each alliance will require less space, allowing more groups entry into null.
Is you drop more anoms than there are now, people will endlesly bump into each other. It's super anoying, as long there is no toll (better than d scan) to see if anomaly is occupied, i don't see a way to do it. |
Abulurd Boniface
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
161
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:21:46 -
[843] - Quote
1. Kudos for the gumption of addressing a long-standing problem in nul-sec mechanics. This is going to be the thread naught to end all thread naughts :-)
2. Your communication about it is nothing short of a thing of beauty. I understand where you're going with this on the first pass. Extremely exciting.
3. Distributing the spawns throughout the constellation is definitely going to make sure not every fight is going to be in the same system.
4. This change does favour larger entities because they will be able to keep a very large area of space covered by fleets to control the space. I honestly don't think you could ever devise a system that larger entities won't benefit from. Numeric superiority has historically proven to be the deciding factor.
5. Although smaller entities will find it easier to attack some portion of a system it is going to take a lot of work to keep and maintain a nul-sec presence. This design demands dedicated presence for long periods of time. Which is the point of being there and having sov, it's still going to be a job doing that. This puts a floor under the kind of entity that can own space. It will require a minimum size for an entity to occupy sov and that minimum will tend to be fairly high. It will take dedicated man power to hold space.
6. Smaller entities will be much easier to harass. If the present technique is to bore the opposition out of their sov, the new technique will be to bludgeon the smaller entity until they can't muster the will to show up anymore. I think they're both equally bad alternatives.
7. Although this redesign effort is a great way to address some game play issues, I'm not sure whether sov is the thing we want to hold onto. Sov is 'a way' to address the grand scheme of being living deities in a space simulator. I'm not convinced it has to be the only way. From the point of view of ontology I'm not sure that sov should be the thing a capsuleer necessarily wants out of eternity. Ask yourself what that thing would be that you would want out of eternal life, how that would generate conflict and give us that to weave our web of deceit around. I'm not at all certain that sov would be the ultimate answer to that question.
Other than that your work on EVE, your exemplary communication around it and all the exquisite hard work you put into making this a better place for everyone deserves nothing but our deepest respect and thanks.
12 days to go. See you there. |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
137
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:22:08 -
[844] - Quote
Geanos wrote:Sorry if somebody already brought it up: the part with the exploding TCU is problematic. It will turn the sov capturing into a race of who can drop first the TCU from cloaked blockade runners. And that would made the capture of the Command Nodes pointless.
Y yyy you are right here, but TCU is not playing the main role here any more tho.
But you have same stuff with pos's and Coustom offices now, and it seems ok ^^ |
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
268
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:22:27 -
[845] - Quote
*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
900
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:22:32 -
[846] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:and so begins the subbing of accounts.. month to month screw paying you guys months upfront.. EVER AGAIN. take your plex and stick it.
I guess you really mean "unsubbing"
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
17
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:22:55 -
[847] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:Agent Known wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:REALLY IMPORTANT:
Entosis Link should trigger alert IMMEDIATELY - not after a 10 Minute delay when the damage is already done!!!!
*(Please like this post so Dev's will clearly see this) If you're actively using the system they're contesting then intel channels would tell you well before they got to the structures anyway. Intel channels don't tell you someone's fit or cargo. No where in all of EVE's mechanics does an attacker of a POS or POCO or ANY player owned structure get a free 10 minute head start in contesting anything in this game.... @#$@ THAT! That's **** game design right there --- I'm all for what's proposed EXCEPT that! I would go so far as saying any system upgraded past level 1 (so 2 and above) should give that warning, but only those, so basically if your alliance makes even a passing try at using the space you get that benefit, otherwise, your clueless about who's doing what in that wooded 10 acre lot behind your house. Maybe actually go into those woods and see instead of relying on automation to play the game for you? Notifications of aggression encourage AFK empires and coalitions. Thus, bad.
If you're actually living in the space, then you will know what is going on - without notifications. |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
137
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:24:56 -
[848] - Quote
waltari wrote:So basically sov nullsec turns into some weird form of Faction Warfare with a benefit to literaly nobody, full of 24/7 hellcamped freeports filled with trolls who doesnt realy want to hold the SOV anyway (due to reason mentioned earlier), whilst denying the current holders possibility to protect it effectively due to split timezones, great concept realy, keep up good work.
Adapt or die, welcome to eve, this game is dark and hard. GO BACK TO WOW xD Xa xa xa |
Aya Nova
Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:25:49 -
[849] - Quote
Capqu wrote:buff sov benefits to compensate
+20% mining yield per industry index +20% anomaly cash yield per military index
or some ****
i say this as someone who has never lived in sov and has harassed lots and lots, there needs to be a buff to people living there if there's gonna be such a huge buff to me and mine
i mean why wouldnt you just do lvl 4s and mine in highsec even more than people do already if sov is getting harder to hold
Some kind of boost would be good. The income from null mining vs hisec is laughably low. Extra yeld isn't really an answer though as it would increase drag tedium / overflow ore hold.
I'd prefer to see new types of ore added that only appear in L5 systems (or scale in commonality in L3-5 systems) which refine into massively larger amounts. (ex. a Super-Duper Trit that yelds 3x as much as regular Trit, but is only present in L5 industry systems. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
901
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:26:21 -
[850] - Quote
Myriad Blaze wrote:Quote:and the Industrial Index is obtained by mining in the system. So considering the new importance of maxing defense bonuses from occupancy, how is mining for a high industrial index better than grinding structures? If I wanted to shoot rocks, I could have stayed in high-sec. At least tie the industrial index to industry maybe? Probably in the form of building/producing stuff? Maybe even consider planetary industry.
How about recruiting people to shoot those rocks for you? You know, the guys in HiSec that you **** over when you've been bored with Sov games?
--- Signature Locked |
|
Capt Tenguru79
Mass Production
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:28:09 -
[851] - Quote
Escuro wrote:Capt Tenguru79 wrote:Escuro wrote:LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:Devs, make sure you cant fit entosis links to frigates.
Intys, cov ops, bombers, nano dessys.... Thats bit too easy for griefers to exploit.
Let it be on cruiser and above hulls only. tell me how. Activating the link will prohibit you from cloaking, warping etc. You can fit an inty to lock up to 120-130km. This can be countered with a LOT of stuff. Also, you can just use your own link and don't bother at all. Actually you can get a crow to lock up to 175k with implants and passive boost, and have a MWD. have not checked with links yet but most certainly about 220-230k i'd like to see the cap consumption of the "link" first before discussing it actually. if it will eat out your cap - any other inty will counter it. https://www.dropbox.com/s/sgv1g1zdlkssp59/Sov%20Grind%20Ceptor.PNG?dl=0 And that is without proper links, the SC is the ceptor being in a fleet with its self. this was a 20 sec build i am sure someone can come up with something better if they spend time on it It even has the majority of its fittings left to fit the module as well |
Proton Stars
OREfull
29
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:29:04 -
[852] - Quote
Ha, alliances are going to have to ration fa fest atendees! If too many fc's go they won't have space to come home to in 2016. |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
138
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:29:30 -
[853] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:The Zombie F1 pusher died today.
It took a while, did it? |
iP0D
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:29:33 -
[854] - Quote
Elana Apgar wrote:Everyone's complaining about the timezone mechanic, but to it actually sounds like a good idea. Who doesn't want to have guaranteed PVP every day during their prime time?
Sadly, the absolute minority of eve. |
Leisha Miranen
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:30:15 -
[855] - Quote
Holy ******* **** CCP, is this a joke?
40 Minutes to RF? Tone this down before it's too late to back out. This is insane. LET ME REPEAT, THAT IS INSANE. Why would anyone store ships in a system that can be taken in 40 minutes by a small gang?
R.I.P. Null sec Coalitions.
It should take a significant amount of work to take a system. This will be the last nail in the coffin of EVE online's Null Sec. population, because it no longer be viable to defend and hold sov. Srsly. ******* fix this, right now. |
Proton Stars
OREfull
29
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:31:09 -
[856] - Quote
Also why on earth are fcon defending this? They'll be wiped off the map quicker than a *** stain in a nudey booth |
Escuro
Disassembly workshop Out of Sight.
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:32:29 -
[857] - Quote
Capt Tenguru79 wrote:Escuro wrote:Capt Tenguru79 wrote:Escuro wrote:LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:Devs, make sure you cant fit entosis links to frigates.
Intys, cov ops, bombers, nano dessys.... Thats bit too easy for griefers to exploit.
Let it be on cruiser and above hulls only. tell me how. Activating the link will prohibit you from cloaking, warping etc. You can fit an inty to lock up to 120-130km. This can be countered with a LOT of stuff. Also, you can just use your own link and don't bother at all. Actually you can get a crow to lock up to 175k with implants and passive boost, and have a MWD. have not checked with links yet but most certainly about 220-230k i'd like to see the cap consumption of the "link" first before discussing it actually. if it will eat out your cap - any other inty will counter it. https://www.dropbox.com/s/sgv1g1zdlkssp59/Sov%20Grind%20Ceptor.PNG?dl=0 And that is without proper links, the SC is the ceptor being in a fleet with its self. this was a 20 sec build i am sure someone can come up with something better if they spend time on it Look at the cap. You need 12 minutes minimum, and up to 40 on an active system. Add some cap use from the link and you are shot after 5 minutes - have no guns, no speed, can't warp. Sounds like a plan :D |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
139
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:38:03 -
[858] - Quote
I think that would be cool, if system military/industry lvl is below 2, the system is vulnerable.
If you do nothing with your sov, there sould be no defensive prime time window |
Capt Tenguru79
Mass Production
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:38:24 -
[859] - Quote
Escuro wrote: Look at the cap. You need 12 minutes minimum, and up to 40 on an active system. Add some cap use from the link and you are shot after 5 minutes - have no guns, no speed, can't warp. Sounds like a plan :D
First off who runs links from a crow and not a booster t3 or at least a commandship, As for speed i am sure someone can get a better fit if they play around with it i never claimed the fit was perfect. Also as far as guns the fitting requirements easily allow launchers. This was merely a proof of concept not the new meta. |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
413
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:39:09 -
[860] - Quote
Long post incoming.
First off, these changes as they stand make CONDI win eve, thanks CCP.
The changes as they currently stand heavily favor nullified ships, meaning that you will see large gangs of inties and t3s roaming around as the main strategic fleets. Being as this counters the basis of having better ship usage distribution in EVE, I would suggest removing interdiction immunity from all ships. Otherwise, some unnamed group that may or may not exist will gladly burn down all of Eve in inties. Good luck ever catching them.
These new mechanics are actually good and remove the (N+1) requirement of supercapitals to control nullsec space. HOWEVER, CCP is not fully attacking the problem- only part of it.
As nullsec stands, there is very little reason for large groups to go to war. Aside from moons and rental territory, there is no incentive for a group to go on a full scale war with any other equally sized group. These suggested changes do not change the fundamental issue that we have no reason to engage in massive warfare, especially because it is difficult to successfully control multiple areas of space. This change will only continue the blue doughnut empires around Eve (of which the CFC is technically one of the smaller blue doughnuts).
In order for the nullsec landscape to change in a meaningful way, there needs to be incentive to hold additional space. As it stands, nullsec income varies wildly between -.01 and -.50+, with the former systems arguably being worse than highsec. Nullsec specific ore is some of the worst ore in the game (because CCP still hasn't fixed null anomalies), and Null ice hardly is as valuable as it should be because of all of the reductions in ice product usage.
While many people think that nullsec is a place with infinite riches, it's hardly that. Sure, ratting in null is good because you can do it pretty much entirely AFK. However, in an ishtar, AFK ratting nets a measly 60-70 million isk an hour on average, before taxes. Active ratting can make over 100 mil an hour, sure. But if you're doing active anything, you'd make significantly more money in Wormholes or even blitzing highsec missions.
There needs to be an incentive for two equally sized groups to go to war. Until that happens, nullsec will change in small amounts but not change over time. Sure, groups like the CFC will give up regions of space because it becomes a pain in the ass to defend them because of CCP changes, but these changes will not encourage such groups to full on go to war with each other, which is what Eve needs.
Overall, I like these mechanics, but there needs to be more in order to actually encourage groups to use them. These will not suddenly give NC. a reason to come attack Deklein, as the aforementioned group that may or may not exist would burn all of their space down. |
|
Thucydides Herodotus
Ether Bunnies
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:40:17 -
[861] - Quote
"Maximum range of 25km for Tech One, 250km for Tech Two. Requires a target lock on the structure.
Capital Ships would have restrictions for using these modules, most likely in the form of a role bonus that increases the cycle time by 400% (this means a 10 minute cycle time for a T2 Entosis Link on a capital ship)."
First off the bonuses to the T2 (in theory) are just absolutely ridiculous. A large capital fleet of armour ships with mids having a range scripted sensor booster and drone tracking/range mods fit would be able to self rep and maintain the point from 250km off the target piece of SOV? Sheebus.
Once the Territorial Claimamigigger is destroyed anyone can then drop a new one in the system? So the attacking force is three jumps out, the defending force realizes they can't win. They return to base, get large un-maneuverable but powerful ships out, let the attackers win the battle three jumps out and then just drop their new replacement TCU and wax the crap out of any attackers in system doing the same? Maybe everything should just change hands and anything but a station should just random spawn like an anom.
ugh. I think this is going to be, once again, very beneficial to the biggest blob that can just break itself into the biggest smaller pieces with the caviate of adding the most timezones due to the downtime continuation.
Deciding Phoebe was a good thing based on crap stats about how people aren't actually getting the chance to play eve anymore is wrecking your self assessment/decision making processes. (you mentioned it in your post not me). I get the timers from Phoebe I still don't get the ranges at all. Honestly all I've noticed is a 30 minute fleet takes 3 hours now and there is never anyone still there to fight.
I'd like to know what a small alliance that takes a relatively undefended and undeveloped system in the backwoods of a less important region of space is going to gain from that? Are they going to mine for not enough minerals to build anything? With reduced jump ranges on Jump Freighters and friends how are they going to get their mod fought gains out of said system?
~Cheers. |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
139
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:42:29 -
[862] - Quote
Leisha Miranen wrote:Holy ******* **** CCP, is this a joke?40 Minutes to RF? Tone this down before it's too late to back out. This is insane. LET ME REPEAT, THAT IS INSANE. Why would anyone store ships in a system that can be RF'd in 40 minutes by a small gang? R.I.P. Null sec Coalitions. It should take a significant amount of work to take a system. This will be the last nail in the coffin of EVE online's Null Sec. population, because it no longer be viable to defend and hold sov. Srsly. ******* fix this, right now.
Srylyly What?
YOu have your prime time window, capture **** in 10 min as a defender, what else would you like? lol
Drop some idea here, not just "THAT IS INSANE NOOO CHANGES NOOO AAAAaaaaaaa rip."
Adapt or die this game is hard and dark, and this new sov is some fresh air to stale smelly null-sec |
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
139
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:43:43 -
[863] - Quote
Bonzair wrote:Give us possibility to choose version before production changes :D You'll see that all your 'features' are a piece of s*** http://funnyshit.com.au/img/bigcupofshutthefuckup.jpg |
Circumstantial Evidence
172
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:45:22 -
[864] - Quote
What can be taken away quickly, can be taken back almost as quickly. A large force could roll over a region, but if they don't stick around, the locals just take it back. The proposed system promotes more frequent fights, which is what some folks want, right?
I think some folks are overly fixated on the industrial / mining bonus. Its in the chart: the defender is missing out on a little over 10 minutes of extra Entosis link time, if Industry is zero. 27.5 if Military and Strategic are maxed out, versus 40 for everything. I think its perfectly valid to complain that the maximum 40 minutes seems too short, compared to hours of structure grinding by bomber fleets that we have known up to now... which is more like 5 minutes, to a supercarrier blob. But I would not complain about a subset of the proposed 40 minutes. |
Thucydides Herodotus
Ether Bunnies
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:45:36 -
[865] - Quote
Thucydides Herodotus wrote:"Maximum range of 25km for Tech One, 250km for Tech Two. Requires a target lock on the structure.
Capital Ships would have restrictions for using these modules, most likely in the form of a role bonus that increases the cycle time by 400% (this means a 10 minute cycle time for a T2 Entosis Link on a capital ship)."
First off the bonuses to the T2 (in theory) are just absolutely ridiculous. A large capital fleet of armour ships with mids having a range scripted sensor booster and drone tracking/range mods fit would be able to self rep and maintain the point from 250km off the target piece of SOV? Sheebus.
Once the Territorial Claimamigigger is destroyed anyone can then drop a new one in the system? So the attacking force is three jumps out, the defending force realizes they can't win. They return to base, get large un-maneuverable but powerful ships out, let the attackers win the battle three jumps out and then just drop their new replacement TCU and wax the crap out of any attackers in system doing the same? Maybe everything should just change hands and anything but a station should just random spawn like an anom.
ugh. I think this is going to be, once again, very beneficial to the biggest blob that can just break itself into the biggest smaller pieces with the caviate of adding the most timezones due to the downtime continuation.
Deciding Phoebe was a good thing based on crap stats about how people aren't actually getting the chance to play eve anymore is wrecking your self assessment/decision making processes. (you mentioned it in your post not me). I get the timers from Phoebe I still don't get the ranges at all. Honestly all I've noticed is a 30 minute fleet takes 3 hours now and there is never anyone still there to fight.
I'd like to know what a small alliance that takes a relatively undefended and undeveloped system in the backwoods of a less important region of space is going to gain from that? Are they going to mine for not enough minerals to build anything? With reduced jump ranges on Jump Freighters and friends how are they going to get their mod fought gains out of said system?
~Cheers.
Hey remember when there were a ton of pages of people hating the idea of phoebe and they ignored us and put that pos out anyways? Why am I bothering to post/pay for this game. Also thanks for the upcoming release, nothing new, nerf the only ship that can do good dps and not melt to a bomber, while at the same time making more skill points less valuable, well played CCP. |
Black Ambulance
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:47:45 -
[866] - Quote
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:waltari wrote:So basically sov nullsec turns into some weird form of Faction Warfare with a benefit to literaly nobody, full of 24/7 hellcamped freeports filled with trolls who doesnt realy want to hold the SOV anyway (due to reason mentioned earlier), whilst denying the current holders possibility to protect it effectively due to split timezones, great concept realy, keep up good work. Adapt or die, welcome to eve, this game is dark and hard. GO BACK TO WOW xD Xa xa xa
You will be the 1st one who will be whining on forums after the changes :))) I believe lot of CFC space will be taken , even no one want it :) |
Cr Turist
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
40
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:49:00 -
[867] - Quote
well couple question.
1 what is to prevent a cepter or bomber from reffing a region? will this module have some sort of charge making it not possible for a small ship to just gref people to death?
2 shouldn't you make this module only fit able to command ships? makes sense to me. they have the tank and require some skill to fly. if you don't this is gonna be gay-boys online really fast. every noob gonna be like ooooo i has stealth bomber lets go take deklein.
3 why you hate capitals so much yo. i know CCP Rise cant fly them but that doesn't mean the rest of us don't want to. i really hope you have some good content in the pipe for supers. titans, dreads, and carriers. because as of right now the content for them is limited and post this patch that amount of available content drops even more dramatically |
Sieonigh
Rim Collection RC Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
40
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:49:13 -
[868] - Quote
Leisha Miranen wrote:Holy ******* **** CCP, is this a joke?40 Minutes to RF? Tone this down before it's too late to back out. This is insane. LET ME REPEAT, THAT IS INSANE. Why would anyone store ships in a system that can be RF'd in 40 minutes by a small gang? R.I.P. Null sec Coalitions. It should take a significant amount of work to take a system. This will be the last nail in the coffin of EVE online's Null Sec. population, because it no longer be viable to defend and hold sov. Srsly. ******* fix this, right now.
firstly its meant to break the coalition gameplay
secondly: 5 or 2 min + (notification of attack) 10 - 40 min + 2 days RF + time to complete command node contest + 2 day free port then its capture-able.
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66967/1/sovflow.jpg
blue flow graph, learn to read |
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
617
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:50:52 -
[869] - Quote
Black Ambulance wrote:Hairpins Blueprint wrote:waltari wrote:So basically sov nullsec turns into some weird form of Faction Warfare with a benefit to literaly nobody, full of 24/7 hellcamped freeports filled with trolls who doesnt realy want to hold the SOV anyway (due to reason mentioned earlier), whilst denying the current holders possibility to protect it effectively due to split timezones, great concept realy, keep up good work. Adapt or die, welcome to eve, this game is dark and hard. GO BACK TO WOW xD Xa xa xa You will be the 1st one who will be whining on forums after the changes :))) I believe lot of CFC space will be taken , even no one want it :)
Taken by what army?
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
Black Ambulance
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 23:50:57 -
[870] - Quote
Cr Turist wrote:well couple question.
1 what is to prevent a cepter or bomber from reffing a region? will this module have some sort of charge making it not possible for a small ship to just gref people to death?
2 shouldn't you make this module only fit able to command ships? makes sense to me. they have the tank and require some skill to fly. if you don't this is gonna be gay-boys online really fast. every noob gonna be like ooooo i has stealth bomber lets go take deklein.
3 why you hate capitals so much yo. i know CCP Rise cant fly them but that doesn't mean the rest of us don't want to. i really hope you have some good content in the pipe for supers. titans, dreads, and carriers. because as of right now the content for them is limited and post this patch that amount of available content drops even more dramatically
Yo will be able to keep bashing POCOs with them anyway :)) |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |