Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
601
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:20:02 -
[181] - Quote
Callduron wrote:I think Damps will be a pretty hard counter to any trollceptor.
Maybe a frigate that can lock to 80km and and move 8km/s sounds scary but a cheap Celestis dunks it completely. Just sit on the beacon and damp it, the ceptor has to come to within 20km and all sorts of tactics will kill a tankless frigate 20km away. you can easily get inty fits to well over 80km, especially once you get pairs of inties boosting each other
this also is the same dumb response that ignores the interceptor can't be caught, merely its trolling made successful by forcing you to sit on a gate doing nothing but staring impotently at it, while it can then vary it up by moving on to the next system |
Siival
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:20:23 -
[182] - Quote
So far I have thoroughly enjoyed the changes offered and I know I am in the vocal minority here. Some simple points to note that completely counter the constant nerd rage of all these people crying about troll ceptors.
First of all, you must maintain a lock on the target, for the link to work. so if anything any EWAR sensor damping ship will completely, and entirely **** on this strat. Lock range damped to 20k, how to run now. T2 Light drones can also move at speeds greater than 5k with incredible ease. Missle boats that have increased velocity over time can counter this with relative easy.
If you are not creative enough to work with the rules given, you are not deserving of the easy isk that comes with SOV. This system is designed to keep people active in the systems they control. Every is so worried about the first phase of SOV flipping I have heard little to no discussion about the second and third phases. ( excluding that free porting and 3rd partying are a bit silly )
Regardless speculation is what makes Eve great, and it really is what defines the great from the mediocre in regards to planning. But if you can't see past the first five seconds of conflict, you will always remain blind to opportunity for advancement.
Something I do want to chime in about is the fact that most people are talking about SOV not even worth holding and as much as I love the concept of holding SOV I have to agree. If this new system is designed to make us more active in the systems we hold, and condense the population, then something really must be done to make SOV worth holding. I wish I had a reasonable idea of how this could be done without just teetering to my biased desires, but this is something I have full confidence other members of the community and the staff at CCP are fully capable of addressing and hopefully fixing. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
54
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:20:29 -
[183] - Quote
Kale Freeman wrote:What about ditching the whole Entosis link entirely. Make a Entosis deployable. It takes 10 minutes to come online. It needs to be deployed within 25/250km of the objective. Once it is online and there are no more enemy entosis deployables on grid the owner can right click it and instruct it to attack/hack the objective. Oh, structure bashing...
Are you even paying attention? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1412
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:21:41 -
[184] - Quote
Agent Known wrote:In regards to the trollceptor fit, I can't even get a cap stable fitting with any of the interceptors ...and only a handful of them have the PG and low slots for the aux cores to make a MWD fit.
Plus, in doing so you're making them purpose-fit and useless for anything else. The defender has up to 40 minutes to contest an active system and pause all progress. This is assuming the interceptor makes it to the system to begin with.
Empires who hold enough space for their size will be able to counter any of this nonsense. For one thing, intel channels are a thing and neutrals will be reported long before they have a chance to capture anything. You are probably trying to fit an oversized prop mod to an interceptor. You want to fit a 1MN Microwarp Drive. Every interceptor can fit a 1mn mwd without fitting issues.
Also, train power grid management to 5. It's a rank 1 skill.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1677
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:22:39 -
[185] - Quote
Hi Fozzie and thanks for making this thread
CCP Fozzie wrote: The Entosis Link itself should have the minimum possible effect on what ships and tactics players can choose.
Entosis Links will always have some effect on the types of ships and tactics people find viable for Sov warfare, but we should strive to keep those effects to a minimum. As much as possible, we should work towards a meta where whatever fleet concept would win the fight and control the grid would also be viable for using the Entosis Links.
How do you intend to reach that goal on ships that don't have a utility high?
As for the "trollceptors"... I understand that it can be a concern, but don't let yourself get metagamed on this one. Frigates and other ships should retain the ability to fit enthosis modules, but maybe you should add a few stats on the module?
I'd suggest : - Max speed : 4000 m/s - Inertia modifier : x2
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
324
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:23:44 -
[186] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:Callduron wrote:I think Damps will be a pretty hard counter to any trollceptor.
Maybe a frigate that can lock to 80km and and move 8km/s sounds scary but a cheap Celestis dunks it completely. Just sit on the beacon and damp it, the ceptor has to come to within 20km and all sorts of tactics will kill a tankless frigate 20km away. you can easily get inty fits to well over 80km, especially once you get pairs of inties boosting each other this also is the same dumb response that ignores the interceptor can't be caught, merely its trolling made successful by forcing you to sit on a gate doing nothing but staring impotently at it, while it can then vary it up by moving on to the next system Entosis link prevents remote boosts.
But yeah a 2x sebo inty can do 100 something km.
...with no tank and no utility and no dps. |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi
158
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:24:18 -
[187] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:John McCreedy wrote: Doesn't this just lead to escalation which is what the proposed change is meant to remove? That said, is there anything wrong with escalation initially? There really is nothing wrong with escalation, in and of itself, if the target demands it, The issue we have witht he current meta is that every target demands it, because you have to burn through a gajillion EHP to get anywhere. So the attackers bring their biggest guns in bulk, because they don't want to be there for three days shooting structures. So now the defender has two choices - respond in kind, or stay home. I have lived in sov entities that have crunched the numbers, and stood down from a timer fight because there was no way they could win it with the people available. That is what shouldn't be happening.
I completely agree. I'm just against saying that players during a certain period of the day can't mine, can't rat, can't do anything other than camp up to three structures in a system in order to prevent a single Interceptor from disrupting the sov. That cannot be considered balanced. The problem with the deployable entosis module is that if its set to current deployable HP, it can quite easily be headshot straight off the field by the defender. The attacker deploys a couple of Triage Carriers to perma-rep it and it then becomes a HP grind the defender is unlikely to win before the system is hacked. So the attack brings Dreads to kill the Carriers.
Yes, the more I think about this the more I see a deployable Entosis module being the way to go rather than a ship-based link. Escalation in this manner would lead to more fights but still allow alliances the choice. Smaller alliances could foregoe the need to defend the structures, banking on their smaller size increasing mobility and response times to better tackle the command node battle. Alliances more used to smaller fleets rather than F1 jockeys would have an easier time of it. Larger alliances might find use of their superior numbers easier to defend against vulnerability in the first place. It opens up more diversity in to the way we attack sov. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1412
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:26:48 -
[188] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote: But yeah a 2x sebo inty can do 100 something km.
...with no tank and no utility and no dps.
It doesn't need these things to survive or be effective.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
99
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:27:56 -
[189] - Quote
Remove trollceptors as a possibility plz, kthx. And limit the number of entosis modules that can be activated against a target corp at one time so small gangs cant just all spread out to different systems and wreak total havoc. |
Andy Koraka
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
54
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:29:42 -
[190] - Quote
Add the same effects as an active HIC bubble to ships running active Entosis links:
-90% velocity +sig bloom
it is actually that easy to fix the trollceptor and make the attacker actually expose their ship to getting tackled/shot by a defender. |
|
davet517
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:31:39 -
[191] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:rsantos wrote:I still see this has the defending part owing too much sov. Then how much sov is 'enough' sov for a 18k coalition? As clearly a single region is too much, according to our expert sov holder Mordus Angels.
Clearly, as things stand today they need that much space, or more. System resources really need to scale with the number of players occupying it, to a degree, and that should go hand in hand with how much space that many players could reasonably be expected to defend without being run ragged.
Of their 18K, how many are logged in at any given time? 10%? 20%? Lets say it's 2000. If a system's resources could scale to 100 players more or less actively playing, Brave could fit in 20 systems, more or less, and easily defend that many without chasing their tails. They could certainly threaten and even take adjacent systems, but they'd have to be mindful of the downside of getting too spread out.
That opens up space for new entrants. If you want a deterrent to systems getting too densely packed, start widening the "prime time" window once they exceed a certain threshold, forcing the sov holder to either spread out, or defend a bigger window.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1413
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:32:19 -
[192] - Quote
A disturbing trend by the balance team has been to "over-buff" things and then tone them down (years later) if media attention shames them into it. Have you considered, conversely, to risk a thing being underpowered at the start, then boosting its effectiveness?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1677
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:32:37 -
[193] - Quote
Andy Koraka wrote:Add the same effects as an active HIC bubble to ships running active Entosis links:
-90% velocity +sig bloom
it is actually that easy to fix the trollceptor and make the attacker actually expose their ship to getting tackled/shot by a defender.
-90% velocity and sig bloom is extremely bad when it comes to keeping every doctrine that is viable without enthosises a viable choice with them.
You need to consider a penalty that doesn't harm most doctrines in the game. Capping the maximum velocity is one way to achieve this. If you cap it to say 3 or 4km/s, other ceptors can easily catch your trollceptor, while leaving virtually every other doctrine untouched by the change.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
|
Christopher Schmidt
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:33:27 -
[194] - Quote
not sure if this was brought up yet.
But to like counter these trollinterceptors, how about you allow alliances to anchor pos guns/ewar on their sov structures, doesnt have to be dickstarish, just enough CPU for 5 small guns and a web or something. Problem solved, no more troll interceptors.
http://germans-cartel.de/
|
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
99
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:35:05 -
[195] - Quote
Also, you got nearly 200 pages of responses in 48 hours after posting this idea. Do you rly think "thanks but we're leaving it like this" is a satisfactory response to that?
Fix the concerns that people have, don't just put a PR-bandaid on it. |
GsyBoy
Hooded Underworld Guys Northern Coalition.
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:36:00 -
[196] - Quote
Simples, only can be used by a rorq or an orca. If you can not defend, you should not own sov. Committment to taking sov then assured. |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1066
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:36:36 -
[197] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:Also, you got nearly 200 pages of responses in 48 hours after posting this idea. Do you rly think "thanks but we're leaving it like this" is a satisfactory response to that?
Fix the concerns that people have, don't just put a PR-bandaid on it.
whats wrong with http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Delve/PR-8CA i've lived here a long time its a gr8 system
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
ShesAForumAlt
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:36:42 -
[198] - Quote
The single Trolletto or whatever the hell you want to call it doesn't bother me - A single meta 4 fitted Maulus can damp it down below 40km with a pair of damps and a Sebo to boost its own range. If the ceptor decides to trade speed for locking range, then simply fit signal amps - 3 signal amps + leadership bonus gives you nearly max targeting range. Add in to the fact you have plenty of room to fit your own Entosis Link (fitting room is even greater than the ceptor) so you can actively reverse the cap process. Ceptor is either forced to close to kill you or pisses off.
The problem comes, as always in EVE, in scalability. The troll ceptor fit is easily able to run in massive numbers, so I could see a gang of 50 of them running into a constellation and reinforcing everything at once. This comes with little risk to the ceptors themselves. You might lose a couple, but in the end it'd be far too many to deal with at once and some structures would have to go into reinforce (or be offlined for station services). This happening day in and day out I think would be pretty crushing to any group. Not sure how to resolve that issue, or even if it isn't by design.
This is totally my main.-á
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
57
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:37:04 -
[199] - Quote
The root cause of concern from groups who specialize in focusing all available man power onto into one system is they will have two choices:
- They continue with this exact same tactic and their massive territory shrinks down dramatically. As in just a handful of systems.
- They spread out across their territory. I'm not talking temporarily, but more like they are stationed to systems and constellations in order to maintain their empire. This will mean their blob is no more and they will not have the luxury of throwing thousands upon thousands of warm bodies at a problem to solve it. They will have to develop smaller scale combat skills, find a lot more fleet commanders, start dealing with their own logistics. The list goes on and on.
This would also mean that smaller groups looking to get into null will only have to engage that smaller section to get a system or two. If that smaller defending section sounds the Horn of Gondor and everyone comes to their aid, it leaves the rest of their territory ripe for invasion, so they can't. It would mean more leaders and less relying on an ultra select few who reap all the benefits while tossing crumbs to the many. All these battles being spread across so many systems instead of every null entity cramming into one system means the odds of TiDi went way, way down. Over all a far better and enjoyable experience.
It is pretty obvious which choice is better for the game as a whole. But, I'm sure those with vested interest in keeping things similar to what they are now will continue to scream the loudest. |
rsantos
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
33
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:38:16 -
[200] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:rsantos wrote:I still see this has the defending part owing too much sov. Then how much sov is 'enough' sov for a 18k coalition? As clearly a single region is too much, according to our expert sov holder Mordus Angels.
I didn't said that.
if the defender entity to defend a constellation has to leave all their other space at risk of reinforce and without protection then it owns to much space. |
|
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:40:30 -
[201] - Quote
Christopher Schmidt wrote:not sure if this was brought up yet.
But to like counter these trollinterceptors, how about you allow alliances to anchor pos guns/ewar on their sov structures, doesnt have to be dickstarish, just enough CPU for 5 small guns and a web or something. Problem solved, no more troll interceptors.
You're talking about either de-coupling POS's from moons or a whole new system of deployable guns. Not a simple solution at all. |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi
162
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:42:36 -
[202] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Andy Koraka wrote:Add the same effects as an active HIC bubble to ships running active Entosis links:
-90% velocity +sig bloom
it is actually that easy to fix the trollceptor and make the attacker actually expose their ship to getting tackled/shot by a defender. -90% velocity and sig bloom is extremely bad when it comes to keeping every doctrine that is viable without enthosises a viable choice with them. You need to consider a penalty that doesn't harm most doctrines in the game. Capping the maximum velocity is one way to achieve this. If you cap it to say 3 or 4km/s, other ceptors can easily catch your trollceptor, while leaving virtually every other doctrine untouched by the change.
It doesn't matter. The issue isn't with the ship on the grid, it's with a single person in local having to be considered a threat to your Sov during the vulnerability window so you have to have people camp the structures during it. One person being able to reinforce an entire system isn't balance, it's going from one extreme to the other. There has to be a middle ground between the two. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
309
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:43:14 -
[203] - Quote
davet517 wrote:LT Alter wrote:Amyclas Amatin wrote: Put it this way. If sending 500 suicide alts to Entosis something is a viable strategy, we will do it.
While I understand your point of 'anything to win', even with current mechanics you'll never be able to send suicide fleets with the entotis link to win. All the enemy has to do is contest with 1 entosis link and suddenly your 500 are not doing anything. . He didn't say he'd send them all at once. What he's talking about is spamming cheap ships with links on them for as long as it takes. Which brings up a good point. Entosis links don't have to be expensive, but could they be uncommon? Say made from single run BPCs found by exploring? Would deter the "spamming" behavior described above that would be possible if you could crank out unlimited stockpiles of them.
If they're uncommon, they'll be expensive. People will want to buy the BPCs, rather than go and get the BPCs on their own. Others will get the BPC with no intention of making Entosis Links - or of using Links, and either the BPC or the Links will go on sale for whatever price the market will bare.
And the price will go up, the more uncommon these things are. In a market economy like EVE, you cannot decouple availability and price. Supply and demand, as it were. |
Jason Dunham
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:43:25 -
[204] - Quote
Perhaps some clarification of how the module functions would answer the questions in this thread.
1. Can the cycle of the entosis be stopped in the middle?
If not then you can't just bugger off if someone shows up, you have to stay on grid until the cycle completes.
2. If you are jammed, or damped where you lose lock on the structure, does the entosis module deactivate, allowing you to warp off, or are you kept there until the cycle finishes with no effect?
If not, then it would be more risky to activate the module, because like Bastion, Siege, or Triage you are committing to being on that grid until your cycle is done.
I'd like more information on how the module works, but overall I think the change looks good. I see people worrying about how easy it would be to attack systems, but I think that misses the intent of the change. This change is meant to emphasize and reward occupancy. You should have no empty systems that an interceptor can go capture while you're doing something else. If you are active in your space you will have 40 minutes to go respond to the attack in your prime time. So if a group decides to reinforce a bunch of your systems at once with only a few ships or single interceptor at each, you will have the opportunity to form up a roam and respond to each of those attacks. If you are in a big enough group to occupy a lot of space, you should be able to form up multiple fleets to kill or drive the attackers away.
These changes should shrink the blocks of territory that are controlled, making room for more groups in nullsec. It also (rightly) reduces the risk and cost of attacking sov. Fast frigates would be easily countered by sensor damps or jams, so you could either drive the attacker away or interfere with their progress while your fleet forms. You also have to investigate why you would attack sov after the changes. Sure, some people will do it to create content or annoy others, but I believe most will be more concerned about defending their space than trying to acquire more space that they will have to defend.
The risk is low for a small attacking force, but that also means the cost to counter that attack is also low. The initial attack will occur at structures that the defenders put in place, meaning that they have plenty of time to put bookmarks all over them. I only see issues for groups that have lots of empty space, and for them the answer is to shrink their controlled space until they can occupy it. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
57
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:43:58 -
[205] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:Harkin Issier wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:Trollceptors fundamentally don't fit the "effective control of the grid" argument. The things that can hit an orbiting snaked-out interceptor are few and far between and require very specific fits to counter, allowing a trollceptor to easily keep a link alive without effective control of the grid. This also forces specific metas, in opposition to the view that they should not affect the meta - you have to be able to blap interceptors in your fleet composition.
They also simply allow you to evade committing anything to a fight, and if you're attacking sov at the very least you should be risking a single ship. Kiting trollceptors need LOTS of room to burn around in, putting them in the 100+km range. All you need to do to counter them is fit sensor damps. Congrats, your interceptor is now useless. "Step into my fleet's optimal range", said the Lachesis to the Crow. Hey what about if the troll ceptor comes with 3 or 4 normal ceptors along? What you think will happen to the maulus or whatever ? It's the question of agility also... a ceptor can be in 1 system and 5 minutes after can be at 10 jumps out doing the same thing again... to the same alliance... To be fair, do you really think that alliance who can only muster ONE guy to defend the territory in their prime time should have that sov? |
Lorac Gemini
Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:44:12 -
[206] - Quote
The simplest solution I think is just lowering the range of Entosis links. Trollceptors with a 100km radius bubble sphere of influence definitely makes them hard to handle.
If you downgrade the ranges from 25km and 250km to 15km and 25km, their sphere of influence is much smaller, making it easier to both scram and web them. It also puts them within range of weapons that can drive them off the field, even if they won't outright blap them. |
Arkon Olacar
Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective
503
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:44:41 -
[207] - Quote
davet517 wrote:Arkon Olacar wrote:rsantos wrote:I still see this has the defending part owing too much sov. Then how much sov is 'enough' sov for a 18k coalition? As clearly a single region is too much, according to our expert sov holder Mordus Angels. Clearly, as things stand today they need that much space, or more. System resources really need to scale with the number of players occupying it, to a degree, and that should go hand in hand with how much space that many players could reasonably be expected to defend without being run ragged. Of their 18K, how many are logged in at any given time? 10%? 20%? Lets say it's 2000. If a system's resources could scale to 100 players more or less actively playing, Brave could fit in 20 systems, more or less, and easily defend that many without chasing their tails. They could certainly threaten and even take adjacent systems, but they'd have to be mindful of the downside of getting too spread out. That opens up space for new entrants. If you want a deterrent to systems getting too densely packed, start widening the "prime time" window once they exceed a certain threshold, forcing the sov holder to either spread out, or defend a bigger window. You see, this is why it's clear you're a moron.
Napkin maths gives me a current nullsec population of 120k, plus another 15k non-sov holding NPC null dwellers, who would presumably be in for a piece of sov with these changes. If you're saying that a suitable amount of space for Brave is 20 systems, and we scale that across the current total population (including renters), then you're saying that everyone currently living in sov or npc nullsec should fit into 6% of the current systems out there, and if they try to hold more, they are overextended and shouldn't be able to defend that much space.
6%.
How about no.
Warping to zero
|
xttz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
453
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:44:46 -
[208] - Quote
Will an active Entosis Link prevent cloaking? |
Christopher Schmidt
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:44:59 -
[209] - Quote
Yroc Jannseen wrote:Christopher Schmidt wrote:not sure if this was brought up yet.
But to like counter these trollinterceptors, how about you allow alliances to anchor pos guns/ewar on their sov structures, doesnt have to be dickstarish, just enough CPU for 5 small guns and a web or something. Problem solved, no more troll interceptors. You're talking about either de-coupling POS's from moons or a whole new system of deployable guns. Not a simple solution at all.
actually a set of deployable guns that are only allowed to be launched on a grid with a sov structure would be very simple , CCP likes deployable structures, might start making some usefull ones then.
http://germans-cartel.de/
|
Arkon Olacar
Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective
504
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:47:46 -
[210] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Andy Koraka wrote:Add the same effects as an active HIC bubble to ships running active Entosis links:
-90% velocity +sig bloom
it is actually that easy to fix the trollceptor and make the attacker actually expose their ship to getting tackled/shot by a defender. -90% velocity and sig bloom is extremely bad when it comes to keeping every doctrine that is viable without enthosises a viable choice with them. You need to consider a penalty that doesn't harm most doctrines in the game. Capping the maximum velocity is one way to achieve this. If you cap it to say 3 or 4km/s, other ceptors can easily catch your trollceptor, while leaving virtually every other doctrine untouched by the change. Arbitary hard caps are a shockingly awful way to design game mechanics, absolutely not. A percentage based reduction in speed would be viable however. Maybe not 90%.
Warping to zero
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |