| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Chewan Mesa
Beagle Corp
   |
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:32:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: BurnHard
Edited by: BurnHard on 06/01/2007 17:18:43
The responses many of these threads generate are funny. They show how many players value "PvP" not as fair fights (where the odds are more or less even, apart from player skill), but in unfair fights - i.e. scanning out mission runners, or camping a gate. If you ever come up with an idea that is anything like an arena (similar to alliance tournaments), then expect the pirate carebears to shoot it down as not being "in the spirit of Eve" - which I think is a Euphemism for "in the spirit of attacking the weak and running away when the odds start to look more even".
The funny thing is that many players would participate more in PvP if there were more controlled scenarios for them to take part in, where they don't feel as if someone is either going to scam, cheat or otherwise take advantage of them. I don't believe the latter is "the spirit of Eve", unless of course it's a reflection of the spirit of the player base (I suspect it is).
Lol you dont really see the flaw in there do you?
Who would you personally engage in such a PvP Battleground? Only same ship classes against each other?
Its unrealistic, and would become so very boring very fast.
You have just shown the typical reply blaiming everyone not agreeing being pirates not interested in "fair fights".
Siganture removed due to profanity - Serathu ([email protected]) |
Sensless Killing
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:34:00 -
[32]
dont like the idea and i dont think it would work in eve. bringing wow ideas into eve is not a good thing
|
Drakonei
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:43:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Chewan Mesa
..Who would you personally engage in such a PvP Battleground? Only same ship classes against each other?
Its unrealistic, and would become so very boring very fast..
Personally, I dont see the flaw, no.
Ships wouldnt be that heavily limited, obviously. We all know interceptors can beat BS's if the fittings and tactics favor it. It'd be sheer idiocy to remove that kind of variety. I'm sure no one is suggesting that.
But it evens the numbers, and creates an alternative to the 15 BS/HAC versus 1 frig fights that seem to dominate Eve at the moment.
As to your second remark about it becoming boring... Thats the point!!
Its not (nor at any time has it been implied) that it'll be a replacement to PvP as it currently stands. It'll simply be a kind of intermediary step or a 'quick fix' for those who dont have the time etc, to engage in the 'real' PvP wars.
Why does all those arguing against this seem to use the idea that its going to stop all non-concentual or 'non-scripted' PvP from happening??
Its not.
|
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:45:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Chewan Mesa
Lol you dont really see the flaw in there do you?
Who would you personally engage in such a PvP Battleground? Only same ship classes against each other?
Its unrealistic, and would become so very boring very fast.
You have just shown the typical reply blaiming everyone not agreeing being pirates not interested in "fair fights".
You don't need to invoke realism - I mean christ man, this entire game is unrealistic! It's just this games PvP culture is not really about a good fight for both participants - it is sometimes, usually when it's consensual strangely enough. A lot of PvP in Eve is about one laying the smack down on someone else when they have as little chance as possible of actually winning. It's about tricks, cheats, "prey", exploits - the game has attracted large numbers of dishonorable pilots who think of other players as kinds of NPC's.
|
Ediz Daxx
FinFleet
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:48:00 -
[35]
Originally by: BurnHard
Edited by: BurnHard on 06/01/2007 17:18:43
The responses many of these threads generate are funny. They show how many players value "PvP" not as fair fights (where the odds are more or less even, apart from player skill), but in unfair fights - i.e. scanning out mission runners, or camping a gate. If you ever come up with an idea that is anything like an arena (similar to alliance tournaments), then expect the pirate carebears to shoot it down as not being "in the spirit of Eve" - which I think is a Euphemism for "in the spirit of attacking the weak and running away when the odds start to look more even".
The funny thing is that many players would participate more in PvP if there were more controlled scenarios for them to take part in, where they don't feel as if someone is either going to scam, cheat or otherwise take advantage of them. I don't believe the latter is "the spirit of Eve", unless of course it's a reflection of the spirit of the player base (I suspect it is).
Its funny seeing all these newb corp members all talk about ganks and gatecamps when in fact there are alot more to it then that. You guys only see the ganks and gatecamps becouse you dont spend any time in any form of PVP corp or alliance where the real PVP is at. And then you come on here and want to have "arenas" becouse you cant make the effort to join and fight for something.
|
Janus Lee
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:49:00 -
[36]
The negative responses in this thread are bewildering. For those of you who proclaim to be PvP fans, why wouldn't you want an avenue that minimizes the importance of team size and ship differences and instead places the emphasis on tactics and teamwork? This wouldn't take away from the gate camping and POS defending that already takes place, but would allow players who are looking to PvP a quick avenue in finding a matched opponent.
Are you opposed to the annual PvP tournament as well? Because that's similar to this idea, except instead of a once a year event, it would be available around the clock for all players.
It would be even better with perhaps class-specific setups, such as frigate-only 5v5 matches, or perhaps with a total ISK cap of the combined team's ship worth.
It's amazing to me that so called PvPers are in fact only interested in lopsided fights. Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.
|
Chewan Mesa
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:50:00 -
[37]
Originally by: BurnHard
You don't need to invoke realism - I mean christ man, this entire game is unrealistic! It's just this games PvP culture is not really about a good fight for both participants - it is sometimes, usually when it's consensual strangely enough. A lot of PvP in Eve is about one laying the smack down on someone else when they have as little chance as possible of actually winning. It's about tricks, cheats, "prey", exploits - the game has attracted large numbers of dishonorable pilots who think of other players as kinds of NPC's.
There's nothing dishonorable about killing someone who wasnt smart enough to take precautions to survive.
It's unforgiving, in a way realistic due to that. You dont need an artificial meeting point within the game for PvP.
If you think PvP mainly consist of ganking then you are simply at the wrong place.
Siganture removed due to profanity - Serathu ([email protected]) |
Ediz Daxx
FinFleet
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:52:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Janus Lee
The negative responses in this thread are bewildering. For those of you who proclaim to be PvP fans, why wouldn't you want an avenue that minimizes the importance of team size and ship differences and instead places the emphasis on tactics and teamwork? T
Wow.. just wow.. so all these major fights in 0.0 space are all just dumb people throwing rocks at eachother? Where is the tactics in a 5v5? Everything is easily predicatabe, were as 25v25 in open space or even 20v40 or something is ALOT more tactics then a controlled 5v5 will ever be.
|
Kazender
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 17:59:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Ghoest
The rewards in these situaations should be worth more what the losing side loses, so its a positive sum game, which will encourage people to do them.
Ok I couldn't be bothered to read the entire thread so someone might have already mentioned this. So the reward is worth more than what the loser loses ... so if I have 2 accounts I go to this complex and have one of them blow up the others ship and get some nice loot ...
Also how would the loot be calculated? is it going to be set? in which case I get my 2 accounts to fight in noob ships ... is it going to somehow calculate how much my setup is worth and give a bit of loot worth more? Either way it seems like a way of printing isk to me.
PS I disagree with the concept entirely ... its just not what eve is about. If you want to do this talk to someone and meet them in a low sec system at a safe spot and have a fight ... if you want a reward you can both 'bet' on who wins ... so the winner gets the losers cash or something ... now yes this is open to serious scamming but if you really care about it so much set up a corp with the sole purpose of organising such things.
------------------------------------------------
The purpose of life:
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, hear the lamentation of their women. |
Stakhanov
Gallente
Newbies On Xstacy
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:15:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Chewan Mesa
There's nothing dishonorable about killing someone who wasnt smart enough to take precautions to survive.
It's unforgiving, in a way realistic due to that. You dont need an artificial meeting point within the game for PvP.
If you think PvP mainly consist of ganking then you are simply at the wrong place.
What you dont seem to understand is that we arent against what you call "an avenue that minimizes the importance of team size and ship differences and instead places the emphasis on tactics and teamwork?"...because the actual pvp in eve as it is takes way more tactics and preparations because your opponent is unknown, where you meet him is unknown, his backup is unknown, his ships are unknown...dont make it look like we are against the more challenging way of PvP.
Quoted for emphasis. Some people seem to think that being part of a blob / ganksquad makes you invulnerable. Everyone is at risk in PvP , tacklers especially. Even a seemingly harmless bait can mire an entire squad until retribution comes.
If you feel like others treat you like a NPC , then it might be because you act as smart as a NPC  avoiding player attacks isn't all that hard , but obviously it's easier to learn when you're attacking people yourself.
|
Janus Lee
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:25:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Chewan Mesa
...because the actual pvp in eve as it is takes way more tactics and preparations because your opponent is unknown, where you meet him is unknown, his backup is unknown, his ships are unknown...dont make it look like we are against the more challenging way of PvP.
I understand the appeal of the unknown, but as I brought up before, having tourney matchups wouldn't take away from the PvP that is already in place. There could still be elements of that unknown in a tourney match. For example, if the team ships were capped at a billion isk, the makeups would be variable.
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
Where is the tactics in a 5v5? Everything is easily predicatabe, were as 25v25 in open space or even 20v40 or something is ALOT more tactics then a controlled 5v5 will ever be.
Related to the mention above by Chewan of looking for a more "challenging way of PvP," wouldn't you generally prefer, other factors set aside temporarily, an equally numbered match? If I'm the 40 in the 20v40 case you mention, I would prefer my opponent to be closer to my size and not half of it. Likewise, if I'm the 20 in your example, I would prefer going up against a 20ish size team and not one double or more my size.
Having a tourney-style venue would allow more wolf pack sized PvP to be viable (as well as supporting big fleets). Again, none of this would take away from the open PvP that already exists.
|
Ediz Daxx
FinFleet
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:35:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Janus Lee
Originally by: Chewan Mesa
...because the actual pvp in eve as it is takes way more tactics and preparations because your opponent is unknown, where you meet him is unknown, his backup is unknown, his ships are unknown...dont make it look like we are against the more challenging way of PvP.
I understand the appeal of the unknown, but as I brought up before, having tourney matchups wouldn't take away from the PvP that is already in place. There could still be elements of that unknown in a tourney match. For example, if the team ships were capped at a billion isk, the makeups would be variable.
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
Where is the tactics in a 5v5? Everything is easily predicatabe, were as 25v25 in open space or even 20v40 or something is ALOT more tactics then a controlled 5v5 will ever be.
Related to the mention above by Chewan of looking for a more "challenging way of PvP," wouldn't you generally prefer, other factors set aside temporarily, an equally numbered match? If I'm the 40 in the 20v40 case you mention, I would prefer my opponent to be closer to my size and not half of it. Likewise, if I'm the 20 in your example, I would prefer going up against a 20ish size team and not one double or more my size.
Having a tourney-style venue would allow more wolf pack sized PvP to be viable (as well as supporting big fleets). Again, none of this would take away from the open PvP that already exists.
PVP isnt about even numbers, its about tactics. In a 20v40 the 20 can easily win by utilizing better tactics then the 40. In a closed off tournament like setting with even numbers all it would be is a few near identical setups and tactical options. Like ive said before PVP isnt about getting "clean" "fair" fights all the time. If youre outnumbered by a stupid enemy youre able to win with far less numbers than them, and vice versa.
|
Nanobotter Mk2
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:45:00 -
[43]
"Hunter vs prey is part of the reason I fly EVE. Battlegrounds in WoW were a stupid implementation (Though in a game where you didn't get any loot anyway, it atleast gave some reward, but in EVE loot is the reward) removing most of the pvp that was actually somewhat interesting in the long run."
Right because heaven forbid that you need to play better to beat your opponent, instead of just out number him or jack them up while they are in ships not set up for pvp. Another shining example of how EVE pvp players are the lowlifes of pvper's who have found a game finally they can take the EZ way out to win fights because they can;t play for jack.
|
Ediz Daxx
FinFleet
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:46:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2
"Hunter vs prey is part of the reason I fly EVE. Battlegrounds in WoW were a stupid implementation (Though in a game where you didn't get any loot anyway, it atleast gave some reward, but in EVE loot is the reward) removing most of the pvp that was actually somewhat interesting in the long run."
Right because heaven forbid that you need to play better to beat your opponent, instead of just out number him or jack them up while they are in ships not set up for pvp. Another shining example of how EVE pvp players are the lowlifes of pvper's who have found a game finally they can take the EZ way out to win fights because they can;t play for jack.
Selective reading ftw?
|
Janus Lee
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:49:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
PVP isnt about even numbers, its about tactics. In a 20v40 the 20 can easily win by utilizing better tactics then the 40.
That is quaint to say and we all love the underdog winning, but what if the 40 are smart too and utilize equally effective tactics? How often will the 20 win then? For me, neither winning or losing the majority of the time with numbers is fun.
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
[from earlier] Where is the tactics in a 5v5? Everything is easily predicatabe
Quote:
In a closed off tournament like setting with even numbers all it would be is a few near identical setups and tactical options.
If tourney style matches are indeed as shallow and easy as you say, then why has BoB won the last three PvP tournaments in a row? Why doesn't someone take it from them if it's as predictable as shooting ducks in a barrel?
|
Sorja
E X O D U S
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:54:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Ghoest
There are only 2 skills in 90% of EVE PVP.
-getting close to someone weaker than you
-getting away from someone stronger than you
You are correct, ganking is far too common on EVE.
My only good memories are from fights with equal numbers, or outnumbered.
Ganking a BS jumping through a gate in our gang is far from exciting and when he loggofski and escapes it makes me smile 
If CCP was clever enough to bring ships/modules prices to realistic levels, people would probably be less afraid to lose their ship (200mill net loss on a Rokh, 300 on a Cerberus...) and leroy like men.
____________________
A gentleman is someone who can play the bagpipe, but who does not. |
ScreamingLord Sutch
Hand in Mouth
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 18:55:00 -
[47]
I love these threads.
Great reasoning by people in player corps and the usual drivel by the usual 2 year old npc corp troll alts and exclamation marks.
|
Ediz Daxx
FinFleet
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 19:03:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Janus Lee
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
PVP isnt about even numbers, its about tactics. In a 20v40 the 20 can easily win by utilizing better tactics then the 40.
That is quaint to say and we all love the underdog winning, but what if the 40 are smart too and utilize equally effective tactics? How often will the 20 win then? For me, neither winning or losing the majority of the time with numbers is fun.
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
[from earlier] Where is the tactics in a 5v5? Everything is easily predicatabe
Quote:
In a closed off tournament like setting with even numbers all it would be is a few near identical setups and tactical options.
If tourney style matches are indeed as shallow and easy as you say, then why has BoB won the last three PvP tournaments in a row? Why doesn't someone take it from them if it's as predictable as shooting ducks in a barrel?
The 20 have the tactical options of fleeing or calling their friends to help them if they cant take on the 40.
And about BOB winning the tourney, its quite simple.. you need discipline and very good teamwork and a bit of luck to win and a hint of knowledge on what your opponent is fieldning. And BOB had the most of the above.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 19:48:00 -
[49]
Smaller and more diverse things to fight over would be nice, mobile refinaries comes to mind.
Ourselves Alone |
Janus Lee
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 19:48:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
The 20 have the tactical options of fleeing or calling their friends to help them if they cant take on the 40.
With those options of disengaging from PvP or fighting numbers with numbers, the OP's description of "hunter vs prey" seems apropos. What if the twenty are interested in a good fight but can't field enough to consistently win against teams double and triple their size? Instead of going down the slippery slope of bigger and bigger teams, tourney PvP could accommodate everything from 1v1 to fleet battles.
Quote:
And about BOB winning the tourney, its quite simple.. you need discipline and very good teamwork and a bit of luck to win and a hint of knowledge on what your opponent is fieldning. And BOB had the most of the above.
It would seem to me then that qualities like discipline, teamwork and prediction do make a qualifying difference in arranged PvP matches and are not the predictable contest you said they were earlier. They might not have as much suspense of the unknown as a free-for-all battle, but the more evenly match makes up for that.
Both PvP types can coexist and complement each other well.
|
Gar Ddhen
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 19:51:00 -
[51]
I have to admit to currently being one of those Carebears....
I also have to admit that I cant stand the idea in Eve of "Battle Arenas" for want of a better description.
I like the option to do what I want when I want that Eve offers. If I want to do a bit of mining, I'll go do that, if I want a little PvP I'll go to a nearby low sec system and cruise the Ore belts, enough ratters there who are willing to indulge in a bit of a rumble.
Like most people I loathe ganking and being ganked, but its a fact of life on Eve and I simply get on with it. I avoid systems or Gates near my base of operations that I know are popular targets for these folk, or I scout them out first using a jump clone with no hardware and a cheap throw away ship like a Slasher or shuttle. If they catch me running a mission in lowsec then its my own damned fault for not keeping an eye on my local and overview and bailing if they get close... like many people my PvP setup is completely different to my PvE, no point in staying and fighting with a setup not geared to the tactics and ships fielded by players.
I don't like the thought of controlled PvP except for tournaments. It disturbs what is probably the best part of the game, that is, almost anything could happen almost anywhere.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 20:17:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Kazender
Ok I couldn't be bothered to read the entire thread so someone might have already mentioned this. So the reward is worth more than what the loser loses ... so if I have 2 accounts I go to this complex and have one of them blow up the others ship and get some nice loot ...
Also how would the loot be calculated? is it going to be set? in which case I get my 2 accounts to fight in noob ships ... is it going to somehow calculate how much my setup is worth and give a bit of loot worth more? Either way it seems like a way of printing isk to me.
PS I disagree with the concept entirely ... its just not what eve is about. If you want to do this talk to someone and meet them in a low sec system at a safe spot and have a fight ... if you want a reward you can both 'bet' on who wins ... so the winner gets the losers cash or something ... now yes this is open to serious scamming but if you really care about it so much set up a corp with the sole purpose of organising such things.
This is worth responding to even if it is an example of cluelessness.
Time = isk in EVE. Thats all that matters.
You would want the rewards to compensate for insurance and good fittings not the ships themselves. Then the rewards would also account for the time spent.
So it wouldnt be like free money.
Also as some one else suggested this could be tied into factional warefare.
Wherever you went - here you are.
|
Janus Lee
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 20:32:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Gar Ddhen
I have to admit to currently being one of those Carebears....
To clarify, the motivation for proposing tourney PvP is not to accommodate carebears who want to avoid combat, but to provide more combat opportunities for PvPers like myself. The wildly variable PvP that exists today is exciting and fun, but I would also love to grab four of my friends and quickly find a match against similar teams.
Quote:
It disturbs what is probably the best part of the game, that is, almost anything could happen almost anywhere.
Ganking of carebears, POS battles, and gatecamping would continue to exist with or without tourney PvP. Anything could still happen anywhere.
|
Ediz Daxx
FinFleet
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 20:36:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Janus Lee
Originally by: Ediz Daxx
The 20 have the tactical options of fleeing or calling their friends to help them if they cant take on the 40.
With those options of disengaging from PvP or fighting numbers with numbers, the OP's description of "hunter vs prey" seems apropos. What if the twenty are interested in a good fight but can't field enough to consistently win against teams double and triple their size? Instead of going down the slippery slope of bigger and bigger teams, tourney PvP could accommodate everything from 1v1 to fleet battles.
Quote:
And about BOB winning the tourney, its quite simple.. you need discipline and very good teamwork and a bit of luck to win and a hint of knowledge on what your opponent is fieldning. And BOB had the most of the above.
It would seem to me then that qualities like discipline, teamwork and prediction do make a qualifying difference in arranged PvP matches and are not the predictable contest you said they were earlier. They might not have as much suspense of the unknown as a free-for-all battle, but the more evenly match makes up for that.
Both PvP types can coexist and complement each other well.
Wtf is a "good fight" ? Does a good fight always equal to even numbers? Your mind is clouded by what you refer to as a good or even fight. A good fight can be 20 people going up against 40 and dying horrible while killing alot. A good fight can be 10 frigs with 1 week old characters going after a 1 year old character in a battleship and killing it.
Do you believe that discipline and teamwork is anything tactical? In the last two tourney finals the setups of the ships that have been used has been almost identical. This last one it was a nos fest, the one before that was missile boats with heavy maintance drones. Do you see what im getting at here? The options are limited.
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Northern Intelligence
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 22:57:00 -
[55]
Battleground PvP is doable. If the majority player base ask for it, CCP can make for us a DeadspaceBattlfield. Finally, PvP is accessible for mission runners and empire dwellers. :)
---------
Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Kali is for KArebearLIng.
I 100% agree with Avon. |
Wylbur
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 23:12:00 -
[56]
Oh look, all the gank bears are out tonight. I want to kill you just to pyss you off. But please, leave me alone, I don't want the risk of a fight. 
-----------------------------------------------
|
Adunh Slavy
Chaos Faction
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 23:34:00 -
[57]
How about something simlpler that won't require lots of new code: isolated 0.0 systems in empire space, no stations, a few belts, at least three gates, some moons that for some magical reason can't support a POS.
Now, there's something to fight over, can PVP with out sec status concerns, not going to be camped 24/7 by some big allaince, what's the point, and there's no good place to be safe but out of the system. |
Blacklight
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.01.06 23:41:00 -
[58]
Battleground PvP might be doable but lots of the game's long standing PvPers, especially those in alliances won't participate.
PvP for many of us, excluding some empire gankers admittedly, is a means to an ends. PvP is one of the many ways to accumulate power or secure your assets or control space or build an empire or enhance your market share.
The reason I would be against battleground PvP is that it would provide a distraction that may prevent people from finding their way to meaningful PvP and some may therefore never find it.
Battleground style PvP is a cop out that circumvents or avoids totally PvP that actually means something. Let CCP organise alliance and hopefully corporation PvP tournaments in the context of events, don't dilute the fact that we live our virtual lives in a cold, hard but risky universe where PvP can and should have some meaning.
Eve != WoW in space.
Blog
|
Wylbur
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.01.07 00:07:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Blacklight
The reason I would be against battleground PvP is that it would provide a distraction that may prevent people from finding their way to meaningful PvP and some may therefore never find it.
Agreed, meaningful PvP is what EVE should be about. I do think it is unfortunate that to test PVP set-ups and practice PVP skills players find it necessary to do so on SiSi. I think it would good to have a place where those inexperienced in Eve's PvP dynamics could go and get some experience without risk.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2007.01.07 00:51:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Wylbur
Agreed, meaningful PvP is what EVE should be about. I do think it is unfortunate that to test PVP set-ups and practice PVP skills players find it necessary to do so on SiSi. I think it would good to have a place where those inexperienced in Eve's PvP dynamics could go and get some experience without risk.
Sorry to jump in like this and pull this thread more off topic, but who are these players who find it necessary to go on SiSi to test PvP? Why can't they test like the rest of us?
I don't make a lot of isk compared to most, but I learned PvP by getting blown up. Why is everyone so afraid of getting blown up?
/Ki
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |