Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Louis DelaBlanche
Cosmic Odyssey YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:01:00 -
[31]
I agree with the principle that the homogonisation of ships in EVE is a bad thing. However, I disagree that these changes necessarily are taking EVE further down that road. Theres still pleanty of scope for variety of setups for ships, & till it reaches the point (which itl hopefully never do) that the only difference between each races ships is the hull design, CCPs attempts to "balance" should continue.
|
Alkeena
Gallente Unitas Nusquam Est FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:08:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Mekk Azal
I didnt read it either. But please skip the fancy words and just tell me to STFU like normal space-geeks.
STFU Noob
|
MEEATYOU
Gallente Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:09:00 -
[33]
Amen to this post.
/signed. CCP, get off your asses and fix some nerfs and then STOP NERFING EVERYTHING cause some carebear in Empire lost his ship cause he was dumb.
I see this one day,
EVE ONLINE USERS: 5,000 (All In Empire)
CCP, get it straight. Majority rules, Not BOB, nor CAREBEARS.
YARR! FTW
|
Mark Lucius
Forbidden Lore
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:21:00 -
[34]
I disagree. The drone buff makes it necessary to think on your feet. Sure it will be easier to decide what drones you take with you since you've got a larger bay, but now you will have to think of what you actually set loose instead of just dropping the 5 Ogre II's (since you got nothing else). Also, a larger bay makes for better mixing and matching, so you don't have to go the secure 'read about in the ships/modules section' loadout.
The bandwidth reduction is also a good thing, because it brings the power of the Myrmidon more in line with the other Tier 2 BCs. It makes the other BCs viable choices again, which brings back the element of the sandbox and choice (ofcourse I will still get laughed at because I prefer the Harbinger). ---
|
Buyerr
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:35:00 -
[35]
i see the point in beeing able to fit a larger weapon type on a smaller ship, so that you are able to do considerable dps on something bigger then your ship, although the term balance needs to be in place so that you can NOT tank in any way while doing it (no speed or normal tank).
but your whine is primary about the drones where it is lame that it is the only weapen system that can effectively do this and only on a few ship types. if it have to be apply it to all weapon types and MAKE SOME DRAWBACK FOR USING HEAVY DRONES instead of light
|
Mark Lucius
Forbidden Lore
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:52:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Mark Lucius on 26/10/2007 21:52:48
Originally by: Buyerr i see the point in beeing able to fit a larger weapon type on a smaller ship, so that you are able to do considerable dps on something bigger then your ship, although the term balance needs to be in place so that you can NOT tank in any way while doing it (no speed or normal tank).
but your whine is primary about the drones where it is lame that it is the only weapen system that can effectively do this and only on a few ship types. if it have to be apply it to all weapon types and MAKE SOME DRAWBACK FOR USING HEAVY DRONES instead of light
Oooh, I like this. How about a CPU-heavy module that allows medium sized ships to use (more) heavy drones? ---
|
Owi
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:15:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Owi on 26/10/2007 22:16:45
Originally by: Alkeena Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 20:11:06
It is not the true death of Eve, it is the spiritual death of Eve.
~Alkeena
i saw that coming long time ago. If something good and uniqe gets created, ppl overrun it and make it commercial. And in that way it gets f***** up by stuiped s*** and boring low entertaiment. *coughs
Its part of growing and grow it to death.
Well its bit off topic but the changes are made about growing. If this changes are wrong and overreacted it ends in boring - all the same kind of s*** .
I feel ya Alkeena and i know what you want to say - some ppl that posted in here dont.
My EvE-Files.com folder !
|
Alkeena
Gallente Unitas Nusquam Est FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:15:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 22:18:20 Quick response as I have other engagements shortly:
You're quite right in believing that I'm not terribly fond of the impending drone nerf. That, however, was not the primary thrust of the post, merely an extended example. I think the greatest affront of all is actually the proposed torp changes...It really removes quite a bit of cross-race variety from the game, much to its detriment imho. These are all just symptoms of a larger problem though.
This is not really a whine about nerfing in general, although it seems many people misconstrued it as such. It's a whine about HOW nerfing is done. Adjusting ships to "bring them in line" with other ships in class seems a poor decision. First because, as I've repeatedly said, it encourages homogenization which I consider to be the bane of any good game a direct source of boredom and stagnation. Also, balance is almost impossible if you attempt to have everything perform the same without actually having their stats exactly the same. The end result is that you either have ships that ARE exactly the same (BAD) or you have ships that are very nearly the same but with some inherent imbalance which people will seize upon. If all ships of a given class perform exactly the same role, but one performs it marginally better (as one inevitably will) then the players will flock to it until further calls for nerfs are made. In this way we'll end up with the consistent chain nerfs that we've been witnessing for the past couple years.
The way to avoid this issue is to ensure that each ship in a class has a particular independent role which encourages people to fly it in specific circumstances because that's what it is best suited for. I get the sense that this was originally why the racial profiles were created in the first place...Who says Caldari should have a good close range damage dealer? They're (ostensibly) the long range race. Who says the minmatar need 'good' ew, be happy with your target painters and speed, it makes you unique (or should, and the fact that it doesn't is really the issue).
It then becomes a matter of balancing roles against one another rather than taking a bunch of ships that are essentially the same and tweaking a few states at the outrage of the many.
Before I'm attacked for these views, note well that what I presented above is something of a simplification for explicative purposes. If you take it too far in the 'role-based' direction you're right back to pigeonholing...It's a balancing act assuredly, but one that seems far more appealing to me than arbitrary stat changes that make all the ships appear to be nearly the same.
Oh, and if it keeps the thread alive, feel free to keep whinging about drones specifically if you like.
~Alkeena
|
Grim Vandal
Caldari Burn Proof
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:25:00 -
[39]
the worst balance factors are within similar systems like:
shield tanking working as armor tanking = pretty lame
guns do dot ... all of them do dot ... thats it ... now even missiles and torps do dot ... MISSILES SHOULD BE TACTICAL WEAPONS DEAR GOD, missiles should by now way bet a dot weapon ...
the worst thing EVER: ships having bonuses to ONE weapon-type only why shouldnt a ship have like 2 laser guns, some autocannons and one tactical torp launcher ... well i stop already ... it wouldnt be eve anymore ...
Greetings Grim |
Mark Lucius
Forbidden Lore
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:42:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Alkeena Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 22:18:20 Quick response as I have other engagements shortly:
You're quite right in believing that I'm not terribly fond of the impending drone nerf. That, however, was not the primary thrust of the post, merely an extended example. I think the greatest affront of all is actually the proposed torp changes...It really removes quite a bit of cross-race variety from the game, much to its detriment imho. These are all just symptoms of a larger problem though.
This is not really a whine about nerfing in general, although it seems many people misconstrued it as such. It's a whine about HOW nerfing is done. Adjusting ships to "bring them in line" with other ships in class seems a poor decision. First because, as I've repeatedly said, it encourages homogenization which I consider to be the bane of any good game a direct source of boredom and stagnation. Also, balance is almost impossible if you attempt to have everything perform the same without actually having their stats exactly the same. The end result is that you either have ships that ARE exactly the same (BAD) or you have ships that are very nearly the same but with some inherent imbalance which people will seize upon. If all ships of a given class perform exactly the same role, but one performs it marginally better (as one inevitably will) then the players will flock to it until further calls for nerfs are made. In this way we'll end up with the consistent chain nerfs that we've been witnessing for the past couple years.
The way to avoid this issue is to ensure that each ship in a class has a particular independent role which encourages people to fly it in specific circumstances because that's what it is best suited for. I get the sense that this was originally why the racial profiles were created in the first place...Who says Caldari should have a good close range damage dealer? They're (ostensibly) the long range race. Who says the minmatar need 'good' ew, be happy with your target painters and speed, it makes you unique (or should, and the fact that it doesn't is really the issue).
It then becomes a matter of balancing roles against one another rather than taking a bunch of ships that are essentially the same and tweaking a few states at the outrage of the many.
Before I'm attacked for these views, note well that what I presented above is something of a simplification for explicative purposes. If you take it too far in the 'role-based' direction you're right back to pigeonholing...It's a balancing act assuredly, but one that seems far more appealing to me than arbitrary stat changes that make all the ships appear to be nearly the same.
Oh, and if it keeps the thread alive, feel free to keep whinging about drones specifically if you like.
~Alkeena
Ok so you are saying that we should keep the 'little' imbalances that exist now, because they are what define Eve? So Caldari should stay PvE, Gallente should stay PvP, Minmatar should stay Nano and Amarr should stay the laughing stock?
While I agree that there should be distinguishing points between the races, like the ones you mention, they should clearly not be so far apart that for each role there is a clear answer.
Example: This means that if someone ask you which ship he should train for when he likes fast, heavy hitters, you don't immediately reply 'train for the Ishtar or Myrmidon', but instead say 'Well, that depends. Do you like lasers? Do you like missiles?' With an unbalance this second answer is not really an option.
Adjustments like this make the distinction better, because no matter role or race you choose, you can participate meaningfully instead of being cannonfodder just because your preference 'just happens to not work so well'. ---
|
|
Murtala
Mushin Market
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 23:04:00 -
[41]
AGREED
But ultimately, the developers and shareholders depends on getting this right and personally I think the drive to "BALANCE" everything will succeed and variety will disappear and . . . well I have spent 3 years here, so I have had a good run.
STOP BALANCING EVERYTHING
|
SirMoric
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 23:08:00 -
[42]
Nothing wrong with "balancing" EVE.
I don't see any problem in each race and each ship has their own purpose, as long as you don't create a unbeatable ship.
When you fit your ship there should always be an option for people to counter it.
So everytime you go out on a mission you may be able to kill 50 percent of the ships in your own class where the drivers have the same amount of SP and the other 50 percent will be dangerous to you.
Stupidity will prevail when you're able to make a setup that is nber against everything else class- and skillwise.
So, I like "balancing".
If this thread is about you just lost your favourite ship cause it's nber in most situations.... Can I have your stuff then?
rgds
|
Dirk Magnum
Red Light Enterprises Eastern Star Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 00:09:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 27/10/2007 00:10:42 I wouldn't say that balance is killing Eve, but it has the potential to if taken too far. Even if you're a dedicated roleplayer who would never consider cross-training weapons and ships, you still shouldn't be complaining about balance. Does Mozambique complain to the UN about the military superiority of American weapon systems, and demand they be regulated (nerfed, if you will) down to match third world levels of quality? No. You make do with what you have, and take advantage of system improvements whenever possible. Okay this may not be the greatest possible analogy, but I've said it before and I'll say it again, true balance kills diversity in this game.
Originally by: SirMoric
I don't see any problem in each race and each ship has their own purpose, as long as you don't create a unbeatable ship.
When you fit your ship there should always be an option for people to counter it.
Making that statement strongly implies that there is an unbeatable ship setup in this game. Pray tell what it is, because I wish to make use of it
|
Jack Icegaard
The Omega Project
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 00:18:00 -
[44]
To the OP: Very nice post, i share the same concern for the game.
Originally by: Alkeena
...Also, balance is almost impossible if you attempt to have everything perform the same without actually having their stats exactly the same. The end result is that you either have ships that ARE exactly the same (BAD) or you have ships that are very nearly the same but with some inherent imbalance which people will seize upon. If all ships of a given class perform exactly the same role, but one performs it marginally better (as one inevitably will) then the players will flock to it until further calls for nerfs are made. In this way we'll end up with the consistent chain nerfs that we've been witnessing for the past couple years. This is the mechanism behind the FOTM...nerf...FOTM cycle in my estimation.
Exactly!
|
Incantare
Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 00:21:00 -
[45]
Balance is good for the game. End of.
Balance doesn't mean watered down gameplay and identical races, it means equal ability to compete so that performance in battle is dictated through skill, both in preparation and in combat, rather than largely influenced by racial choices.
|
Si Raven
Challenger Logistics Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 01:20:00 -
[46]
Originally by: MasterEnt This is why weapons and modules has CPU/MW requirements. If you want to fit a "L" weapon on a meduim ship.. should should be able to.. just knowing that your resources will be limited.
QFT
The Drake shouldn't have the same CPU/MW as the Ravem just as the Myrmidon shouldn't have the same bandwidth as the Dominix. If you still want to use "L" drones, your resources should be limited!
Originally by: Alkeena The trouble we've run into, in my opinion, is the obsession with DPS
Including you? How can you call the new Myrmidon homogenous when you consider the versatility of that huge drone bay? You can go from BC DPS, to cap neuter, to repairer, to ecm! All without redocking at a base station!
|
Bohoba
Caldari Dragons United Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 01:37:00 -
[47]
I have played the game 3.5 years I am Cald, race what I am seeing is this Eve will become 1 race 1 ship 1 gun no skill(player wise) to play the game I have seen my share of the nerf bat hehe well every patch sence the day I logged onto eve.
Eve is really becoming more of a WoW group whinners win the game here
have you noticed that every time a major nerf bat is comming CCP offers the 2 for one deals
Oh well just a game hope to play for awhile longer could always go mining in empire I guess hehe
The Dark Force is strong in EvE But it will fail
Get Into the Game it makes it fun for all |
Saris Dadra
Drifter Unincorporated
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:10:00 -
[48]
I think most of the posters here seem to be missing the OP point.
Balance is wonderful, balancing everything by making it the same is not.
For example a passive shield tank and an active shield tank are very different beasts. Now suppose a change comes around that makes them less so. Perhaps, the optimal recharge rate is removed and shield recharge rates are boosted slightly to compensate. Now the two tanking styles are fairly similar. All damage is repaired in a linear fashion so you just chose the one that does it slightly better. The change may not even drastically change the effectiveness of any particular ship, but it removes a certain flavor of the game, which is something I think should be avoided.
I'm not a big missile user so I cant offer much of an opinion the torpedo changes. But if the changes are being made because every other race has long and short range weapons, not because torpedos in their current form are overpowered then it is a bad change. Balance doesn't mean that every race has long and short range weapons, it means that every race is just as viable to play as the next one.
Likewise nerfing the Myrm for the REASON it can fit Large sized weapons is bad. Nerfing the Myrm for the REASON it OMGWTFPWNs all other battle cruisers is a good thing, and I think it is the real reason for nerf. Still it makes me rather sad to see a rather unique ship made into an oversized Vexor, and I wish there was another way to nerf the ship that didn't destroy its uniqueness. |
Teneshian
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:13:00 -
[49]
if you balance the game completely no one is going to win
|
Vana theHunter
PsyCorp INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:21:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Tarminic There's nothing killing EVE - it's been growing consistently for several years now. People are whining, people have whined, and people will continue to whine. If CCP decides to nerf something it will be due to the massive amount of data they have on how various ships or modules are purchased/lost/used primarily and input from the community secondarily.
If the Myrmidon is 3 times as popular as any other battlecruiser despite only 35% of players being Gallente (example numbers) then they figure it needs to be balanced. Of course this won't be popular because unbalanced ships are popular for obvious reasons - they kick ass.
EVE will survive the carrier nerf, will survive drone bandwidth, and will survive any future nerfs unless they're truly short-sighted and idiotic, which I don't think will ever happen.
I'd have to agree fully. The nerfs are in place for reasons. The nano age was rediculous, and this time is just another way to balance the combat and pvp aspect of the game.
If you want a combat system that's not balanced, I recommend you moving to WoW. Really, you may enjoy it.
Other than that, hop back into your nerfed nanophoon and quit complaining.
|
|
Drizit
Amarr Lonely out here Division of Eden
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:43:00 -
[51]
The only thing overpowered in this game is the nerf bat.
I'm all for balance, there should be a certain amount of versatility that allows everyone, no matter what race they are, to do what they want without having to cross-train to fly the only ship in the game capable of it.
The problem recently is how they have balanced the game - with nerfs
Reducing the effectiveness of one always makes another more powerful. Take away the top card and the card underneath always becomes the top card. All this does is creates a continual round of removals from the top until there's no cards left. The only way you can ever achieve a true balance is by reducing the DPS of every ship to zero then it just becomes space tag. Oh but that makes Minmatar too powerful so we have to nerf their speed... And so it goes until nothing is left but ambulation and it becomes a chat room game.
Stop with the nerfs already. In WW2, did some ultimate dev nerf the aircraft because it was too powerful? No, someone invented the anti-aircraft gun and flak cannon to counter it.
Stop nerfing by subtraction, lets have some nerfing by addition instead.
--
|
TRYPTIC
The Flaming Sideburn's Hedonistic Imperative
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 03:06:00 -
[52]
I strongly agree with the OP. There are, at most, two solid kit-outs for each ship. Some may have a third fit which is slightly above mediocre.
What I have noticed most in CCP's attempts at balancing is movement towards specialized ships of every type. That is one of the culprits which encourage blobbing. You need tacklers, support, damage-dealers, snipers, drone boats, ECM boats, etc. Solo PvP is all but dead because of this specialization.
I'm glad to see several differing opinions here, both pro and con...except for the moronic temper tantrum thrown by Jita Alt, who doesn't even have the balls to post with his main.
Regards, Tryp
|
Gastco
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 03:18:00 -
[53]
Actually, I find this thread to be a bit hypocritical.
The title "balance is killing eve" implies that the game is currently unbalanced and then you go on to say the upcomming potential changes are a bad thing because it kills the "flexibility" of eve.
I couldnt disagree more. Flexibility comes about because there are more than a few viable paths to take in EvE. Right now, EVE is the most flexible game out there. But, there are still a large majority of people following a few paths, simply because those paths are a little more viable than others.
EVE is no different in that way than any other game thats every been released. The masses will always migrate towards the ships, abilities, and mods that are the most powerful. The best way to identify those skills that need addressing is letting lots of people play your game. Currently, its no fluke that certain Carriers and drone ships are the ships most sought after by the masses.
You use the term "homogonization" I dont see CCP doing this at all.
If you have 10 ships, 8 of which are balanced and 2 of which are more powerful, especially when combined with certain skills. What do you think people will play? How is bringing the 2 in line "homogonizing" the game? Since everyone is now flying those 2 ships everyone is gonna be mad when they nerf them. Thats whats happening here.
the bottom line is needed rebalancings and nerfs are a part of games like this, and rebalancing does anything but homogonize the game.
|
shupaco yaloo
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 03:24:00 -
[54]
Originally by: TRYPTIC except for the moronic temper tantrum thrown by Jita Alt, who doesn't even have the balls to post with his main.
that is his main unless you think this guy is on more than 6 hours a day every day actively speaking within local and trading contracts and then goes on a pvp character
|
MrPops
Caldari Foundation R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 05:10:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Jita Alt Didn't read it, you're wrong though
STFU, you are jackass. Go shine some d i l d o e s
|
Ban Shui
Eve University
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 05:14:00 -
[56]
As the saying goes:
"The road to failure is paved with good intentions."
I do not doubt CCP's intentions.
|
faxtarious
Silent Death Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 05:36:00 -
[57]
there's a saying that goes... "you don't like it...then get the F' out"
|
Danae Melios
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 06:56:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Alkeena Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 22:32:53 Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 22:18:20 Quick response as I have other engagements shortly:
You're quite right in believing that I'm not terribly fond of the impending drone nerf. That, however, was not the primary thrust of the post, merely an extended example. I think the greatest affront of all is actually the proposed torp changes...It really removes quite a bit of cross-race variety from the game, much to its detriment imho. These are all just symptoms of a larger problem though.
Alkeena, I agree with this somewhat. I liked the idea of a "big, slow, dumb, can kill you quickly if it hits but is easily outran" weapon with a long range. I ran a Caldari toon for a long time, and I liked having it as part of the game.
Originally by: Alkeena
This is not really a whine about nerfing in general, although it seems many people misconstrued it as such. It's a whine about HOW nerfing is done. Adjusting ships to "bring them in line" with other ships in class seems a poor decision. First because, as I've repeatedly said, it encourages homogenization which I consider to be the bane of any good game a direct source of boredom and stagnation. Also, balance is almost impossible if you attempt to have everything perform the same without actually having their stats exactly the same. The end result is that you either have ships that ARE exactly the same (BAD) or you have ships that are very nearly the same but with some inherent imbalance which people will seize upon. If all ships of a given class perform exactly the same role, but one performs it marginally better (as one inevitably will) then the players will flock to it until further calls for nerfs are made. In this way we'll end up with the consistent chain nerfs that we've been witnessing for the past couple years. This is the mechanism behind the FOTM...nerf...FOTM cycle in my estimation.
Here, I am afraid, we part ways out how we see things. You have been in the game since pre-Exodus, well I have as well (though I gave my previous characters away to start a new life in Eve). Remember that each navy has been built up independently of the others, reacting to one another. One Empire comes up with a new concept, the others steal it to put a ship with the same role in their navies. So there is deliberate duplication of capabilities. Why? Because not everyone cross-trains to different races to get unique ships.
Originally by: Alkeena
The way to avoid this issue is to ensure that each ship in a class has a particular independent role which encourages people to fly it in specific circumstances because that's what it is best suited for. I get the sense that this was originally why the racial profiles were created in the first place...Who says Caldari should have a good close range damage dealer? They're (ostensibly) the long range race. Who says the minmatar need 'good' ew, be happy with your target painters and speed, it makes you unique (or should, and the fact that it doesn't is really the issue). ~Alkeena
Yes, I agree that the flavors of the different races need to be preserved. Hell, halve the structure of Minmatar races and boost their speeds, make 'em more distinct. At the same time, add more armor to the Amarr, buff their lasers, and lower their speeds even more. Keep different weapon systems more consistently Amarr and Caldari and Gallente and Minmatar, enhance the modifiers that come from each shipyard.
BUT-- keep in mind that every fleet needs its fast scouts and tacklers. Each fleet needs its snipers and its close combat specialists. Its own tankers and logistics ships. And when one side gets too good at a particular trick, others will steal it. Or, now, file complaints with CONCORD alleging provocative and illegal weapons systems threatening a new arms race, requiring adjustments to technology to comply with arms limitations treaties.
|
Owi
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 07:04:00 -
[59]
What wouldt be better for the game ?
Balancing it for the average mass or balancing it on results that made from a handfull strong players ?
To keep the mass happy - sure its better balancing / reducing the skill-level . But for the game itselfs it is bad because it gets balanced with little faults init.
Balance it on a handfull strong players wouldt raise the level and make it better.
CCP make to much nerfs, finding a way between the both examples wouldt been probably the best.
How bout a "Nerf Filtersystem Managment" CCP ;-)
My EvE-Files.com folder !
|
Tona Beqa
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 08:40:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Owi Edited by: Owi on 27/10/2007 07:13:26
What wouldt be better for a game ?
Balancing it for the average mass or balancing it on results that made from a handfull strong players ?
To keep the mass happy - sure its better balancing / reducing the skill-level . But for the game itselfs it is bad because it gets balanced with little faults init.
Balance it on a handfull strong players wouldt raise the level and make it better.
CCP maked to much nerfs early.
To find a way between the both examples wouldt been probably the best.
How bout a "Nerf Filtersystem Managment" CCP ;-)
Currently, 'the masses' fly Myrmidons, Carriers or use torpedoes. What are you on about?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |