Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE Page: <<   < prev  10 11 12 [13] 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE - 12/12/2010 6:02:32 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline 		There it is...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 361
RE: Jagers and 328 - 12/12/2010 7:57:37 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		Like others I have been following unit histories and here are a few for consideration:

328 Inf (39corps, 2pzG), arrives t80, 7-4-42, but historically arrived with 9th Army 4-42. It went to France 11 or 12-42, returned 6 or 9-43 (which is after the scenario ends).

5 Inf (5corps, 3pzG) was in the central sector with 5 corps, 9th Army until 11-41 when it was sent to France to refit as 5 leichte. Returned to 10 corp, 16 Army, 2-42, redesignated 5 jager 7-42, stayed in the Staraya Russa sector until 1944. In the scenario 5 Inf never leaves and 5 jager (55corp, 2pzG) arrives t80.

8 Inf (8corps, AOK9) part of 8 corp, 9th Army until 11 or 12-41 when it was sent to France to refit as 8 leichte, returned 3-42 and sent to 10 corp, 16 Army, redesignated 8 jager 6-42. In the scenario 8 Inf never leaves and 8 jager (59corps, AOK4) arrives t78 or 79.

For both the 5th and 8th, the 'leichte' to 'jager' change appears to have been in name only, so maybe the original Infantry units can withdraw and the Jager versions can arrive later.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 362
RE: sPzAbt.503 - 12/12/2010 8:04:28 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		Tigers first arrived on the east front in 8-42 with sPzAbt.502, but were deployed in small numbers and had little effect. At the time of the Stalingrad crisis, available Tigers were organised into sPzAbt.503 and sent to AGS. Maybe in the scenario sPzAbt.503 can enter 1-3-43 (with the original organisation of 20 Tigers and 25 IIIn's). It didn't convert to the 45 Tiger organisation until 4-43. As the scenario ends around that time, it probably doesn't need to be represented. A suggestion:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 363
RE: Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE - 12/12/2010 8:33:36 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

There it is...

I like the new German and Russia chrome quite a lot. Just a small bit of regret you didn't work from the latest file so a number of edits (including a couple of tricky and time-consuming ones) aren't in the events. I'm going to do a little inventory of these and see how tricky it is to get this file up to date.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 364
RE: Jagers and 328 - 12/12/2010 9:31:42 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Like others I have been following unit histories and here are a few for consideration:

328 Inf (39corps, 2pzG), arrives t80, 7-4-42, but historically arrived with 9th Army 4-42. It went to France 11 or 12-42, returned 6 or 9-43 (which is after the scenario ends).

5 Inf (5corps, 3pzG) was in the central sector with 5 corps, 9th Army until 11-41 when it was sent to France to refit as 5 leichte. Returned to 10 corp, 16 Army, 2-42, redesignated 5 jager 7-42, stayed in the Staraya Russa sector until 1944. In the scenario 5 Inf never leaves and 5 jager (55corp, 2pzG) arrives t80.

8 Inf (8corps, AOK9) part of 8 corp, 9th Army until 11 or 12-41 when it was sent to France to refit as 8 leichte, returned 3-42 and sent to 10 corp, 16 Army, redesignated 8 jager 6-42. In the scenario 8 Inf never leaves and 8 jager (59corps, AOK4) arrives t78 or 79.

For both the 5th and 8th, the 'leichte' to 'jager' change appears to have been in name only, so maybe the original Infantry units can withdraw and the Jager versions can arrive later.


Good ones got 'em.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 365
RE: sPzAbt.503 - 12/12/2010 9:32:10 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Tigers first arrived on the east front in 8-42 with sPzAbt.502, but were deployed in small numbers and had little effect. At the time of the Stalingrad crisis, available Tigers were organised into sPzAbt.503 and sent to AGS. Maybe in the scenario sPzAbt.503 can enter 1-3-43 (with the original organisation of 20 Tigers and 25 IIIn's). It didn't convert to the 45 Tiger organisation until 4-43. As the scenario ends around that time, it probably doesn't need to be represented. A suggestion:




A fun unit and another excellent piece of chrome. Let's do it.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 366
RE: Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE - 12/12/2010 9:32:47 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: briantopp


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

There it is...

I like the new German and Russia chrome quite a lot. Just a small bit of regret you didn't work from the latest file so a number of edits (including a couple of tricky and time-consuming ones) aren't in the events. I'm going to do a little inventory of these and see how tricky it is to get this file up to date.


Ok this wasnt too bad. PO orders are going to take awhile but worth another look in any event.

(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 367
RE: Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE - 12/12/2010 10:10:50 PM   
Panama


Posts: 1362
Joined: 10/30/2009
Status: offline 		Don't know how badly this would mess things up but... All of the Soviet 76mm divisional guns were also AT guns. They were the 76mm AT guns you see in the Soviet AT brigades and their secondary role in a division was as an AT gun. The F22 was the one the Germans used until their own PAK 40 became widely available. I suppose they might have used the F22 USV also. Not sure.

About 3000 F-22 at wars start. About 9800 F-22 USV from 1939 to 1942. ZIS-3 was the most common from February 1942 to wars end. About 15000 during your scenario.

Most of the F-22 and F-22 USV that began the war were lost (early on). So maybe just going with the ZIS-3 would work best.

Of course you would have to edit the unit db.

< Message edited by Panama -- 12/13/2010 2:20:09 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 368
BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 3:08:48 AM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline 		Here is the current build. This scenario:

- provides a comprehensive re-label of both OOBs into German and latinized Russian, courtesy of Obert_Klinck with many thanks. Took a little while to get used to it but it's growing on me...

- all of the formations have revised PO orders. This is a first draft of this redo -- no guarantees -- just starting to playtest it. Basically, I'm experimenting with looser, less detailed orders to see how Elmer does with them.

- some previous edits folded back into this file (tank arrivals; 8-panzer fixes; various other tweaks and corrections).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by briantopp -- 12/13/2010 3:09:10 AM >

(in reply to Panama)
Post #: 369
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 4:22:39 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline 		Really nice build, I especially like the German naming now it's like I'm used too.

Is anyone taking a look at the Luftwaffe?
Would be nice to have real Geschwader names, also I wonder if smaller units(size of a Gruppe) are needed/not needed.

@sPzAbt653
Nice findings, I really didn't think about divisions that converted.
I mentioned the 328. ID already but afaik it was dispersed among 9. Armee not sure in how small groups so maybe it wouldn't be bad to stay with July 42 as arrival date.

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 12/13/2010 4:27:08 AM >

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club
JOIN Napoleonic Wargame Club
JOIN American Civil War Game Club

(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 370
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 11:26:08 AM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		I did look at the Luftwaffe. I planned to look at the VVS as well. Then i caught the flu. As a result i've done little but for the last few days. Now that i am more or less recovered i will try to figure out the VVS as well, and we will see where that leads.

_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 371
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 12:16:47 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline 		You're busy with your project, too. In case you got the Lw/VVS Units, let us from STALAG13 have a look and we'll start integrating them, with your and Brian's kind permission, into Battles of Moscow 41-43.

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 372
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 12:43:11 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		What i did for the LW is in this thread already. I've still got the open office spreadsheet in case you want it. I haven't got anything on the VVS yet, but i have a couple of sources to look through, thanks to yourself and Panama.

_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 373
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 2:32:56 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

You're busy with your project, too. In case you got the Lw/VVS Units, let us from STALAG13 have a look and we'll start integrating them, with your and Brian's kind permission, into Battles of Moscow 41-43.


I'm all for an historical treatment of both air forces. The challenge here is that both must be done concurrently to preserve game balance. The current build is modelled on "Guderian's Blitzkreig II" by the Gamers, which abstracts the air war to some extent (artillery units are also basically abstracted in this build).

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 374
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 3:01:20 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline 		No problem. I'll have a look before I change the names anyway. The advantage is, that we can use the Geschwader (air wings), not the Gruppen (groups/squadrons). So, KG7 - He-111, KG1 - Do17 or a similar approach. Funny thing is... I never saw anybody complaining, that we can't divide the air groups in TOAW! :)


_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 375
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 3:33:39 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		Depends on how close you want to be to history. You see, in many cases only parts of the Geschwader were on the eastern front. An example that springs to mind is JG26 of channel front fame (The Abbeville Boys). Most of the Geschwader stayed in the west while I./JG26 was sent east for about a year. An other example worth mentioning might be JG54, which was usually based just south of Leningrad, and thus outside the scope of the scenario. However, during the period of the scenario parts of it did come south.

While i am on the topic, i did not have time to check which Geschwaders were in the area the scenario deals with. I excluded one or two that i know for a fact were never there though.

Now, on to the VVS. I can tell you which aviation divisions belonged to which front, and which army. This on a monthly basis. I can tell you which aviation regiments were in existence during the period of the scenario.

I can, as yet, NOT tell you which regiment belonged to which division, nor what they were equipped with.



_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 376
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 4:09:56 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		VVS part 1 

Front	Army		Unit			Source:http://tashv.nm.ru/BoevojSostavSA/1941/19411001.html
Western Front			23 bad			
			31 sad			
			43 sad			
			46 sad			
			467 sad			
Reserve Front						
	24th		38 sad			
			10 iap			
			163 iap			
			66shap			
	43rd		10 sad			
			12 sad			
Bryansk Front			24 bap			
			6 reserve aviation group (1shap+1 bap)			
	13th		11 sad			
			60 sad			
			61 sad			
South-Western Front						
			36 iad pvo			
			14 sad			
			19 sad			
			63 sad			
			75 sad			
			76 sad			
			316 rap			
			1 reserve aviation group (3 iap, 3 bap, 3 shap)			
			4 reserve aviation group ( 2 iap, 1 shap, 1bap)


_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 377
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 4:10:59 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		Part 2 Explanation of terms to follow shortly. 
Separate Armies						
	4th					
			2 reserve aviation group (2 iap, 1bap, 1 shap)			
	51st		182 iap			
			247 iap			
			253 iap			
			21 bap			
			507 bap			
			103 shap			
Long Range Bomber Aviation			22 bap			
			40 bap			
			42 bap			
			50 bap			
			51 bap			
			52 bap			
			81 bap			
Moscow Military District			6 IAK PVO (17 iap)			
			77 sad			
			441 iap


_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 378
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 4:18:49 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		iad = fighter aviation division
bad = bomber aviation division
shad = ground attack aviation division

As above but ending in p (e.g. iap) = regiments

PVO = a special formation intended to defend against enemy aviation

A regiment had 40 a/c
A division had 3 regiments + 4 spare a/c. = 124 a/c

In May '42 the aviation was reorganized into aviation armies, each consisting of 5 or more aviation divisions.

see here for my source and some pretty pictures of VVS fighters.

_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 379
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 6:01:38 PM   
Panama


Posts: 1362
Joined: 10/30/2009
Status: offline 		Because of how TOAW handles air units, is it a bad idea to mix different aircraft and types of aircraft? Since the air war is so abstract I've always thought it better to treat it as such and not go into too much detail.

_____________________________


(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 380
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 6:30:31 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline 		The above is true. It should be less of a problem if you depict soviet air units at the regiment level, as the units in the same regiment usually had the same purpose, whereas the divisions might have 1 fighter regiment and two bomber regiments, for example. Admittedly that is probably more unit slots than most designers would be prepared to spend on air units.

_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to Panama)
Post #: 381
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 8:16:30 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama

Because of how TOAW handles air units, is it a bad idea to mix different aircraft and types of aircraft? Since the air war is so abstract I've always thought it better to treat it as such and not go into too much detail.


That's been my view up to now, and I've seen that discussed before heading to the same conclusion. The current build of this scenario basically breaks the AFs out by aircraft type, and creates "virtual squadrons" by stacking. Some technical issues arise from mixing aircraft types, like -- what kind of unit icon should the unit have, if it is a mixed type?

If folks have energy to do more digging and continuous improvement (and this scenario has certainly benefited enormously to date) I think it would be at least at interesting to get the artillery on both sides in better shape. Artillery is also currently abstracted in this build to a considerable extent. The game system rewards historicity there, much better than with the air units.

(in reply to Panama)
Post #: 382
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 8:34:04 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline 		In what way is the artillery abstracted? Is it the load-out or the way they ware organized?

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club
JOIN Napoleonic Wargame Club
JOIN American Civil War Game Club

(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 383
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 8:36:12 PM   
briantopp

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

In what way is the artillery abstracted? Is it the load-out or the way they ware organized?


Well, the artillery units are labelled "artillery" instead of an historical unit designation (the panzer art units have historical names). And the TO&Es are probably worth a second look to ensure they are reasonably accurate

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 384
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 9:51:53 PM   
samba_liten


Posts: 367
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Currently in Kiev
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: briantopp


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama

Because of how TOAW handles air units, is it a bad idea to mix different aircraft and types of aircraft? Since the air war is so abstract I've always thought it better to treat it as such and not go into too much detail.


That's been my view up to now, and I've seen that discussed before heading to the same conclusion. The current build of this scenario basically breaks the AFs out by aircraft type, and creates "virtual squadrons" by stacking. Some technical issues arise from mixing aircraft types, like -- what kind of unit icon should the unit have, if it is a mixed type?

If folks have energy to do more digging and continuous improvement (and this scenario has certainly benefited enormously to date) I think it would be at least at interesting to get the artillery on both sides in better shape. Artillery is also currently abstracted in this build to a considerable extent. The game system rewards historicity there, much better than with the air units.


On closer reflection, (and with apologies for bringing up ever idea that comes into my head - my justification is that it is teaching me how to build my own scenario better) the soviets did lump different aircraft together. Might the disadvantage of doing so in the game not help preserve the historical ability of the LW to maintain air superiority in spite of having fewer a/c?

_____________________________

السلام عليكم

(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 385
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 10:03:20 PM   
Panama


Posts: 1362
Joined: 10/30/2009
Status: offline 		The problems the Soviets had in the air never had anything to do with numbers of aircraft. In 1942 they out produced the Germans almost 2 to 1. It wasn't until 1944 that the Germans were able to come close to matching Soviet air production. The Soviet problem was one of personel and training. Keeping a Soviet pilot alive long enough to become a good Soviet pilot was more the issue. Perhaps proficiency could mirror that. As long as a Soviet air unit remains on the map it becomes better through combat and increasing proficiency. Maybe start them out with a low proficiency and a veteran status to prevent them from becoming good too fast.

_____________________________


(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 386
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 10:38:06 PM   
Telumar


Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama

The problems the Soviets had in the air never had anything to do with numbers of aircraft. In 1942 they out produced the Germans almost 2 to 1. It wasn't until 1944 that the Germans were able to come close to matching Soviet air production. The Soviet problem was one of personel and training. Keeping a Soviet pilot alive long enough to become a good Soviet pilot was more the issue. Perhaps proficiency could mirror that. As long as a Soviet air unit remains on the map it becomes better through combat and increasing proficiency. Maybe start them out with a low proficiency and a veteran status to prevent them from becoming good too fast.


I think that should be the way to go. And see where this leads to.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to Panama)
Post #: 387
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 10:45:00 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline 		I think the way to distribute artillery, like Brian did, was a good solution. To put'm into the Korps/Armee/Panzergruppe etc. HQs would be less feasible and practicable. For the scale of the scenario and their role, e.g. Korps/Armee/Panzergruppe/Armiya/Fronta level support, that's the best way. Just MHO.

Even with an accurate OOB or TO&E of the different Art.Abt or Batteries attached to the Korps/Armee/Panzergruppe sector; you'd use them to support an attack/defense of the Korps/Armee/Panzergruppe sector.

As you guys might have noticed, I labeled the German Artillery units, the ones attached to the Korps/Armee/Panzergruppe as Art.Pk. = Artillerie Park and the heavy bits simply as sArt.Abt. (heavy artillery battalion). The independent Katyusha units, depending on their size, to Katyusha Brigada or Battalion.

Before the final release pops up, I'll have managed to send Brian a glossary and a short explanation why/how I used the various German/Russian abbreviations.

Anyway. Feedback for my little *and first* localization effort for TOAW is appreciated. And for the record: I just felt like doing it and I appreciate Brian's positive response very much ^5. Thanks lad!


_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 388
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/13/2010 10:47:56 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

VVS part 1

Front Army Unit Source:http://tashv.nm.ru/BoevojSostavSA/1941/19411001.html
Western Front 23 bad
31 sad
43 sad
46 sad
467 sad
Reserve Front
24th 38 sad
10 iap
163 iap
66shap
43rd 10 sad
12 sad
Bryansk Front 24 bap
6 reserve aviation group (1shap+1 bap)
13th 11 sad
60 sad
61 sad
South-Western Front
36 iad pvo
14 sad
19 sad
63 sad
75 sad
76 sad
316 rap
1 reserve aviation group (3 iap, 3 bap, 3 shap)
4 reserve aviation group ( 2 iap, 1 shap, 1bap)



Sehr gut! Очень хорошо!




< Message edited by Oberst_Klink -- 12/13/2010 10:49:05 PM >

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Panama)
Post #: 389
RE: BfM Current build Dec 12/10 - 12/14/2010 1:53:44 AM   
Panama


Posts: 1362
Joined: 10/30/2009
Status: offline 		Soviet artillery will make you crazy.

If the numbers are good then what you have is good enough IMHO.

BTW, the December 41 Rifle Division TO&E eliminated the 76mm AA gun. The AA battalion was represented by 6x37mm AA guns. The regimental AA was represented by 3 truck mounted 12.7mm DShK HMG. The quad Maxims were also removed at this time.

< Message edited by Panama -- 12/14/2010 3:15:07 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to briantopp)
Post #: 390
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 12 [13] 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Blank objectives RU/DE .SCE Page: <<   < prev  10 11 12 [13] 14   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6.359