Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Give Models after the first additional chance to roll high structural design

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Give Models after the first additional chance to roll high structural design Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Give Models after the first additional chance to roll h... - 12/16/2020 5:10:43 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline
One peculiarity of the current design process is that the price for new design lines keeps going up - but the chance to roll a specific STR design score stays the same.
This can lead to frustrating experiences, like someone having to make a 4th Infantry Design line because he always rolled low for that one score!

I can understand why this increasing price can not be scrapped for now and why deleting models is not a option either. But maybe we could give the players a small benefit for all those failures at least?
I thought of this old Micheal Jordan quote: "I've missed more than 9,000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times I've been trusted to take the game-winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."

Basically while the price goes up with each new Model line, the chance of rolling a good STR design should go up accordingly. Your designers failed so often, they finally figured out what not to do! (and thus did the right thing for once).
Maybe a flat bonus, with the maximum staying the same (effectively shifting the whole bellcurve upwards; I think you use that elsewhere, where a flat bonus comes out of the dice range).
Maybe you just roll N times and take the highest result (with N being the number of existing designs for that Model type).
The details are malleable, but the fix seem very nessesary.

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 1/15/2021 12:45:05 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/15/2021 3:40:38 AM   
newageofpower


Posts: 261
Joined: 12/3/2020
Status: offline


Pain...

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 2
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/15/2021 12:46:46 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: newageofpower



Pain...

Personally I propably would have just taken the 93. It is good enough.
But the other rolls are a example for the issue.

(in reply to newageofpower)
Post #: 3
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/15/2021 1:04:24 PM   
AgentFransis

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 1/10/2021
Status: offline
I imagine Mussolini had quite similar thoughts back in the day.

I like it this way. Makes things more interesting and diverse. Encourages you to adapt your strategies and try different army compositions. Although commander bonuses are so massive that they often completely wash away any differences in quality, at least against the AI.

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 4
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/25/2021 7:30:37 PM   
newageofpower


Posts: 261
Joined: 12/3/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AgentFransis
I like it this way. Makes things more interesting and diverse. Encourages you to adapt your strategies and try different army compositions.

Humans can squish the AI even uphill, but excessive, uncontrolled, uncompensatable RNG makes MP really unbalanced.


< Message edited by newageofpower -- 1/26/2021 1:00:22 AM >

(in reply to AgentFransis)
Post #: 5
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/25/2021 9:44:18 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AgentFransis

I imagine Mussolini had quite similar thoughts back in the day.


Italy lacked the industry to produce any decent tanks, not designs for tanks!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqoOk5nZEKw

(in reply to AgentFransis)
Post #: 6
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/26/2021 2:30:58 PM   
beyondwudge

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/22/2020
Status: offline
It occurs to me that the emphasis on procedural generation of a storied world plays a part in this model design system. It seems that the game deliberately allows extreme events to take place so that you can get for instance a 'country' which has bad tanks or bad machine gunners or what have you. There have been nations in the last century that never got their head around how to do some part of their military well, emphasising a doctrine or idea that just didn't work.

It is also the case that this happened with some repetition, owing in part to the cultural and economic circumstances (projects changing hands completely and being started again) much like you can have happen in the model design system.

I'll admit, it's irritating to plan on using tanks in a game and you can't get a good roll within the timeframe you can afford. Then again, maybe you rolled a country that is just bad with tanks as a concept. Not every time you play are you going to end up with a superpower culture that is good at everything.

Ofcourse, I'm roleplaying a little bit here to explain what are effectively random dice rolls that bear little relation to what else has happened in your game. It would be better if there was a cause for the effect, some kind of explanation for what is going on and can be seen and responded to before you discover "well, can't use tanks this game."

However, like most things, it might have to wait while far more substantial game elements are added like navies and leader stories that use all of those statistics they've been given. In the mean time, perhaps it would just be best to let the player toggle an option to reject a model and redo it (for full time and price) with a bonus added, which is cumulative if you reject a model over and over up until a certain cap (you don't want unlimited bonus or you could get just a perfect design).

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 7
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/26/2021 3:48:17 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: beyondwudge

It occurs to me that the emphasis on procedural generation of a storied world plays a part in this model design system. It seems that the game deliberately allows extreme events to take place so that you can get for instance a 'country' which has bad tanks or bad machine gunners or what have you. There have been nations in the last century that never got their head around how to do some part of their military well, emphasising a doctrine or idea that just didn't work.

It is also the case that this happened with some repetition, owing in part to the cultural and economic circumstances (projects changing hands completely and being started again) much like you can have happen in the model design system.


That sounds more like they have not invested enough resources or time into that work - or have Industry constraints like the Italian army - rather then not having any aptitude with the designs.
You can have the best design in the universe - if you lack the industry to actually produce and deploy it, all you got is a piece of paper:
https://youtu.be/LJcLG4rzTLk

The game Dominus Galaxia has a interesting take on design here:
https://starchart-interactive.itch.io/dominus-galaxia-ks-edition

You can choose how much time and/or money you want to pour into a work and how much quality you want.
Time, Quality and Cost are in a Zero-Sum sliding game (you can keep one of them low, or all 3).

But I think a simple "subsequent designs of the same type have better rolls" can also solve that. As by definition if you are by the 3rd or 4th line, you invested a lot of time and resources.

(in reply to beyondwudge)
Post #: 8
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/26/2021 3:50:11 PM   
newageofpower


Posts: 261
Joined: 12/3/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: beyondwudge
I'll admit, it's irritating to plan on using tanks in a game and you can't get a good roll within the timeframe you can afford. Then again, maybe you rolled a country that is just bad with tanks as a concept. Not every time you play are you going to end up with a superpower culture that is good at everything.


Countries that can't make a good piece of kit are nations that lack the talent and can't invest the resources (money, man-hours of engineering time, laboratory testing) required.

These are represented ingame by the your Director (talent) and BP cost (resources). If you have both the talent and the resources to produce multiple different lines (paying increasing BP cost per line!) to explore infantry rifles, light tanks, helos or whatever, then your nation should naturally see some improvement.

"Perfection" is not a real concern; with +2 minimum Structural Design per attempt you'd need 30 (!) different lines to get to 130 minimum structural design roll; you'd be able to finish linear researches before you got "perfect" design bonus.

-Even with- a high Structural Roll you can still whiff on the Base Design, Weapons/Engine/Armor rolls, we're just asking Vic that our engineers actually learn a little from mistakes please.

< Message edited by newageofpower -- 1/26/2021 3:51:23 PM >

(in reply to beyondwudge)
Post #: 9
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/26/2021 4:33:11 PM   
beyondwudge

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/22/2020
Status: offline
I feel like this is more a philosophical argument. I am going to bet that even if I gave examples of chronic mismanagement of war equipment design by a given culture that you would just ignore it. So lets just leave it here shall we.

(in reply to newageofpower)
Post #: 10
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 1/26/2021 5:14:05 PM   
newageofpower


Posts: 261
Joined: 12/3/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: beyondwudge

I feel like this is more a philosophical argument. I am going to bet that even if I gave examples of chronic mismanagement of war equipment design by a given culture that you would just ignore it. So lets just leave it here shall we.

I love debates. So please actually give your examples instead of wussing out with "you'll just ignore me".

< Message edited by newageofpower -- 1/27/2021 8:04:04 PM >

(in reply to beyondwudge)
Post #: 11
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 2/13/2021 12:56:30 AM   
dtbilek

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 2/12/2021
Status: offline
On the one hand, in my current game I failed to get a good STR design roll for infantry 4 times in a row. I've given up trying because it would take so long. On the other hand I rolled extremely well on my first tank design. So I kind of like how it forces you to adapt. Mediocre dudes and monster tanks it is.

(in reply to newageofpower)
Post #: 12
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 2/23/2021 7:36:51 AM   
Sieppo


Posts: 933
Joined: 12/15/2012
From: Helsinki, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtbilek

On the one hand, in my current game I failed to get a good STR design roll for infantry 4 times in a row. I've given up trying because it would take so long. On the other hand I rolled extremely well on my first tank design. So I kind of like how it forces you to adapt. Mediocre dudes and monster tanks it is.


I think someone even suggested that the rolls should be hidden and only revealed during testing. I kind of like the idea a lot. Just think of how many "great" tank etc designs WW2 had but turned out to be total crap in action. Even well designed German ones that just broke down and such. Just makes MP harder and more based on luck. However, even if you field test a crappy model, the next one will always be better.

_____________________________

> What is the hardest thing in the universe?
> A diamond?
> No. 500 machine gun men on a mountain.

(in reply to dtbilek)
Post #: 13
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 2/23/2021 5:15:32 PM   
newageofpower


Posts: 261
Joined: 12/3/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sieppo
-snip-

I think that idea is utterly retarded garbage and worthless, and hope if Vic ever considers it he gives the option to toggle it off/enable transparency.

(in reply to Sieppo)
Post #: 14
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 2/24/2021 6:42:42 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sieppo


quote:

ORIGINAL: dtbilek

On the one hand, in my current game I failed to get a good STR design roll for infantry 4 times in a row. I've given up trying because it would take so long. On the other hand I rolled extremely well on my first tank design. So I kind of like how it forces you to adapt. Mediocre dudes and monster tanks it is.


I think someone even suggested that the rolls should be hidden and only revealed during testing. I kind of like the idea a lot. Just think of how many "great" tank etc designs WW2 had but turned out to be total crap in action. Even well designed German ones that just broke down and such. Just makes MP harder and more based on luck. However, even if you field test a crappy model, the next one will always be better.

I think Vic mentioned it in a Interview.
My only response is: God I hope not!

With all that Radomisation and Details it is already a minor chore to make any informed decisions. You want to hide that information from me, so I can not make a informed decision in the first place?
This game is desinged to be only playable with decent information. Hiding the data does not seem like a good idea.

(in reply to Sieppo)
Post #: 15
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 2/28/2021 4:11:52 PM   
BlueTemplar


Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline
Sword of the Stars 2 uses a slightly different system than the one just mentioned :
Each ship model eventually gets a random bonus or malus, but it only happens after some field testing.
So in a way it manages to be both unpredictable and transparent.

Otherwise there is indeed some tension between trying to make a game fun for casual play (which often involves wildly random events) as well as for competitive multiplayer.
IMHO it's hopeless trying to balance for both, these just need (a set of) different settings !

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 16
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 2/28/2021 11:11:17 PM   
Lovenought

 

Posts: 227
Joined: 8/21/2017
Status: offline
Your Model Designer will get better with everything they make. So in a way, gradually increasing civilisation skill at something is already represented. Might be worth focusing on other designs until your director gets better, then going back and making a new line of infantry or tanks. Plenty of low value things to practice on, like bikes.

(in reply to BlueTemplar)
Post #: 17
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 3/1/2021 1:44:49 AM   
newageofpower


Posts: 261
Joined: 12/3/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lovenought

Your Model Designer will get better with everything they make. So in a way, gradually increasing civilisation skill at something is already represented. Might be worth focusing on other designs until your director gets better, then going back and making a new line of infantry or tanks. Plenty of low value things to practice on, like bikes.

Model Design Councilor's skill doesn't affect design rolls, only efficiency of turning assigned BPs into Model Completion Progress They could have 160 Technician and still roll 74 Structural.

Holy ****, know what your talking about first before using such a self-assured tone.

(in reply to Lovenought)
Post #: 18
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 3/1/2021 9:33:19 AM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lovenought

Your Model Designer will get better with everything they make. So in a way, gradually increasing civilisation skill at something is already represented. Might be worth focusing on other designs until your director gets better, then going back and making a new line of infantry or tanks. Plenty of low value things to practice on, like bikes.

It is a common misconception that the Design Councilors Skill helps with the Rolls in any way, shape or form.
All it does is allow you to get out Models to production ready quicker. Wich actually could help with quality, if the Number of existing desings for any model is a bonus on the structural roll^^

(in reply to Lovenought)
Post #: 19
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/9/2021 1:38:43 PM   
Eretzu

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 4/4/2021
Status: offline
I think it would make sense to hide the structural roll before doing some actual field testing.

It feels stupid that you just design a tank and immediately can see that you need a new model, instead of a new model.

At the same time I think that the scale of 70-130 is too high and at least an option to use 90-110 would be great.

< Message edited by Eretzu -- 4/9/2021 1:39:51 PM >

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 20
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/9/2021 2:41:02 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Eretzu

I think it would make sense to hide the structural roll before doing some actual field testing.

It feels stupid that you just design a tank and immediately can see that you need a new model, instead of a new model.

At the same time I think that the scale of 70-130 is too high and at least an option to use 90-110 would be great.

Every design is ready to be ordered by the day you finish it.
All testing and prototyping that could be done, has been done.
A finished design is not just some blueprint or designers feever dream - but something that can be ordered right this month.

Vic has indicated he is consindering a game variant with more hidden information. But that is about it.
And not everyone is on board with such a mechanic.

(in reply to Eretzu)
Post #: 21
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/14/2021 10:44:16 AM   
Snoman

 

Posts: 101
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
I've finally just come to understand this mechanic (Structural Design Stat), and discovered how frustrating it is. I started Googling, and discovered multiple threads and comments saying the same thing: This sucks!

The current way it works seems tailor-made to piss you off. There's a fundamental stat, that you can see from day 1, that if rolled poorly, will permanently hobble this model. The obvious response is to try again. Except... The cumulative cost increases with each subsequent attempt!! Wut??

I understand the argument about randomisation adding to the character of each empire you play. I like that idea. I like the interesting choice of either A: just dealing with a weak unit type in your army's roster or B: spending more to fix things, at the cost of doing something else. I don't think the current system does that at all. Instead you end up with the following:

  • Option A has the problem that you can immediately see that you've got a weak model. There's little incentive to go ahead with something that the game is telling you in black and white is substandard. You haven't built any units yet, so there's no cost in terms of reorganising and replacing units if you make a new base model. So the game is motivating you to go with Option B. (If you don't believe me, take as an anecdote all the forum posts and comments and guides advising people to just keep making new models until they get a good score.)

  • Option B has escalating costs each time, as if the game is saying "Haha, F*** you!". I don't mind making the decision to pay the same again for another crank of the slot machine, but when the costs keep escalating it's incredibly aggravating. I'm already paying the opportunity cost of delaying the rollout of this new unit, and the opportunity cost of not researching something else, and you're going to hit me with another penalty on top of that? Why? It makes no sense! Adding some in-game logic here: surely they'd have an easier time on subsequent attempts? Or at least the same difficulty. What part of the process of doing something again would make it take longer and cost more? It flies in the face of common sense that says that things will tend to either take the same time, or go faster as you repeat them. It's this disconnect between common sense and how the game treats the player that makes it so especially annoying, I think.

So, with that off my chest, I really think something needs to give here. I'm clearly not the only one with a problem, and it's pissed me off enough to quit playing for a while, and spend my evening writing this post instead. For a game that is so innovative, and has so many cool systems, I really want to see something constructive here.

Suggestions:

  • Have the Structural stat be shown as a range, with uncertainty. E.g. 75 - 115, with the true score somewhere in that range. Have the range converge on the true score based on the percentage of field testing completed.

    • This would result in a sunk-cost effect if you find out after operational testing that the design has structural flaws. The decision at this point of whether to start over, or stick with that model line would be much more interesting.

  • Get rid of the aggravating escalating costs for creating new base models. Honestly I tried to think of something more constructive here, but I just can't see any way that it can be justified. Personally I think something like a cost reduction on each subsequent new model, with diminishing returns, would make sense. Something like the following function acting as a multiplier to new base model cost, where n is the number of existing base models, starting at zero:
    This would see costs get closer to half the original cost, but never quite get there. See the curve shown at this link: https://i.imgur.com/53MDjIk.png

    • If the existing cost penalty to the player is (as I've speculated) a game balance measure against constant re-rolls until a desirable score is rolled, then it wouldn't be required any more: If you eliminate the penalty, or even give a cost reduction, at the same time as the above change to the displaying of the Structural Stat, then you won't have to worry about people constantly re-rolling, due to the time it takes to field test.




(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 22
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/22/2021 2:40:41 AM   
Way2co0l

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 11/25/2010
Status: offline
I echo Snoman's input on the lost opportunity costs and was going to be making a post to basically say the same thing but as he's already done it I'll just +1 his statement. It would be one thing if there was something the player could do to improve their chances but to my knowledge it's complete RNG on the roll which isn't fun... If it's going to be that way then just let us chalk it up as a failed design, remove it and start again from scratch. We've already lost the time researching it, delaying new units into the field, AND having to start research all over from scratch without any assurances that what we'll get will be any better. There are already an abundance of negatives at play to disincentize players from trying over and over again as they're already delaying upgrades to the rest of their forces entirely without any kind of guarantee that your next model will roll any better. I mean, with any real world comparison you wouldn't be limited to working on a single design for any sort of hardware. The fact that you're limited to a single design at a time, combined with all the opportunity costs, the penalty of getting nothing more than a bad RNG roll, and then slapping on an addition HAHA penalty on top of all of that just isn't fun IMHO. Love the game, but hate this specific part.

(in reply to Snoman)
Post #: 23
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/22/2021 12:49:49 PM   
deMangler


Posts: 227
Joined: 7/13/2013
Status: offline
Some tech advances could be modelled as in combat, only gaining knowledge ground or achieving advantage over scientific/ engineering obstacles.

This would create a more intuitive and immersive advancement, it seems. Also generate the tech strengths and weaknesses of AI opponents in a good way. They have all conquered different ground from a tech point of view, and from where they are various other ability terrains are more or less accessible.

More simply I have a thought that the way breakthroughs work in combat could be applied similarly to tech advances.

I know that would mean re-working a lot of stuff and changing a lot of core concepts. This isn't really a suggestion - more of an idea of something that would avoid this issue.

< Message edited by deMangler -- 4/22/2021 12:50:11 PM >

(in reply to Way2co0l)
Post #: 24
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/22/2021 4:15:23 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: deMangler

Some tech advances could be modelled as in combat, only gaining knowledge ground or achieving advantage over scientific/ engineering obstacles.

This would create a more intuitive and immersive advancement, it seems. Also generate the tech strengths and weaknesses of AI opponents in a good way. They have all conquered different ground from a tech point of view, and from where they are various other ability terrains are more or less accessible.

More simply I have a thought that the way breakthroughs work in combat could be applied similarly to tech advances.

I know that would mean re-working a lot of stuff and changing a lot of core concepts. This isn't really a suggestion - more of an idea of something that would avoid this issue.

I had some ideas for a Scientific Progress based on being exposed to a problem (fighting a lot of armor, opearting in Radiaiton fields):
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4847761

(in reply to deMangler)
Post #: 25
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/22/2021 6:59:27 PM   
deMangler


Posts: 227
Joined: 7/13/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zgrssd


quote:

ORIGINAL: deMangler

Some tech advances could be modelled as in combat, only gaining knowledge ground or achieving advantage over scientific/ engineering obstacles.

This would create a more intuitive and immersive advancement, it seems. Also generate the tech strengths and weaknesses of AI opponents in a good way. They have all conquered different ground from a tech point of view, and from where they are various other ability terrains are more or less accessible.

More simply I have a thought that the way breakthroughs work in combat could be applied similarly to tech advances.

I know that would mean re-working a lot of stuff and changing a lot of core concepts. This isn't really a suggestion - more of an idea of something that would avoid this issue.

I had some ideas for a Scientific Progress based on being exposed to a problem (fighting a lot of armor, opearting in Radiaiton fields):
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4847761


Exactly! reminds me of the old days constantly adding to and improving the rules for table-top and pen and paper games

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 26
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 4/23/2021 5:30:11 AM   
Snoman

 

Posts: 101
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Way2co0l
...
Love the game, but hate this specific part.


Exactly

(in reply to Way2co0l)
Post #: 27
RE: Give Models after the first additional chance to ro... - 5/15/2021 5:38:56 PM   
BlueTemplar


Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline
What you seem to be missing is that the solution to Option A ("sucking it up") involves looking for another model type able to play a similar role (Motorbikes instead of Recon Buggies, Medium Tanks instead of Light Tanks, Bazooka instead of Anti-Tank Gun, Mechanized Artillery or Rocket Launcher instead of Artillery, Trucks instead of APCs, Quad MG instead of MG...) and a different army composition.

We *already* have a sunk cost effect in that designing the first model of a model type has a bunch of pre-requisites : all those BPs needed to unlock, discover and research the required techs and models.

Hiding the structural stat would make it *even worse*, because you would have to either delay *committing even more* for a specific design type (delaying getting related OOBs and related tech upgrades), or risk ending up with lots of BPs (and XP) invested in a model type for a model line that is a dud, and then being even more than now *forced* to try to go for Option B ("re-rolling trying to get a better model line").

And how else would you suggest that the game should dis-incentivize you from going for the "optimal" model type and the "optimal" army composition every game ? You have glossed over that.

(in reply to Snoman)
Post #: 28
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Give Models after the first additional chance to roll high structural design Page: [1]
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

0.969