Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

v7.1 status report

 
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] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> v7.1 status report Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
v7.1 status report - 1/8/2002 1:53:00 AM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline 		We are currently working on a fix to the "synch bug" and a few issues with the two player campaign (most notably when done online). We are also looking into a way to address one aspect of the artillery delay issue, but I not sure if the fix will pan out. What has been fixed in the current test build is: 1) too many men fire primary inf weapons - this has been corrected so only primary inf weapons in SLOT 1 are fired multiple times. Also a suppression componant has been added so supression reduces the number of "multiple men" firing. This should help the problem of unsuppressed defenders taking excessive losses because suppressed attackers still attack with the same number of men as unsuppressed units. Likewise this reduces this will reduce teh casualties taken when an attacking force has a significnat numerical superiority and suppresses the daylights out of defenders. This will in general increase the effectiveness of preparatory and overwatcing fires. The effect is now: Roll DIE(200) for each man in the squad , if the result is less than (experience-(suppression/2)) the man fires. The result is added to the base of at least 1 man always firing. 2) Flame weapons are too destructive: Flame weapons has a base 60% chance of penetration vice "automatic" penetration. 3) APCR T/d calcualtion incorrect: Repaired. This reduces the effectiveness in undermatched engagements (ie armor significantly greater than projectile diameter) 4) Slope effect on effective resistance tweaked slightly upward. (this makes the effective resistance slightly higher) 5) Modified the ricochet routine to do a check for "shatter gap" tendency (though with a significant randon element) based on the chance of shatter starting at about T/d = .75 and reaching max at about 1.25. Penetration to effective resistance ratio ramps from a minimum at ramping up linearly from 1.01 to max at 1.11 and at the high end more variably in a "hump" centered at 1.25 but having significant tails form about 1.10 up to 1.4. Note the max shatter probability is capped at .5 and testing has shown it generaly much less, but wanted to include this effect as part of the ricochet routine. 6)Introduced a more linear variabilty into vulnerable location hits, The chance ramps up from 300m on in rather than a step function at range 150. 7) Bit the bullet and added a rudimentory "armor quality" function that works a lot better than the thickness germandering I tried to do. Since the effective resistance of high hardness or cast armor had a bigger T/d dependance than I originally thought. For those complaining about this I have come around to the error of my ways The "Skirts" data element in the OOBs is now coded like radio to allow 5 different armor types: 0,1,2,3 Single digit gives the vehicle 0, 10, 20 , or 30mm skirts on Flank hits. Vehice is assumed to have MOSTLY "normal" 240 BHN RHA type armor 10,11,12,13 As above but armor is superior quality to "regualar" RHA. 20,21,22,23 As above but vehicle has "high hardness" armor of moderate quality. 30,31,32,33 As above but has "high hardness" armor of poor quality. 40,41,42,43 As above but armor is cast. Now these categories are a bit vague, but allow for inclusion of T/d into the quality equation, namely that armor deficiency is most pronounced when siginiicantly overmatched, and in the case of high hardness can actually be a benefit when the T/d is high. This means that 37 vs T-34 will be generally ineffective, 50mm will be a wash with the "old values" and 75 and 88 in particular will see less effective resistance. This will allow the enhanced effect of 75mm and 88mm rounds without giving the 50 and in particular 37mm APCR a free ride. I am presently updating the vehicel stats with this additional value. ARmor values have been restored to v6 standards, in the case of some vehicels penalized for cast armor, enhanced. (KV, IS and Churchill types the most effected. THis allows for an appropriate T/d to be calculated based on actual armor thickness, and not a reduced value. I am also changing some of teh front hull values to a more uniform use of "most significant plate" with a slope modifier if a more vulnerable plate is present, again so T/d calculations are not skewed. This works withthe change in vulnerable loaction hits to allow for "lessor" plates to be engaged with more range dependance (its hard to hit them outside 300m, but much easier at 1 hex) This OOB update will take me another week or so to get done with. I have instituted the updates Alby had made form the threads here and the mortar changes (less some the extr FO's).

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif
Post #: 1
- 1/8/2002 2:17:00 AM   
Steve Wilcox

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 8/17/2001
From: Victoria, BC, Canada
Status: offline 		Thanks for all the work you and the others put into perfecting this game. It's greatly appreciated. And I hope 7.1 is the crowning achievement of SPWAW. :-)

_____________________________


(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 2
- 1/8/2002 2:33:00 AM   
scimitar

 

Posts: 301
Joined: 8/22/2001
From: Belgium
Status: offline 		Paul, you make really a great job!

_____________________________

Pour une dent toute la gueule!

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 3
- 1/8/2002 2:33:00 AM   
Warrior


Posts: 1808
Joined: 11/2/2000
From: West Palm Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		Paul, we're lucky you're around. Massive thanks for your continuous work on SPWaW.

_____________________________

Retreat is NOT an option.



(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 4
- 1/8/2002 2:46:00 AM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		Hmmmm I spent the holiday season eating great food and molesting my wife.
It looks like with all this work on 7.1 though, that Paul didnt get much chance to have fun himself this holiday season. I sure hope the mob appreciates all this incesant work. I supposed 7.1 will get posted eventually eh.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 5
- 1/8/2002 2:54:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline 		I have a couple bugs/comments. First, as a former infantryman, I have a complaint. I was taught, as was a friend of mine that was in the military, that when a unit, say, a platoon, engaged an enemy unit, that one squad would lay down fire to suppress the enemy so the other squads could move up reasonably safely and get close enough to actually finish them off.
Your "Special OpFire" defeats that. In the game, i can no longer use real world tactics against the enemy as I could in SP III. I don't care how some folks think it's somehow "unrealistic", it's how wars are won. Next - when I select a "Hard Battle" in the Long Campaign, against the Germans, invariably I end up fighting a HQ, some Recon Patrols, and a couple AAA tracks and little more. This *seems* to be a bug. I am seeing this in 6.0 and 7.0 - dunno if anyone else is...

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 6
- 1/8/2002 3:02:00 AM   
timc

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 12/28/2000
From: Lincoln, NE USA
Status: offline 		Paul, you guys really are the best. For what it's worth, I used the "hoof and mouth disease" fix on the "synch" bug. I removed the game, reinstalled it from the MegaCampaign CD and ran the ver 6.1 upgrade. No problem anymore.

_____________________________


(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 7
- 1/8/2002 3:30:00 AM   
Lars Remmen

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Velovich:
I have a couple bugs/comments. First, as a former infantryman, I have a complaint. I was taught, as was a friend of mine that was in the military, that when a unit, say, a platoon, engaged an enemy unit, that one squad would lay down fire to suppress the enemy so the other squads could move up reasonably safely and get close enough to actually finish them off.
Your "Special OpFire" defeats that. In the game, i can no longer use real world tactics against the enemy as I could in SP III. I don't care how some folks think it's somehow "unrealistic", it's how wars are won. Next - when I select a "Hard Battle" in the Long Campaign, against the Germans, invariably I end up fighting a HQ, some Recon Patrols, and a couple AAA tracks and little more. This *seems* to be a bug. I am seeing this in 6.0 and 7.0 - dunno if anyone else is...
First: Have you bothered to set the op-fire frequency lower? You can do that in the prefrences you know. Next: I suppose your core force is quite large. The game has some difficulties when the number of points becomes very high. Perhaps you can try it out with a smaller core force. Regards, Lars

_____________________________

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 8
- 1/8/2002 3:30:00 AM   
Jackk

 

Posts: 174
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Charlotte, NC
Status: offline 		I don't know what Paul just said with all those numbers and stuff, but I do appreciate that he (and others) is still putting more work into improving this game. Thanks Paul!

_____________________________

Jackk "Smile today cuz tomorrow may really suck"

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 9
- 1/8/2002 3:40:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Lars Remmen:
First: Have you bothered to set the op-fire frequency lower? You can do that in the prefrences you know. Next: I suppose your core force is quite large. The game has some difficulties when the number of points becomes very high. Perhaps you can try it out with a smaller core force. Regards, Lars
Thanks for the reply. I don't like fiddling with the setings, tends (in past experience) to mess the game up. Also, the op fire is a good thing, just not when the unit shoudl be suppressed. I *like* the OpFire, just think that a suppressed unit should be *suppressed*! Of course my Core Force is Large! Could it be anything else??
Me, I'd like to see SPWaW as a Brigade level game, with basic units being platoons, like the original SP III it's built from. But this is a far better game than SP I, which I have and don't play. Big maps, big units, lotsa of variety and complexity.
Seriously, I'd like a Brigade level AND a Battalion level version of SPWaW. As a Battalion level game, it's great, as a BDE game it'd be even better. Maybe V10 can toggle between the two levels? V-man

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 10
- 1/8/2002 3:42:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Lars Remmen:

Next: I suppose your core force is quite large. The game has some difficulties when the number of points becomes very high. Perhaps you can try it out with a smaller core force. Regards, Lars
Just wanted to add, if the game has difficulties with a large point-value force, then that *is* a bug, isn't it? Something to be mentioned, here, for the programmers to think on/be aware of...

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 11
- 1/8/2002 3:45:00 AM   
Lars Remmen

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Velovich:
Just wanted to add, if the game has difficulties with a large point-value force, then that *is* a bug, isn't it? Something to be mentioned, here, for the programmers to think on/be aware of...
I do think they are aware of it but I believe it is a limitation of the old SP3 engine. One more problem that CL will hopefully correct. Regards, Lars

_____________________________

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 12
- 1/8/2002 3:47:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
[QB] 1) too many men fire primary inf weapons - This should help the problem of unsuppressed defenders taking excessive losses because suppressed attackers still attack with the same number of men as unsuppressed units. Likewise this reduces this will reduce teh casualties taken when an attacking force has a significnat numerical superiority and suppresses the daylights out of defenders. This will in general increase the effectiveness of preparatory and overwatcing fires.[QB]
Sounds like this will address what I've been ticked about.
For clairity, in the above example (last sentence), the reduction in casualties is going to be in the favor of the UNsuppressed unit? V-man

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 13
- 1/8/2002 3:55:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
2) Flame weapons are too destructive: Flame weapons has a base 60% chance of penetration vice "automatic" penetration.
This OOB update will take me another week or so to get done with. I have instituted the updates Alby had made form the threads here and the mortar changes (less some the extr FO's).
WRT flame weapons, one thing I'd like to see if you are reducing lethality is an increase in suppression to the point that the unit simply breaks and runs, one shot. People are *afraid* of fire. WRT OOBs, hows about adding in an ammo-dump-like unit called "Ready Rounds" it's loadable on a truck/LVT/DUKW/ETC and functions like an Ammo Carrier.
Allow the Ready Rounds to be accessed by being adjacent, like an Ammo carrier, so when, say, defending, I can position one just behind my front line and keep folks firing. This is GREAT for things like mortar crews. Give it a low cost, and the disadvantage is that it's not mobile like an ammo truck.
Also, how about a toggle, on the deployment screen or in Unit Info, to NOT go into entrenchments? There are times I place units so they can bound forward, like a cav screen, and in a defense scenario, the will appear in entrenchments on turn ONE. I don't want entrenchments there, just the cav unit.
Also, WRT to entrenchments, Special Forces and cargo planes/gliders get their OWN entrenchments in those scenarios, even though they'll be empty very soon.
(Yes, I use SF and Paratroops in a "Defend" scenario - they can REALLY break up an attack just by wrecking the enemy's mortars.) V-man

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 14
- 1/8/2002 3:57:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Lars Remmen:
I do think they are aware of it but I believe it is a limitation of the old SP3 engine. One more problem that CL will hopefully correct. Regards, Lars

"CL"? Who or what is that? This is my first day actually using these forums.

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 15
- 1/8/2002 4:41:00 AM   
Frank W.

 

Posts: 1958
Joined: 10/18/2001
From: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Velovich:

"CL"? Who or what is that? This is my first day actually using these forums.
combat leader. completly new game,which will hopefully be as great (or better) than SPWAW. see " products " section. greetinx frank

_____________________________


(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 16
- 1/8/2002 4:50:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline 		Paul:

Thank you very much for your work, dedication and patience. Sincerely.

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 17
- 1/8/2002 6:07:00 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		Paul, You are THE MAN!
Thanks for continued dedication!

_____________________________



(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 18
- 1/8/2002 7:24:00 AM   
john g

 

Posts: 984
Joined: 10/6/2000
From: college station, tx usa
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Velovich:
WRT OOBs, hows about adding in an ammo-dump-like unit called "Ready Rounds" it's loadable on a truck/LVT/DUKW/ETC and functions like an Ammo Carrier.
Allow the Ready Rounds to be accessed by being adjacent, like an Ammo carrier, so when, say, defending, I can position one just behind my front line and keep folks firing. This is GREAT for things like mortar crews. Give it a low cost, and the disadvantage is that it's not mobile like an ammo truck.V-man
It is already in there, look for ammo cannisters, normally used only in scenarios because they are a total hose. Last time I looked they were only 14 pts and were just 2 men in size. As I recall they loaded just as fast as an ammo carrier, and of course carried all varieties of ammo. At least they are immobile like an ammo dump. There is no way I would want them in any battle except where the scenario author absolutely needed them (like in Lightning Strikes).
thanks, John.

_____________________________


(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 19
- 1/8/2002 7:43:00 AM   
valdor17

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 9/3/2001
Status: offline 		Is there any fixes to the corrupted post game saves in campaign mode? [ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Valdor ]



_____________________________

A66
1st MRB

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 20
- 1/8/2002 7:44:00 AM   
asgrrr

 

Posts: 529
Joined: 9/18/2001
From: Iceland
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
7) Bit the bullet and added a rudimentory "armor quality" function that works a lot better than the thickness germandering I tried to do. Since the effective resistance of high hardness or cast armor had a bigger T/d dependance than I originally thought. For those complaining about this I have come around to the error of my ways
I am extremely happy to hear this. I am convinced that this approach will turn out to considerably better than the earlier one. Most gracious of you, turning our ire into productivity in this way.

_____________________________

Never hate your enemy.
It clouds your judgement.

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 21
- 1/8/2002 8:04:00 AM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline 		THe fix would be to remove the save buttoin so you don't save after a scenario is over. You can refrain form doing this (save before you "end turn" the last time" and then after you start the next game).

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 22
- 1/8/2002 8:44:00 AM   
Figmo

 

Posts: 556
Joined: 5/28/2000
From: Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline 		That's what I've done Paul - is it just to much time to fix the Report Screens in the WW2 Campaign not reloading - I understand if that's it - you have other thing to do. If you can't reproduce the problem - I have some saves if you need them. Thanks for ALL the work - even though we complain we do appreciate it!!

_____________________________

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, f

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 23
- 1/8/2002 9:42:00 AM   
Gallo Rojo


Posts: 731
Joined: 10/26/2000
From: Argentina
Status: offline 		clap... clap ... clap ...
chapeaux!

_____________________________

The bayonet is a weapon with a worker on each end

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 24
- 1/8/2002 11:29:00 AM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by john g:
It is already in there, look for ammo cannisters, normally used only in scenarios because they are a total hose. Last time I looked they were only 14 pts and were just 2 men in size. As I recall they loaded just as fast as an ammo carrier, and of course carried all varieties of ammo. At least they are immobile like an ammo dump. There is no way I would want them in any battle except where the scenario author absolutely needed them (like in Lightning Strikes).
thanks, John.
Well, Ammo Trucks are (or should be) far easier to spot than a pile of ammo. I have to buy a lot of ammo trucks for each game I'm in, as I use my artillery enough that I run out of ammo.
My problem is that I want to drop ammo to my Special Forces and paratroops in a long scenario, and can't do it.
I haven't seen any sign of "ammo cannisters" on ANY purchase screen. Zip! None! NADA!

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 25
- 1/8/2002 11:45:00 AM   
tracer


Posts: 1865
Joined: 11/22/2000
From: New Smyrna Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		Paul, David, Bill, Matrix crew, designers and testers...hats off to you guys. The things you continue to do with a 1997 game engine are incredible. Thanks for everything.

_____________________________

Jim NSB

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 26
- 1/8/2002 11:57:00 AM   
achappelle

 

Posts: 150
Joined: 5/11/2001
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline 		First off,
Thanks Paul and crew, not only for maintaining and improving a game that we all know is in it's twilight of development, but, taking forum-member's suggestions and incorporating them into new releases. Don't know of many s/w companies that do this so willingly.
Secondly,
Velovich, welcome to the forums, and the game. I think you might have better luck with AI force selection if you make sure true troop cost, but more importantly, rarity is checked off in your preferences. I ran a long campaign as the Soviets, and it was almost brigade sized, and I couldn't use rarity, because, like you, I'd launch my 60 or so T34s against a whole section of flakpanzers and a couple of recon teams.
Also, you can try using the editor to buy, and deploy the AI forces. Haven't tried that really, but I've noticed a few people here do, with good results.

_____________________________

"Molon Labe" - Leonidas @ Thermopylae (Come Get Them!!)

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 27
- 1/8/2002 12:09:00 PM   
Lars Remmen

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Velovich:
Well, Ammo Trucks are (or should be) far easier to spot than a pile of ammo. I have to buy a lot of ammo trucks for each game I'm in, as I use my artillery enough that I run out of ammo.
My problem is that I want to drop ammo to my Special Forces and paratroops in a long scenario, and can't do it.
I haven't seen any sign of "ammo cannisters" on ANY purchase screen. Zip! None! NADA!
It's there. Just look in the Norwegian OOB. Change the availability date and load them onto a cargo plane and airdrop them. Regards, Lars I almost forgot. I suppose you could also give the cannister a weight of 1 and give the special forces unit a carry capacity of 1. Then one of the units could carry it into battle. I'm sure this will be a bad dag - just put my socks on inside out... [ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: Lars Remmen ]



_____________________________

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 28
- 1/8/2002 12:20:00 PM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Aleksandr Morozov:
Velovich, welcome to the forums, and the game. I think you might have better luck with AI force selection if you make sure true troop cost, but more importantly, rarity is checked off in your preferences. I ran a long campaign as the Soviets, and it was almost brigade sized, and I couldn't use rarity, because, like you, I'd launch my 60 or so T34s against a whole section of flakpanzers and a couple of recon teams.
Also, you can try using the editor to buy, and deploy the AI forces. Haven't tried that really, but I've noticed a few people here do, with good results.
Thanks, Aleksandr. I haven't messed with the editor yet, I'll have to try that. I do use true troop cost and rarity, it keeps things as real as possible. V-man

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 29
- 1/8/2002 12:22:00 PM   
V-man

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Aleksandr Morozov:
First off,
Thanks Paul and crew, not only for maintaining and improving a game that we all know is in it's twilight of development, but, taking forum-member's suggestions and incorporating them into new releases. Don't know of many s/w companies that do this so willingly.
I must agree, the game, as it, with all the flaws I have bitched about,is incredible! Please, don't take my criticisms as anything but intended as constructive. V-man

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to Paul Vebber)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> v7.1 status report Page: [1] 2   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

0.934