Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support



Message

hades1001 -> Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:20:08 AM)

Use the given mechanism airplane research, my opponent successfully bring the N1K5-J into production from 10/45 to 10/43.

And he only spend 10 lines, 30AC/line on this type of plane.

I mean, seriously, TWO YEARS?!

BTW, N1K5-J George is a very good plane which can easily beat P47D25, which will be produced since 4/44.



koniu -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 5:19:36 AM)

10x30 is 300 research point in month. Engine bonus in doubling that , so 600 points in month. 4 months of research giving You 24 (4x6) months of r&d progress.
So let say he start research K5 in may just after K1 enter production and You have K5 in service in October



N1K5-J is good plane especially in 10/43 but i will not say he can easily beat P47D25.
I would say he have decent chances with P-47.
True is that You will have some trouble against them with P-38 and F4U but George is not balance changing plane. Especially with SR 3.

Bigger concern for You can be Your 4E health. George K5 is best 4E killer until late war fighters arrive.



hades1001 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 5:57:52 AM)

my test shows the loss ratio of N01K5-J vs P47D25 is about 1:1.5

My point is, the current mechanism of research can actually bring some very good planes 2 years earlier. And it doesn't cost much.
The actual limitations for Japanese fighters is the engine, yet in the game the engine is surprising easy to research.

I just feel that this type of research is off the original purpose.




koniu -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 6:13:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

my test shows the loss ratio of N01K5-J vs P47D25 is about 1:1.5

My point is, the current mechanism of research can actually bring some very good planes 2 years earlier. And it doesn't cost much.
The actual limitations for Japanese fighters is the engine, yet in the game the engine is surprising easy to research.

I just feel that this type of research is off the original purpose.



Sweep him to death. After few days most of his fighters will be in maintenance because of SR3 and You can easily rotate air group to keep them fresh. Then send 4E and finish job.


I will not say it not cost him much. To use engine bonus he use 1200 engines so
21600 HI points (month of pilot training cost). Also to repair and expand factories he use lot of supplies and HI.

Of course having K5 in 10/43 is not nice for Allies but You will be ok. P-47 is arriving. F4U-1A is entering servise on CV. British start to get good fighters. Number of 4E not allowing Japanese player to sleep. It will be harder but nobadu was teling it will easy.

Research model was probably balanced for PDU OFF where player need to build more types of planes so he just cant focus on single model. With PDU ON using that research model can give You those results. But until it is not using bugs in game engine or it is against HR You have to live with that.

Resarching engine is easy but remember that You still need airframe for that engine and r&D factory need to repair first.And sometime You have them rapired monts before arrival date and sometime only days.

It is game and i think Japanese player having best planes asap i good for game. I allowing to play longer games with more balance so it is better i think.









GreyJoy -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 7:09:23 AM)

Nothing can beat the P-47D-25. For sure not the N1K5. A good plane, for sure, but nothing you have to fear about when your new toys come online



koniu -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 9:42:00 AM)

There is only one thing better from P-47

Two P-47[:'(]



GreyJoy -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 11:36:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Use the given mechanism airplane research, my opponent successfully bring the N1K5-J into production from 10/45 to 10/43.

And he only spend 10 lines, 30AC/line on this type of plane.

I mean, seriously, TWO YEARS?!

BTW, N1K5-J George is a very good plane which can easily beat P47D25, which will be produced since 4/44.



however 10 production lines are a lot and implies a huge effort in terms of economy.
Still it seems quite extreme... how can you have all those N1K a/c factories repaired by that time?

BTW, the George won't win him the war. Be sure of that... also doesn't the N1K5 uses the Ha-43 engine? If so, he had to R&D heavily that engine too...which means a lot less factories not producing other precious engines.
A winning IJAAF/IJNAF need to be balanced. If you have the N1K5 but you're still struggling with Nells and Betties or Kates and Vals in 10/43, then you're not going to win anything with Japan imho.
Better to have several 1944 planes in 1943 than one 1945 a/c and lots of 1942 planes in late 1943.

that's my 0,2 cents anyway



koniu -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 11:48:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
however 10 production lines are a lot and implies a huge effort in terms of economy.
Still it seems quite extreme... how can you have all those N1K a/c factories repaired by that time?


Factories in last month before plane availability repair very fast.
He just wait when all N1K1 factories repair before K1 enterproduction and move them forward K5. With 10 factories and engine bonus He need 4 months of R&D to advance plane by 24 months




Puhis -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 12:06:10 PM)

Good Japanese player can do crazy things when playing without HR, PDU on and possibly realistic R&D off. Still, Japan is going to loose.

Personally I think game should get rid of the engine bonus, which is nothing but stupid feature. Also there is idiotic upgrade path that gives too much advantage, I'm talking about Rufe -> A6M5 Zero.



DOCUP -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 12:57:31 PM)

I will have to agree with Hades on this.  Advancing the George up 2 yrs is ridiculous.  How many Georges can he produce a month from 10/43 on?  Now, look at the build rate for allied planes from 10/43 on.  Would it be kosher for the Americans to have P47D2 or F4UA1 in Dec 41 in the same quanity?  It will throw off the game some.  Will it win the game porbably not but take away the fun, it def could for an allied player. 

I can see advancing some planes by a few months but 2 yrs is beyond pushing it in a some what historical game.  A what if game is a different story.



Crackaces -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 2:14:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Use the given mechanism airplane research, my opponent successfully bring the N1K5-J into production from 10/45 to 10/43.

And he only spend 10 lines, 30AC/line on this type of plane.

I mean, seriously, TWO YEARS?!

BTW, N1K5-J George is a very good plane which can easily beat P47D25, which will be produced since 4/44.


Were you looking for an historical replay or a good game? Given the plethora of resources the Allies have in 1944 .. the accerleration of one airframe will at least make the game interesting .. This coming from an AFB....



n01487477 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 2:41:34 PM)

This issue comes up from time to time and I'll write again what I think and the solutions for fixing it.

Firstly, let me say that it does come at some considerable economic cost to achieve these results in the first place. The OP is wrong in that and only that.

Okay - so 30*10*1000 = 300,000 supplies and to maintain the engine bonus the same again in engine expansion and repair. The engine bonus uses engines and as soon as the stockpile drops below 500 engines, it is lost. This is without considering the much lesser cost of HI, supplies and manpower to expand them initially.

Next, there is the opportunity cost in not using these facilities to advance other planes.

R&D works on a 2/3's principle. 2/3 of the time till arrival will be spent repairing the facility, 1/3 in accruing points. So for factories a long way out, multiplying the factories is a good option for real returns on investment.

So, R&D is overpowered. Well, yes it is but there are a number of ways of making it less so.

1. HR's
- limiting number of factories dedicated to the same model R&D.
- Realistic R&D
- I've even seen a HR which talked about how much R&D max advance was allowed. Each year adding one month. So 42 = 2, 43 =3, 44 = 4 etc (Or whatever permutation you want)
- no Engine bonus R&D (hard to implement though)

2. Economic Mod.(I've done this with my game with Floyd)
- Add months to F & FB (as well as others) plane arrival date. . One month for each year (see above).
- no more than 1 upgrade to next model per model. So, A6M3 -> 3a but not A6M5.
- Advanced Engines moved months down.
- Changing engines for advanced models so they are not using typical engines.
- Engine costs increased for building. (later models only) Pity we can't do this for planes too! Or get to the economic multipliers for these things!
- Less R&D plants available.
- All R&D plants start at 0(0)
- Less non-R&D plants (so you need to allow R&D to become production)
- Overall making the player research even late '42 planes to get them on time.
Misc.
-Reducing supply and HI production (while maintaining or increasing resource multiplier needs).
- Still testing a principle of prototyping (no arms) for my Options88 mod - which then can be used to further R&D on a real model / optioned models.

3. Code changes.
- R&D engine bonus eliminated. Not sure this is used a lot though as it is incredibly expensive to maintain.
- An overhaul of the 2/3 rule. Or something that changes the repair rate for later models.
- Reducing the optimum factory size to below 30. Or maybe better the other way. Increasing the size but halving the output.
- Economic multipliers for planes & engines exposed and while you're at it, the same for Arm / Veh etc.
- Making every plane have to go through R&D. Non-R&D = no plane (more R&D factories required).
- No R&D (but I love it - so would hate to eliminate it!)

AE - Supreme Commander Edition (Yes I am throwing things out there in the next bit ... )
- A move toward variability in plane stats.
- PTO II-esque R&D.
- HOI R&D.
- Design specs determined, producers sought, Ind delivered (In time and budget - yeah right!) - sort of what happens IRL. I really would love to make a game like this...
- No R&D.
- etc ...

Anyway, these are just some doodles as I prepare for another day at the salt-mines cause I rather talk about this than consider the pile of marking that is overflowing on my desk.

Night all ...



Crackaces -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 2:52:56 PM)

quote:

This issue comes up from time to time and I'll write again what I think and the solutions for fixing it.


Why fix it? As you point out it gives the IJ a decision. The player made an economic decision that the Allied player can exploit.... or are you contending that R&D can be exploited to give the IJ an unfair advantage that will needlessly tilt the game play?

This game is not a similiation, and I beleive the problem brought out in this thread arises when we delude ourselves that it is possible ...



GreyJoy -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 2:53:20 PM)

I cannot but agree with Damian.
The cost to do those incredible R&D advances is probably not worth the result.

300,000 supplies is a LOT for Japan. Also you have to add the cost in terms of Engine R&D factories expanding and repairing... and the Engine bonus means you need to waste incredible amount of HI points.

Probably, translating everything in terms of pure supply, we can easily be talking of something like 1,000,000 supplies burnt to get that N1K5...

In 1944 the N1K5 won't win you the war, while 1,000,000 more supplies may mean the difference between life and death for the Empire.

Probably i'm seeing in this way cause i play with Realistic R&D ON and i understand that this option may change the whole prospective.... however i've been on your shoes Hades and i can tell you that you don't have to fear too much from the late generation enemy fighters



n01487477 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 3:11:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

This issue comes up from time to time and I'll write again what I think and the solutions for fixing it.


Why fix it? As you point out it gives the IJ a decision. The player made an economic decision that the Allied player can exploit.... or are you contending that R&D can be exploited to give the IJ an unfair advantage that will needlessly tilt the game play?

This game is not a similiation, and I beleive the problem brought out in this thread arises when we delude ourselves that it is possible ...

What moi? I have no care how you play the game. I was writing to the O.P and others interested in one view of many that I hold. On one hand I believe that R&D is working perfectly well for all intensive purposes for those that want to play that way - should be allowed. On the other, I contend that it is too easy and I provide solutions to those that want a more realistic game (the OP). Ok some of them are code changes (but that was just more of an academic thinking out-loud thing rather than what I started off with).

Honestly crackeraces getting hot and riled up because some nobody guy (me) makes some observations and suggestions for the O.P (and not you) and you jumping on my back is not in the spirit of this forum.

I'm getting quite tired of trying to assist and ...

For the record, I believe the economic modelling is too easy cause I like a challenge. The R&D model is too easy for most of us that know how to manipulate it. I don't advocate change, I am just suggesting what could be done. People are free to play the game however they like. You can read into it anyway you like. I like most of the people I hang with are adept at framing a response that doesn't always put forward all or any of what I believe.

Cheers



Crackaces -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 3:46:15 PM)

quote:

Honestly crackeraces getting hot and riled up because some nobody guy (me) makes some observations and suggestions for the O.P (and not you) and you jumping on my back is not in the spirit of this forum.


I appoligize that I came off that way .. as an AFB I have no clue how the IJ economy works and thus I was honestly asking if some exploit were possible that would ensure an advantage. Again my appoligies for my unintended tone. My question was to determine if there was an actual expoit or if in fact your opinion is one that a set of algorithums should be enabled to ensure a more historical context and if that were the intent . well there would be a lot of fixing .. Now the Air model and detection happening at the target hex .. now that is something I get hot and bothered about [8D]

My thoughts were coming from this particular thread where as the orginal author is dismayed by the IJ's choice of economic path's .. me, I would be overjoyed at this decision as for one .. I would be seeing a lot less Kami's in 1944 as I understand overall Air production would be affected. I foresee a few advanced planes with an otherwise empty inventory ... If the author's problem was not a game decision, but the fact the game has deviated from their view of history that is a different problem altogether ..



Kull -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:08:35 PM)

The real question is, could you do this playing a game with Realistic R&D on and PDU off? And the answer is, "no". Yes, you can make modest advances in certain areas, but there's no point in focusing all your research attention on one or two aircraft types as it won't be possible to use them in other than small-to-medium numbers. If you allow both of those options in your game, just accept the fact that you'll get unrealistic results in short order. On the other hand, versus a human player it probably does make for a better long term "game", and I can understand why many JFB PBEM players want it.

Keep in mind that both of these are "fantasy" options - pointing at them as an indictment of the game engine is sort of missing the point.



Puhis -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:16:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

The real question is, could you do this playing a game with Realistic R&D on and PDU off? And the answer is, "no".


With PDU off, in 10/43 there is not a single unit that can even use N1K5 George. Except permanently restricted Yokosuka fighter unit...



Kull -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:19:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

The real question is, could you do this playing a game with Realistic R&D on and PDU off? And the answer is, "no".


With PDU off, in 10/43 there is not a single unit that can even use N1K5 George. Except permanently restricted Yokosuka fighter unit...


[sm=terms.gif] Game, set, match! [:D]



GreyJoy -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:24:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

The real question is, could you do this playing a game with Realistic R&D on and PDU off? And the answer is, "no". Yes, you can make modest advances in certain areas, but there's no point in focusing all your research attention on one or two aircraft types as it won't be possible to use them in other than small-to-medium numbers. If you allow both of those options in your game, just accept the fact that you'll get unrealistic results in short order. On the other hand, versus a human player it probably does make for a better long term "game", and I can understand why many JFB PBEM players want it.

Keep in mind that both of these are "fantasy" options - pointing at them as an indictment of the game engine is sort of missing the point.


Well, PDU OFF means a lot. It brings away most of the thrill to play the Japanese economy... but Realistic R&D ON lets you get your fun with industry and research but, at the same time, forces you to make lots of decisions and creates lots of bottlenecks... and i think with PDU ON but R&D ON those results aren't possible



hades1001 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:27:33 PM)

Guys, I'm talking about N1K5-J George, not some other planes. You really should test and see how powerful this particular plane is.

At 30,000 ft it beats P47D25 with advantage of 100:160. For those who don't believe it's game changer, just imagine you have a long range Shinden in 10/43. And why is N1K5-J George so powerful? I don't have an answer.



GreyJoy -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:44:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Guys, I'm talking about N1K5-J George, not some other planes. You really should test and see how powerful this particular plane is.

At 30,000 ft it beats P47D25 with advantage of 100:160. For those who don't believe it's game changer, just imagine you have a long range Shinden in 10/43. And why is N1K5-J George so powerful? I don't have an answer.



My experience is defenetly different mate. My P-47s ate alive everything Japan had in the air. Maybe only the KI-83 was able to cause me some little headhaces, but not that much.
N1K5-J is something like 60 knots slower than the P-47D25 and its weapons are not that accurate (those 20mm cannons aren't as good as those used by the KI-84 for example).

The Shindens are not that "exceptional" either imho. I remember my Spits VIII ate them alive as well.

Obviously this is just my personal experience



Puhis -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:51:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

The real question is, could you do this playing a game with Realistic R&D on and PDU off? And the answer is, "no".


With PDU off, in 10/43 there is not a single unit that can even use N1K5 George. Except permanently restricted Yokosuka fighter unit...


[sm=terms.gif] Game, set, match! [:D]


Well, actually 341 Ku S-1 is arriving 10/43 or 11/43 and can use N1K5. The unit have 27 planes.

But other than that, next N1K5 capable unit arrives early 1944.



hades1001 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 4:59:35 PM)

Are you talking about 42000 ft?

Cause in my test 30,000 ft N1K5-J George definitely beat P47D25.

I'll test on the 42,000 ft.
quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Guys, I'm talking about N1K5-J George, not some other planes. You really should test and see how powerful this particular plane is.

At 30,000 ft it beats P47D25 with advantage of 100:160. For those who don't believe it's game changer, just imagine you have a long range Shinden in 10/43. And why is N1K5-J George so powerful? I don't have an answer.



My experience is defenetly different mate. My P-47s ate alive everything Japan had in the air. Maybe only the KI-83 was able to cause me some little headhaces, but not that much.
N1K5-J is something like 60 knots slower than the P-47D25 and its weapons are not that accurate (those 20mm cannons aren't as good as those used by the KI-84 for example).

The Shindens are not that "exceptional" either imho. I remember my Spits VIII ate them alive as well.

Obviously this is just my personal experience



GreyJoy -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 5:16:04 PM)

Well, as far as i know, the game engine works in this way: when a plane is faster than the other one, the slower one gets a "deminutio" in its manouvre rating.
The P-47D25 reaches 435 mhp, while the N1K5-J gets to 480 (slower than the KI-84a). It's 55 mhp faster, it's 6 points more durable than the George (36 against 30) and its 8 cal.50 guns are more accurate than the obsolete type 99-2 20mm cannons.

Obviously it depends on the environement of your sandbox test. The P-47-D25 should be used to sweep japanese bases to oblivion, at high altitudes, thus denying the mvr advantage typical of every japanese airframe.

It's like to use a KI-44c against a Hurricane mkIIc... The Hurricane may have some good die and rolls and, playing defensively, can hold its own, but statistically speaking, there's no match



Miller -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 5:50:24 PM)

He researched the wrong model George, the K2 is 99% as good as the K5 but has service rating of 2 which is a huge difference in repair time compared to 3........



crsutton -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/17/2012 6:04:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Guys, I'm talking about N1K5-J George, not some other planes. You really should test and see how powerful this particular plane is.

At 30,000 ft it beats P47D25 with advantage of 100:160. For those who don't believe it's game changer, just imagine you have a long range Shinden in 10/43. And why is N1K5-J George so powerful? I don't have an answer.



No, never seen this kind of result. George is good but all 2nd generation Allied fighters do better vs it. Even hellcat hold it own in my game. The issue is speed and all Allied fighters are faster. Speed kills, both in game terms and historically.



n01487477 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/18/2012 1:59:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

Honestly crackaces getting hot and riled up because some nobody guy (me) makes some observations and suggestions for the O.P (and not you) and you jumping on my back is not in the spirit of this forum.


I apologise that I came off that way ..

Sir, you are a gent. I accept the apology and want to reciprocate by saying that I had just had a long day and didn't get the intent of your post in a way I should have.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
The real question is, could you do this playing a game with Realistic R&D on and PDU off? And the answer is, "no".

With PDU off, in 10/43 there is not a single unit that can even use N1K5 George. Except permanently restricted Yokosuka fighter unit...

[sm=terms.gif] Game, set, match! [:D]

Guys, I know you all realise this but I'm procrastinating again ... Giving the Japanese the ability to manage production takes all historical air production realism away in the first turn.

I primarily play as the Japanese and would never accept a PDU Off game. There is no point giving me production control and then telling me that I can't change the manufacture of planes because the historical OOB was predicated by the historical production, not mine. Of course if the Japanese had developed the plane earlier they would have flown more N1K5-J units earlier. Giving me one thing and then taking the other just seems illogical.


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Well, PDU OFF means a lot. It brings away most of the thrill to play the Japanese economy... but Realistic R&D ON lets you get your fun with industry and research but, at the same time, forces you to make lots of decisions and creates lots of bottlenecks... and i think with PDU ON but R&D ON those results aren't possible

GreyJoy - I agree with almost everything you say but I will say that realistic R&D would still allow you to move along the upgrade path and get this plane at the same time. Sure, it would be more difficult, more opportunity cost, but not impossible



Kull -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/18/2012 6:02:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

Guys, I know you all realise this but I'm procrastinating again ... Giving the Japanese the ability to manage production takes all historical air production realism away in the first turn.

I primarily play as the Japanese and would never accept a PDU Off game. There is no point giving me production control and then telling me that I can't change the manufacture of planes because the historical OOB was predicated by the historical production, not mine. Of course if the Japanese had developed the plane earlier they would have flown more N1K5-J units earlier. Giving me one thing and then taking the other just seems illogical.


Totaly understand. However the way I look at it is this - almost everything the Japanese did in this war was an enormous clusterfuck. So being forced to deal with the illogical production choices of my minions is just a small way of adding an extra degree of realism. Plus I look forward (not really) to having airfields full of semi-useless airframes and asking the rhetorical question, "Really? REALLY? You clowns spent years researching this useless piece of trash while just one city away we're producing a different model that is light year superior in every way? Where is the bugger with the briefcase full of yen who made THAT decision?? BRING HIM TO ME!!!" [sm=00000023.gif]



n01487477 -> RE: Seriously, N1K5-J George in Oct, 43? (12/18/2012 7:28:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

Guys, I know you all realise this but I'm procrastinating again ... Giving the Japanese the ability to manage production takes all historical air production realism away in the first turn.

I primarily play as the Japanese and would never accept a PDU Off game. There is no point giving me production control and then telling me that I can't change the manufacture of planes because the historical OOB was predicated by the historical production, not mine. Of course if the Japanese had developed the plane earlier they would have flown more N1K5-J units earlier. Giving me one thing and then taking the other just seems illogical.


Totaly understand. However the way I look at it is this - almost everything the Japanese did in this war was an enormous clusterfuck. So being forced to deal with the illogical production choices of my minions is just a small way of adding an extra degree of realism. Plus I look forward (not really) to having airfields full of semi-useless airframes and asking the rhetorical question, "Really? REALLY? You clowns spent years researching this useless piece of trash while just one city away we're producing a different model that is light year superior in every way? Where is the bugger with the briefcase full of yen who made THAT decision?? BRING HIM TO ME!!!" [sm=00000023.gif]

Thanks Kull - you gave me a nice chuckle for the afternoon



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.90625