A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

MadDawg -> A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 12:25:44 AM)

Hi Folks,

Im playing the Gaudacanal campaign, and I have a bunch of A6M2's I want to upgrade to a bunch of A6M3's I have spare. The problem is that the only upgrade option I am given for them is to upgrade to A6M5's, somethng that isnt even out of development stage yet and wont be ready for over 12 months, 7 months after the scenario is finished! [&:]

Am I doing something wrong here? It seems wierd that I cant upgrade these aircraft to the next model up which I have available but instead have to wait for one thats still being resarched and will never be availabe in this game, doesnt it? Is there any reason pilots from the A6M2 wouldnt have upgraded to the A6M3?

Dawg

added to FAQ



2Stepper -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 12:29:07 AM)

As I understand it, and I could be wrong on specifics, the upgrade paths are historical in nature. I remember reading of certain "get arounds", but I don't recall what specifically much less the thread... I know that's not much help, but I'm fairly certain that they'll stay A6M2's till the M5 comes out for that unit.



Mr.Frag -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 12:37:14 AM)

Correct, the A6M2 & A6M3 were not grouped together.

The A6M5 replaces both of them when it comes around.



MadDawg -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 12:43:29 AM)

Thanks for the feedback guys!

I can live with that. [:)] My only comment though is that shouldnt this be up to the player? I mean, I can invade Brisbane in this scenario if I want yet I can ask my pilots to fly this other plane [;)]

Dawg



Mr.Frag -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 1:00:18 AM)

quote:

My only comment though is that shouldnt this be up to the player?


Air groups have what they historically had. If someone actually had complete control over industry and you could re-aircraft any groups with any aircraft, we would end up wandering into the turf of RTS games instead of a war game.

We asked about a billion times during the beta for some measure of control, but you keep coming back to the same old problem ... it would have to be an non-ai only version of the game.



Tenzan -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 3:01:05 AM)

The neatest way to do it would've been branched upgrade paths, as in A6m2's upgrading to either a3's or a5's, and so on...More than one single upgrade option, but, sticking to model and class and service upgrade paths...That'd give you a choice in what you want your airmen flying, to an extent, but, would prevent an RTS style build-up fest...



2Stepper -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 3:19:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Air groups have what they historically had. If someone actually had complete control over industry and you could re-aircraft any groups with any aircraft, we would end up wandering into the turf of RTS games instead of a war game.

We asked about a billion times during the beta for some measure of control, but you keep coming back to the same old problem ... it would have to be an non-ai only version of the game.


Sounds like a solid candidate for the eventual Mod'ers to take on later on down the road. Something I find as an eventuality... For now though I couldn't be happier. Though honestly Frag, I would have to disagree that it would make it an RTS game... Nah... Just not a very historical one... Sort of a WiTP "what if" game. LOL!

Be a while before that happens... [8D]



Hard Sarge -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 2:48:17 PM)

Well, maybe we could use PP for this action as well (hmmm, don't even know if the JP side gets PP ?)

I mean some of it seems a little silly, the Chinese units have to wait for the P-40 N, but if I replace my P-40 E units with N's, I am going to have tons of E's sitting around, and all the Chinese units are still flying I-153's and I-16's but can't use my hand me downs

I mean, say, the normal path is P-40 N's, if I want to change it to P-40 E's it will cost 150 PP, change it to P-36's, it will cost 120, change it to P-38's, cost 500, change it to F4f4's 1000 (different branch), change it to Spit V's, 2000-3000 different country)

(well, really, I want to get some of them Demons into the air)

HARD_Sarge



Mr.Frag -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 3:03:36 PM)

Perhaps while you are outfitting the Allies, you can have those shipments of German aircraft arrive too. What if? I'll give you what if! [:'(]

Operation Sea Lion a success, Britain withdraws from the war! Germany turns her production to aid her Allies [:D][X(][8|]



Apollo11 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 3:14:03 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Perhaps while you are outfitting the Allies, you can have those shipments of German aircraft arrive too. What if? I'll give you what if! [:'(]

Operation Sea Lion a success, Britain withdraws from the war! Germany turns her production to aid her Allies [:D][X(][8|]


Nah... IMHO, while Luftwaffe could have beaten the RAF if they used better tactics the RN would have stopped any invasion (no matter the air supremacy over channel - British proved in WWII that, if necessary, they would operate their ships regardless of enemy air when necessary)... [;)]


Leo "Apollo11"



Mr.Frag -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 3:25:13 PM)

quote:

Nah... IMHO, while Luftwaffe could have beaten the RAF if they used better tactics the RN would have stopped any invasion (no matter the air supremacy over channel - British proved in WWII that, if necessary, they would operate their ships regardless of enemy air when necessary)...


What can I say Leo, it just drives me nuts when people playing the Allies want even more stuff in their favour. They already have enough to fight 4 separate Japan's. Do they really need more??? [8|]



Apollo11 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 3:38:10 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

What can I say Leo, it just drives me nuts when people playing the Allies want even more stuff in their favour. They already have enough to fight 4 separate Japan's. Do they really need more??? [8|]


I am always for historical accuracy (when possible)!


Saying that Raymond, I will play grand campaign PBEM as Japanese using stuff they had and my only goal would be to try to be better than Japan historically was... I will fight to bitter (and predictable) end...


IMHO current WitP is just great for this because:

#1
We really don't need unhistorical ships (except for small craft for which I think there should not be any limits).

#2
We really don't need to see aircraft that historically come in 1944 to come in 1942 (few months advancement that WitP allows is just fine).


Leo "Apollo11"



Spooky -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 4:03:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

My only comment though is that shouldnt this be up to the player?


Air groups have what they historically had. If someone actually had complete control over industry and you could re-aircraft any groups with any aircraft, we would end up wandering into the turf of RTS games instead of a war game.

We asked about a billion times during the beta for some measure of control, but you keep coming back to the same old problem ... it would have to be an non-ai only version of the game.


In this case, just provide this control to the Japanese player - similar to the control given to the Axis player in GG's BTR (ie : you can replace a day fighter by another day fighter but not by a night fighter or a bomber)

And the AI will only have to follow the upgrade paths defined in the scenario or by the editor.

To be honest, I really do not understand this hard-coded planes upgrade control [&:]. This control (or rather lack of) is for me the biggest WITP weakness



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 4:37:44 PM)

quote:


To be honest, I really do not understand this hard-coded planes upgrade control [&:]. This control (or rather lack of) is for me the biggest WITP weakness


It has to do with the fundamental developmental design of the program itself. A lot of fixed array based indexing of stuff with static global constants (hard coded stuff). The AI is going to expect certain aircraft (or types of aircraft) to be in certain, fixed "slots", in the arrays. If they are not, the AI "breaks". This type of design used to be highly favored in games because it uses less memory, requires little, if any, dyanamic memory allocations meaining less memory fragmentation, and can be very fast. All big plusses in the days of limited memory and slow processors. The cost however is flexibility and scalability. You are loargey "locked in" to what you start with. Even minor modifications can be daunting tasks with such a design. After a while your "fixes/mods" end up breaking more than they fix.

While there is no longer any need to design programs this way, a lot of older developers (i.e. GG) still adhere to this model because they are comfortable with it, understand it, and are leary of other, less "proven", methods of application design. Sending programmers to school or programming seminars, and then spending 12-18 months or more, to learn new development styles is not within the budgets of most of these extemely thinnly capitalized operations.

In short, WitP players need to accept the concept of "slots". It is just how it is.



Rainerle -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 4:42:36 PM)

But BTR is also a GG game and there it was possible ?



Spooky -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 4:42:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

In short, WitP players need to accept the concept of "slots". It is just how it is.


I agree, in this time of modded games, "Hard-coded" stuff is evil [;)] However, BTR was probably as hard-coded (and probably more) as WITP and provided some kind of flexibility in the aircraft upgrade model so it should be doable



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 5:04:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spooky

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

In short, WitP players need to accept the concept of "slots". It is just how it is.


I agree, in this time of modded games, "Hard-coded" stuff is evil [;)] However, BTR was probably as hard-coded (and probably more) as WITP and provided some kind of flexibility in the aircraft upgrade model so it should be doable


Probably has to do with scope more than anything. The bigger the scope of a game, when using this "fixed" data model, the more "rigid" it has to be bacause of the exponential increase in the amount of tedious work involved, especially the AI, where in such a system, it becomes the "lowest common denominator" and the limiting factor. That's the "scalability" problem with this kind of design. Like Fraggo elluded to, it would force a game of this magnitude and scale to become a non-AI game.



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 5:13:06 PM)

And one thing I've learned from gaming is players are NOT going to EVER see mods that would require an alteration of the fundemental way in which the program works. The data model in WitP is what it is. Whatever mods and fixes we are going to get, including the AI, are going to be what they can do WITHIN the design paradigm of the game. It would not make to sense to expect them to "rewrite" the game from the ground up just to make upgrade paths and everything else "soft" and user definable.

Plainly, some things are fixable, some things are not. Removing adherence to "slots" is probably something well beyond "fixability". Same thing with the AI "Death Spiral" problem. There may be only so much they can do with that based on how the AI is designed.



Caltone -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 5:14:22 PM)

I have to agree with Mr. Frag here. This is a historical war game, not a comic book. Slots or no, they work best for the way the game is designed. Why not use a fixed path when it is easier, it works for the design, and might allow slower machines to run this game?

While I have a new machine at home, many grogs are notorius for keeping old comps running many years past their prime. You'll notice the system requirements for this game are lower than most stuff released today. It runs well on older laptops. Don't forget guys, this plays to a limited but world wide audience.

By RTS factor, Frag means everyone would rush to build the "good" stuff like in Warcraft where everyone builds the same units en masse. The other factor is you would see Japan with jets in '43 and before you know it, the Nimitz would come steaming in to save Pearl Harbor.

Kirk Douglas and crew to the rescue [:D][:D]



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 5:28:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Caltone

I have to agree with Mr. Frag here. This is a historical war game, not a comic book. Slots or no, they work best for the way the game is designed. Why not use a fixed path when it is easier, it works for the design, and might allow slower machines to run this game?

While I have a new machine at home, many grogs are notorius for keeping old comps running many years past their prime. You'll notice the system requirements for this game are lower than most stuff released today. It runs well on older laptops. Don't forget guys, this plays to a limited but world wide audience.

By RTS factor, Frag means everyone would rush to build the "good" stuff like in Warcraft where everyone builds the same units en masse. The other factor is you would see Japan with jets in '43 and before you know it, the Nimitz would come steaming in to save Pearl Harbor.

Kirk Douglas and crew to the rescue [:D][:D]


This is where the skills of a guy like GG are so impressive. In most of his games that allow this kind of play (using R&D to build uber-weapons), he knows how to make a player pay dearly for using strategies like that Warcraft nonsense, to the extreme. One of his earliest efforts, back in the Apple II days, was a game that simulated the strategic daylight bombing of Germany. The Japanese R&D model was actually born in that game back in 1985. Invariably the German player would go all out to research the ME-262 to get large numbers by Oct 44 and completely turn the game around. However, in a hot-seat game, the Allied player would simply bomb the hell out of the ME-262 research plants and win the game in even a shorter time period because the German player would be out of traditional aircraft way too early! Great balance there, great design!



Spooky -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 5:52:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Caltone

I have to agree with Mr. Frag here. This is a historical war game, not a comic book. Slots or no, they work best for the way the game is designed. Why not use a fixed path when it is easier, it works for the design, and might allow slower machines to run this game?

While I have a new machine at home, many grogs are notorius for keeping old comps running many years past their prime. You'll notice the system requirements for this game are lower than most stuff released today. It runs well on older laptops. Don't forget guys, this plays to a limited but world wide audience.

By RTS factor, Frag means everyone would rush to build the "good" stuff like in Warcraft where everyone builds the same units en masse. The other factor is you would see Japan with jets in '43 and before you know it, the Nimitz would come steaming in to save Pearl Harbor.

Kirk Douglas and crew to the rescue [:D][:D]


Have you played BTR ????? In this game, the German player controls the German planes production but the results are not really unhistorical ... only probably just a little optimized compared with the true historical German planes production.



Caltone -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 5:59:44 PM)

Indeed, sometimes the simplest solutions can be the most elegant.

I was a little worried when I saw that production was going to be in the game. I didn't want to play Rise of Nations [:D] It's a good game I suppose but not what I wanted.

I like the production model here. Enough of it is fixed to keep things from getting too far in the alternate universe category, but the player can make some changes that yield measurable results.



vonmoltke -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 6:04:44 PM)

The way I see it, there are real reasons the RTS behavior did not happen. Zoomie has one good reason: it makes you too weak early on, which in a game like this is deadly. Having Georges and Shindens in 1943 won't do you any good if you had to skimp on your forces to the point where the Allied player is operating carriers off Tokyo at will. The RTS power tech trick works because RTS game mechanics allow it to work. I think it would backfire in WitP.

Then there is the issue of doing a better job than our real counterparts. Part of doing that job better involves making better choices about the deployment of hardware. Fixing upgrade paths, and not allowing downgrades, locks the player into making the same mistakes that were actually made with aircraft deployment and, in the case of the Japanese player, puts an extra burden on their production decision making.

Oh, while I'm on that subject, something I just thought of. The Japanese player needs to optimize their production of aircraft to survive. However, not allowing group downgrades makes this task unrealistically difficult, since the Japanese player will find themselves left with stocks of older but useless aircraft.



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 6:07:37 PM)

Yes, just enough production to be "fun" but without the ability to simply pick the three or four best Japanese aircraft available and have the entire Japanese Air converted to just these three or four models by 1944....

Assume that your end game in production is the A7M, B7A, and D4Y with maybe the G4M2e. Try converting most every aircraft factory in the game to just these four types, leaving a few A62M, G4M1, D3Y and B5N's around for at least a few replacements, ignoring recon and transports entirely, and see what disaster befalls you! Nice way for Japan to lose against a human player by mid 1943....long before any one of these models even show up....



Mr.Frag -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 6:22:04 PM)

quote:

While there is no longer any need to design programs this way


I guess this means you are offering to buy new computers to 75% of the forum members who have machines that barely made it into the "I can play WitP" catagory eh?

Sometimes your posts just crack me up at times. You identified exactly why it was coded the way it was for roughly 75% of the target market then you go off on a rant that it's not required because everyone has new machines.

The 25% of us who would have still bought and been able to run the game would be real happy right now. The rest would be somewhat annoyed don't you think?



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 6:50:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

While there is no longer any need to design programs this way


I guess this means you are offering to buy new computers to 75% of the forum members who have machines that barely made it into the "I can play WitP" catagory eh?

Sometimes your posts just crack me up at times. You identified exactly why it was coded the way it was for roughly 75% of the target market then you go off on a rant that it's not required because everyone has new machines.

The 25% of us who would have still bought and been able to run the game would be real happy right now. The rest would be somewhat annoyed don't you think?



Well you analysis of the current state of technology on the desktops of WitP purchasers is based on ???? Another very good reason for the client-server model design to gain momentum in this market. If you are still running a PII 450MHz box with 128 MB RAM, well then forget gaming, even wargaming. Take a look at your resource and CPU utilization numbers when this game is running! 100% pegged CPU and 200MB RAM, and that is on a PIII 650 with 256MB RAM And the same numbers on a PIV 3.4GZ with 2GB RAM! No difference. Why so much RAM and CPU? Has NOTHING to do with the data model used and EVERYTHING to do with multi-media baggage in tow. The game does not have 200MB of data in cache memory, it's all sound and video efflua. I doubt the ENTIRE WitP database cached into memory eats up more than a megabyte or two. And there is obvoiulsy a lot of tight/nested looping in code (typical of such design) to drive the CPU utilization so high (when it's not being driven by page-swapping because of media memory demand).

See, this is where you are delving into subject matter you have NO IDEA as to what you are talking about. My design suggestions are no more system intensive nor unable to run on lower end machines than the current obsolete fixed array base indexing model. The system utilization of these games is driven more by the eye-candy baggage than the game engine, itself.

Stick to what you know, Fraggo, programming, application design, application performance are what I make my living at and I'm as good as any and better than most at it.



Mr.Frag -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 7:30:14 PM)

quote:

Stick to what you know, Fraggo, programming, application design, application performance are what I make my living at and I'm as good as any and better than most at it.


Umm, golly gee little programmer dude, what exactly do you think I do for a living for Big Blue? You are just a tad full of yourself at times. Like you are the only person in the world who ever wrote a line of code? I grew up and became an Architect. More full telling your types what to do [;)]

As far as your inability to read the posts here by others complaining about how slow the game runs on system blah blah blah, well, I'm not going to repeat all their posts, I'm sure they can slap you silly as far as your goal of making witp run slower then it already does by being pigged out with lots of useless libraries vs tight code routines that let the monster run on 4+ year old pc's [:D]



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 7:58:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Stick to what you know, Fraggo, programming, application design, application performance are what I make my living at and I'm as good as any and better than most at it.


Umm, golly gee little programmer dude, what exactly do you think I do for a living for Big Blue? You are just a tad full of yourself at times. Like you are the only person in the world who ever wrote a line of code? I grew up and became an Architect. More full telling your types what to do [;)]

As far as your inability to read the posts here by others complaining about how slow the game runs on system blah blah blah, well, I'm not going to repeat all their posts, I'm sure they can slap you silly as far as your goal of making witp run slower then it already does by being pigged out with lots of useless libraries vs tight code routines that let the monster run on 4+ year old pc's [:D]



Proof yet, you still haven't a singl;e clue as to what you are talking about. There are ALL KINDS of facilities in this day and age to things a LOT more flexible while still retaining small system footprints without losing speed. (Ever hear of dynamic arrays, hash-maps, etc...)

Case in point. I have a "wargame-like" test applet I wrote about four years ago, that uses the wxWidgets class library that I was using to test some scrolling techniques. It has a hex grid of 300x300, somehat LARGER than the one in WitP. It has attached to the "map" over 300 "bases", 100 "airfields" 100 "cities", over 200 "LCU's, 30,000 individual generic "aircraft", 1500 "ships" in 200 "task-forces", all computer generated but still game-like data. Each entity is a fully fleshed out data entity, not an empty object (i.e. I was testing for clean scrolling of a busy, large memory footprint hex map). I did this about four years ago on a PIII 650Mhz machine with 128MB Ram.

That is a test system with over 1.5 times the amount of data loaded into it that the ENTIRE WitP database. It uses STL maps, hash-maps, std::lists and few dynamic arrays to store it's data. And I can gain INSTANT access to any hex on the board via two std::maps (by LCU or by "base name", and a hashmap (x,y) coords) and acces to whatever is located there. Now there is no real logic behind the "game pieces" but they are full data elements. It's a standard WIN32 app and the WHOLE THING runs in 6MB RAM!!!


By comparison today, I demo a financial settlement system that consists of over 2.5 MILLION lines of code in 31 different processes that go against and Oracle Server, personal edition, on a PIV 2.4 GZ notebook with 512MB RAM. That little test system cranks out 25 million settlement txns a day. COMBINED, the database and application, together, eat up about 350MB RAM. That little demo system is probly 10X or more the amount of code, linked in libraries, and data processing as this game is.

What's the difference? These examples have NO candy. No sound, no embedded high-res graphics, no external visual or audio stuff at all.

Want to know where your system resources are being eaten up? It damned sure as HELL is NOT in the data processing parts of the code, unless they are using some really dumb techniques. It's in all that background sound and pretty video-graphics stuff. If have a full copy of Visual Studio installed run their little DirectX sample that basically loads up a DirectX session and displays a litte 3D object bouncing around......look at the memory that thing eats up!

Don't talk to me about high volume data processing, and that is what WitP is, a data processer with a psuedo real-time presentation layer. And that processing is NOT what is costing resources. The thing that forces the bottom end of computer resources up, even in wargames, is sound and video enhancements, NOT in how the programmers are dealing with the data and its processing.

As I stated, there is NO reason to code turn based wargames the way GG and Co., do it anymore. Not one, other than the time to invest in learning a new way. And, of course, that may very well be reason enough...



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 8:03:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Stick to what you know, Fraggo, programming, application design, application performance are what I make my living at and I'm as good as any and better than most at it.


Umm, golly gee little programmer dude, what exactly do you think I do for a living for Big Blue? You are just a tad full of yourself at times. Like you are the only person in the world who ever wrote a line of code? I grew up and became an Architect. More full telling your types what to do [;)]

As far as your inability to read the posts here by others complaining about how slow the game runs on system blah blah blah, well, I'm not going to repeat all their posts, I'm sure they can slap you silly as far as your goal of making witp run slower then it already does by being pigged out with lots of useless libraries vs tight code routines that let the monster run on 4+ year old pc's [:D]


And you want to talk about "being pigged out on lots of useless libraries"!!! 80% of your memory use and slowness is derived from guess what! That third party ULTIMATE PIG library......Direct X!!! All to play some sounds and video clips most turn off after day one....



Hard Sarge -> RE: A6M2 cant upgrade to A6M3? (8/2/2004 8:05:44 PM)

All complaining aside
how does wanting to be able to change a I-153 unit over to a Demon unit instead of waiting for the P-40 N to come along, make this a unhistorcal game, or a gamer wanted to play with only uber planes (I like the Demon, I got Demons in stock, but nothing uses them in this Campaign I am playing)

and if the arguement is going to be made to keep the game historcal, by not letting the Allied players make changes to plane units, then don't let the JP player make changes either

make the units what they were, and if we disagree, we can post or cry in the OOB post about why this or that unit is flying the wrong type of bird

but again, I wasn't asking for the Allies to be able to change all there planes to the best of the pack, only to be able to use what is in stock at the time, and maybe using PP would be a way to control it, the better the plane type, the more it will cost you

PP points down the road are to vauleable to wastes on just anything, so it would be a game choice, do you change over a HQ to a new command area or do you give a Fighter Squadron some planes

HARD_Sarge

Zoomie, when is your game coming out, I hope you got a demo we can try



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
9.015625