Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Never have anyone be 25% more powerful than anyone else


Recommended Posts

On 3/18/2017 at 1:59 PM, Holyvigil said:

In my opinion all MMO's get this one thing wrong and it ruins everything else so that pvp is never as popular(fun) in this genre as others.

 

This is the uncle bob problem in mmos. Even in well made MMOs they don't take this into consideration during development. Someone or some guild edges out everyone else and starts one shotting or taking 50% of everyone else's health. All the rest of the players who don't have that power are bored because they have no chance of beating them. The people who kill everyone else are bored because they aren't challenged. Just like in Risk, the game is over but we're just waiting for it to end. And unfortunately MMO's can't change this once the game is out because they created entire systems based on this power difference which destroying would waste hundreds of man hours.

 

I think the balanced solution to this is nearly impossible to achieve in development.  Even if individual power curves are perfect, that still leaves the issue of powerful guilds. Powerful guilds dominate servers, and the game starts to suck.  The solution is the game's campaign system.  Worlds that stagnate from power imbalances will reach a conclusion because of that power imbalance, and will come to a close.  Future iterations of that campaign ruleset are able to be tweaked, including soft-gating by offering different levels of rewards.   Powerful guilds will stratify upward to campaigns with more reward.  Those who aren't in that caliber have other options.  

It's like ACE has the advantage of being in development phase for this problem across the entire life of the game.  A campaign ruleset can change anything and everything.  

 

 

Edited by Interbane
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In my opinion all MMO's get this one thing wrong and it ruins everything else so that pvp is never as popular(fun) in this genre as others.   This is the uncle bob problem in mmos. Even in w

This is a general warning for those making personal attacks and derailing the topic. It needs to stop now or I'll start handing out warning points.  Here are the Rules of Conduct in case you need

All you've done is rephrase the same fallacy.  Your ability to equip pixels is completely independent of your actual knowledge of the game mechanics and ability to react to what is happening at any gi

On ‎3‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 9:53 PM, VIKINGNAIL said:

A better player can be competitive if the better player makes sure to give himself the best shot possible in all areas of the game.  If not he is not playing the game better, he is simply better at maybe one aspect of the game. 

To me it does not sound like the idea of fair fights is a desire for the better player to be competitive, it sounds more like it is coming from a place of concern where people want to make sure the worse player doesn't get stomped into dust.  Which for me personally I believe in a pvp-centric game built in the spirit of past mmos and originally pushed with the motto of play2crush, worse players should get stomped into dust, over and over, until they learn to get better and excel.

Simply put, if you've failed to acquire good gear, and you go into combat, you are currently not playing the game to the best of your ability, you are ignoring one of the aspects of the game, either willfully or due to inability.

It's kind of like I see people complain about their inability to excel in WoW arena, and they usually blame gear, but in reality the gear was pretty easy to acquire, if you were a good player, but people just cry for a more fair fight, without wanting to put in any effort to make the fights fair.

I'll address the bolded section as it is a fallacy and deserves some attention.  Your ability as a player is comprised of how well you play your class.  How well do you understand your characters strengths/weakness?  Do you have knowledge of other classes and their mechanics?  Can you exploit mistakes made by another player or group?  Sure, gear is a small part of that, but more in the sense of what stat bonuses have you focused on or chosen to neglect.

Certainly this game is unique in that there are no levels which means fresh players facing veteran players would be similar to low level players facing level capped players in traditional games.  The big difference here is that new players will be immediately thrown to the fire where in other games you usually don't have that interaction until you are in similar level ranges or level capped.  Obviously this won't be quite as punishing as what I described above, but in other games the new player has a chance of catching the veteran player in terms of level and gear and on paper has a fighting chance.  I certainly am not suggesting you run in with starter gear and cover the hillsides with veteran graves, but the top tiers of gear should be relatively close in power.

We've gone back and forth a bit here, but I am not so sure we are standing all that far apart from the line drawn in the sand.  In the end, you have your opinion and I have mine and it may be that we agree to disagree and I am OK with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Meurto said:

I'll address the bolded section as it is a fallacy and deserves some attention.  Your ability as a player is comprised of how well you play your class.  How well do you understand your characters strengths/weakness?  Do you have knowledge of other classes and their mechanics?  Can you exploit mistakes made by another player or group?  Sure, gear is a small part of that, but more in the sense of what stat bonuses have you focused on or chosen to neglect.

Certainly this game is unique in that there are no levels which means fresh players facing veteran players would be similar to low level players facing level capped players in traditional games.  The big difference here is that new players will be immediately thrown to the fire where in other games you usually don't have that interaction until you are in similar level ranges or level capped.  Obviously this won't be quite as punishing as what I described above, but in other games the new player has a chance of catching the veteran player in terms of level and gear and on paper has a fighting chance.  I certainly am not suggesting you run in with starter gear and cover the hillsides with veteran graves, but the top tiers of gear should be relatively close in power.

We've gone back and forth a bit here, but I am not so sure we are standing all that far apart from the line drawn in the sand.  In the end, you have your opinion and I have mine and it may be that we agree to disagree and I am OK with that.

Nope, your ability as a player is comprised of how well you play the game in its entirety.  Which means if, for example, in an mmo, you can't figure out the social aspect and how to get the gear you need to be your most efficient, then you aren't a good player.  Just like if you can get the gear but suck at combat, you aren't a good player either.

But to be honest I've never met a good pvper that didn't know how to acquire gear, but I've met a lot of people that think they are good pvpers but aren't, and they also complain about gear disparities.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

Nope, your ability as a player is comprised of how well you play the game in its entirety.  Which means if, for example, in an mmo, you can't figure out the social aspect and how to get the gear you need to be your most efficient, then you aren't a good player.  Just like if you can get the gear but suck at combat, you aren't a good player either.

But to be honest I've never met a good pvper that didn't know how to acquire gear, but I've met a lot of people that think they are good pvpers but aren't, and they also complain about gear disparities.

All you've done is rephrase the same fallacy.  Your ability to equip pixels is completely independent of your actual knowledge of the game mechanics and ability to react to what is happening at any given time during a fight.  This is a simple fact that you fail to wrap your head around. There is even a debate regarding this very concept that you may have heard of called Gear vs Skill that has been ongoing for years in MMOs.

It is rather amusing as I have encountered a number of players who were under the illusion they were good at pvp, but is was really the gear they were using as a crutch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Meurto said:

Certainly this game is unique in that there are no levels which means fresh players facing veteran players would be similar to low level players facing level capped players in traditional games.  The big difference here is that new players will be immediately thrown to the fire where in other games you usually don't have that interaction until you are in similar level ranges or level capped.  Obviously this won't be quite as punishing as what I described above, but in other games the new player has a chance of catching the veteran player in terms of level and gear and on paper has a fighting chance.  I certainly am not suggesting you run in with starter gear and cover the hillsides with veteran graves, but the top tiers of gear should be relatively close in power.

 

I agree with others that say the gear curve should be fairly flat. No real PvPers ever really enjoy a big imbalance in gear. I think something like level 80 in GW2 is a good example. Getting Exotic gear is easy and competitive, however working harder for Ascended does have benefits, but it's only a 5% stat increase from Exotic. What they do instead is give you real variety in gear to allow for various builds. It also means long term players can acquire numerous sets to switch builds when they want to. That's more fair and more interesting in a PvP environment.

However the quoted section is a problem this game has that others don't that makes balance much harder. Honestly I almost think they should have just kept levels. In most games you don't have to worry about PvP much until max level, so balance is easier. But here you effectively will have level 1 newbies against max level geared players. That's a situation that doesn't happen frequently enough in other games to be a real problem. The passive skills would need to be something people can level up to max within weeks on average if you're going to have it be comparable to traditional levels in other games.

But if you make it take months or years, you'll have a crazy player level and power imbalance that will essentially be permanent, forever putting newer players who didn't start at launch at a huge and insurmountable disadvantage that will severely hamper the game's ability to pick up new players. It would be like Black Desert on steroids (but at least Black Desert has some insane catch up mechanics for new players to reduce the imbalance). That sounds like a terrible idea to me.

You can have meaningful RPG progression mechanics without creating huge imbalances with gear and passive skills. There's no good reason to even do that because it's one of the primary factors that drives players away from any game. I hope the devs realize that the hardcore fans posting here don't represent the silent majority of potential Crowfall players.

Edited by Leiloni
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Meurto said:

All you've done is rephrase the same fallacy.  Your ability to equip pixels is completely independent of your actual knowledge of the game mechanics and ability to react to what is happening at any given time during a fight.  This is a simple fact that you fail to wrap your head around. There is even a debate regarding this very concept that you may have heard of called Gear vs Skill that has been ongoing for years in MMOs.

It is rather amusing as I have encountered a number of players who were under the illusion they were good at pvp, but is was really the gear they were using as a crutch.

It's not a fallacy, and your ability to navigate the social climate to get the gear you need is relevant to playing the game correctly and efficiently.  You can decide not to acknowledge that, but that just tells me what kind of player you are.

Gear vs skill is a debate by people that lack skill.  Good players know how to play games and get all the gear they need, it isn't really an issue for them. 

Sure players can be carried by gear in some cases, but they still get stomped by good players.  They are only carried against people who are similar to their skill-level who don't have the gear.

At least that's the case in the mmorpgs that actually had big competitive communities. 

A good player is someone that can navigate the game correctly, if you can't build your character as strongly as possible you are not a good player, you are an incomplete player that has shown an inability to excel in parts of the game.

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

It's not a fallacy, and your ability to navigate the social climate to get the gear you need is relevant to playing the game correctly and efficiently.  You can decide not to acknowledge that, but that just tells me what kind of player you are.

Gear vs skill is a debate by people that lack skill.  Good players know how to play games and get all the gear they need, it isn't really an issue for them. 

Sure players can be carried by gear in some cases, but they still get stomped by good players.  They are only carried against people who are similar to their skill-level who don't have the gear.

At least that's the case in the mmorpgs that actually had big competitive communities. 

A good player is someone that can navigate the game correctly, if you can't build your character as strongly as possible you are not a good player, you are an incomplete player that has shown an inability to excel in parts of the game.

PVP (player skill oriented) brings people together on the field of battle.

Gear/stat/level dependencies as primary establish a redirect out of PvP.  AKA it actually separates players.

I prefer the first option, and was my experience, in general, in GW 1.

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bramble said:

PVP (player skill oriented) brings people together on the field of battle.

Gear/stat/level dependencies as primary establish a redirect out of PvP.  AKA it actually separates players.

I prefer the first option, and was my experience, in general, in GW 1.

PvP goes beyond the field of battle in an open world pvp game, it involves politics and managing many social logistics, including your ability to gear up and use other players to gear up.

Honestly looking at the systems that ACE is proposing and getting a sense of their vision, if you came to this game for fair battlefields where gear doesn't matter a lot and all that matters is your ability to press hotkeys, you are REALLY into the wrong game.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

PvP goes beyond the field of battle in an open world pvp game, it involves politics and managing many social logistics, including your ability to gear up and use other players to gear up.

Strictly speaking, your statement articulates a vague mindset that could apply to any number of games with crap-tastic MMO PvP dynamics.  I think we all understand that if you have a game that is stat/level/gear dominant, then the requirement is to bow to The Grind whilst being ejected from PvP until you reach some point of level and stat viability.

Within context, for Crowfall, that's a fail model we don't want to follow too closely.

Player first, always.  That's where they mystique and challenge resides.  Politics, social logistics, etc., are separate parallel tracks that will exist regardless, and yes, part of game play of course.

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

It's not a fallacy, and your ability to navigate the social climate to get the gear you need is relevant to playing the game correctly and efficiently.  You can decide not to acknowledge that, but that just tells me what kind of player you are.

Gear vs skill is a debate by people that lack skill.  Good players know how to play games and get all the gear they need, it isn't really an issue for them. 

Sure players can be carried by gear in some cases, but they still get stomped by good players.  They are only carried against people who are similar to their skill-level who don't have the gear.

At least that's the case in the mmorpgs that actually had big competitive communities. 

A good player is someone that can navigate the game correctly, if you can't build your character as strongly as possible you are not a good player, you are an incomplete player that has shown an inability to excel in parts of the game.

It certainly is a fallacy and you haven't provided anything to argue otherwise. Every response has been filled with nothing, but empty rhetoric.  There isn't some mysterious social landscape that is to be navigated to access gear.  You either make it yourself, purchase it or have someone you know kind enough to lend a hand.

Read the highlighted sentences.  You managed to dismiss the Gear vs Skill argument entirely and at the same time defend it with an example.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly where is the fallacy?  Do you know what a fallacy is?

I'm simply sharing with you very valid and real aspects to gaming that you seem to be inexperienced with. 

You obviously have never played some of the most competitive PvP mmorpgs if you think gear is only accessed by crafting or purchasing.  Heck, even the most competitive pvp mmorpg had gear that you accessed by, you know, being good at the game and getting a high enough rating. 

But how you get the gear is on a game by game basis, and if you can't adapt to each game and figure out how to get the best gear, then you aren't a good player, it's really that simple.  A good player can handle what the game throws at them, not struggle in one department and do ok in another department.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bramble said:

Strictly speaking, your statement articulates a vague mindset that could apply to any number of games with crap-tastic MMO PvP dynamics.  I think we all understand that if you have a game that is stat/level/gear dominant, then the requirement is to bow to The Grind whilst being ejected from PvP until you reach some point of level and stat viability.

Within context, for Crowfall, that's a fail model we don't want to follow too closely.

Player first, always.  That's where they mystique and challenge resides.  Politics, social logistics, etc., are separate parallel tracks that will exist regardless, and yes, part of game play of course.

Good players never struggle with gear or stat issues, they can play all aspects of the game proficiently.  If you can't do this, you simply aren't a good player. 

Also it's actually more true in crowfall than it is for many games of late.  What was it they said?  1/3 training 1/3 gear 1/3 skill.

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

Exactly where is the fallacy?  Do you know what a fallacy is?

Are you asking because you don't know?

 

14 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

I'm simply sharing with you very valid and real aspects to gaming that you seem to be inexperienced with. 

You obviously have never played some of the most competitive PvP mmorpgs if you think gear is only accessed by crafting or purchasing.  Heck, even the most competitive pvp mmorpg had gear that you accessed by, you know, being good at the game and getting a high enough rating. 

But how you get the gear is on a game by game basis, and if you can't adapt to each

I've played a number of competitive pvp games some of which had great systems for gear and others that were an absolute nightmare.  You seem to be making the assumption, incorrectly I might add, that I am on the outside looking in as it relates to acquiring gear and performing at a high skill cap.  I personally won't have any issues achieving any of this and would prefer any encounters I face in the game be decided by which person/group was more skilled and not who had a higher teir of gear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Meurto said:

Are you asking because you don't know?

 

I've played a number of competitive pvp games some of which had great systems for gear and others that were an absolute nightmare.  You seem to be making the assumption, incorrectly I might add, that I am on the outside looking in as it relates to acquiring gear and performing at a high skill cap.  I personally won't have any issues achieving any of this and would prefer any encounters I face in the game be decided by which person/group was more skilled and not who had a higher teir of gear.

I'm asking because I don't think you know?

Well I am here to tell you that skill, gear, training and social skills will all play a role in determining who wins encounters. 

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

I'm asking because I don't think you know?

Well I am here to tell you that skill, gear, training and social skills will all play a role in determining who wins encounters. 

You just described every MMO ever created.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Meurto said:

You just described every MMO ever created.

Cool, then it shouldn't be difficult to understand that players who can not excel in all of those things are not good players.

A good chess player is not someone that can only use rooks well, a good chess player is someone that can utilize all of the pieces proficiently.  Just like in MMORPGs pressing hot keys well is only one aspect of games that are supposed to focus on a social element.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VIKINGNAIL said:

Cool, then it shouldn't be difficult to understand that players who can not excel in all of those things are not good players.

And you continue to disregard the fact that equipping pixels does not make you a skilled player.  You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Meurto said:

And you continue to disregard the fact that equipping pixels does not make you a skilled player.  You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

No, you seem to disregard that putting yourself in a position to excel is what makes you a skilled player, and if you can't do that within the parameters of a game, you are not good at that particular game.

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

No, you seem to disregard that putting yourself in a position to excel is what makes you a skilled player, and if you can't do that within the parameters of a game, you are not good at that particular game.

You clearly have a unique perspective of what one would consider skill and this discussion isn't going anywhere.  If anyone else jumps in and has a thought I will comment, but I am done here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So many misnomers...so little time...

Let's start with the thread title...Having read this thread over the last couple days, it really should reference 'damage' not 'power'.  Power is highly subjective...setting aside damage for a moment... the ability to heal is power: especially if you can do so to the point you (and/or others) cannot be killed.  The ability to CC is power, if you can stun/down/root/etc someone, especially to the point they are taken out of the fight or killed without a way to react, that is power.  The ability to mitigate damage is power, especially if you can get to the point where incoming damage is negligible or non-existent.  And none of this takes into account social, political, or economic power, nor does it address just potential functional combat power (like hard counters, etc).

Gear vs Skill is another.  While I am going to give a nod to the fact that not all game systems are alike, I'm going to just stay here on CF for this.  I think people toss around 'skill' in every game far too much...skill is literally doing something well (for various reasons, way of training, performance, etc etc)...here we just push buttons, literally.  Skill here is more in line with:

10 hours ago, Meurto said:

  Your ability as a player is comprised of how well you play your class.  How well do you understand your characters strengths/weakness?  Do you have knowledge of other classes and their mechanics?  Can you exploit mistakes made by another player or group?

To me it's an understanding of the underlying mechanics and how they ACTUALLY work versus what they say they do.  But how is it that your AT and skill training choices don't make it into these equations?  It's there the argument falls apart.  And how is it that no one includes calculated risk (rng)?  Skill can make up for some gear gap, gear can make up for some skill gap, rng can sometimes make up for both or neither, and your actual choices on what AT and skills will have a direct effect on your ability(s) and effectiveness...but hey, let's over-simplify to a gear vs skill debate? 

Gear has to be meaningful here because they want crafters to be a viable 'main' choice for people, and if you continue down the current path, it's really not.  If you want to be 'competitive' you will be 100% 'required' (used loosely, but accurately) to go down the vessel line, as they give the biggest increases we can see (but cannot use yet).  Armor seems broken, and weapons are dominated by the damage stat.  There aren't real 'meaninful choices'.  Ohh, I can get 2% more crit, or crit damage (per piece) if I work really really hard at it (actually, with no blue leather atm, that's actually much harder now), or 10-20 more AP, and some choices are way worse, and not at all viable...like +23 max hp (aurochx3 leather combine) you can pump up to about 50?  How about resource, or broken support power, etc? (and yes, I know these things "should" be fixed, but looking at it now, they are non-choices, unless you are a) testing them or   b ) are using other resource in favor of quality. 

Similarly, if you make the differences between quality of gear meaningless, you will drive away crafters and gatherers, because who wants to feel their efforts are wasted?  Risk versus reward is always thrown around, and right now, the 'risk' associated with collecting and then crafting the blue/purple is far greater than the rewards you get for all that effort, and there are good number of people this does not sit well with, and in fact, is a good portion of the reason I not only advocate a complete elimination of the combat tree (reallocate skills to AT trees to give more 'meaningful' choices), but is 100% the reason I won't even consider gathering or crafting when the game starts, it is a literal hard-coded disadvantage, and does nothing but promote dedicated alt accounts (and let me be very clear here as well, there is NOTHING that VIP will do to deter this under the current system ,it is a literal impossibility under the current restrictions).  Note: while the 'claim' is the advantage is supposed to be 'small', in competitive scenarios any advantage is, and will be, taken by those that want to win more.

 

1 hour ago, Leiloni said:

However the quoted section is a problem this game has that others don't that makes balance much harder. Honestly I almost think they should have just kept levels. In most games you don't have to worry about PvP much until max level, so balance is easier. But here you effectively will have level 1 newbies against max level geared players. That's a situation that doesn't happen frequently enough in other games to be a real problem. The passive skills would need to be something people can level up to max within weeks on average if you're going to have it be comparable to traditional levels in other games.

But if you make it take months or years, you'll have a crazy player level and power imbalance that will essentially be permanent, forever putting newer players who didn't start at launch at a huge and insurmountable disadvantage that will severely hamper the game's ability to pick up new players. It would be like Black Desert on steroids (but at least Black Desert has some insane catch up mechanics for new players to reduce the imbalance). That sounds like a terrible idea to me.

I disagree here...go play eq1 pvp, there are no level requirements...a max level can kill a level 1 with no consequences.  The idea of 'level restricted' pvp is from the 'newer' (I generally think of this  as WoW-babies onward) generation of pvp. People want 'fair' or 'equal', when that idea is idealistic and does not actually ever happen.  However, I have seen nothing that makes me think that this will be that imbalanced.  Yes, a new player will be at a (potential) 'disadvantage', but there is no 'level' restriction on gear, no abilities or disparities (as in level based games) where I log in and equip a new weapon and somehow cannot damage an enemy.  I'm not blind either though, a new player will not stand a real fighting chance against someone who has training, gear, a good vessel, and a support system, but the real barriers they will face are time (mostly for training) and an understanding of the games systems.  However, you can throw that person in a group, give them gear, a little advice (maybe), and they can be a contributing part of an engagement, which cannot be done in many other games.

 

48 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

You obviously have never played some of the most competitive PvP mmorpgs if you think gear is only accessed by crafting or purchasing.  Heck, even the most competitive pvp mmorpg had gear that you accessed by, you know, being good at the game and getting a high enough rating.

Crap like the above is a bad game mechanic, and a crutch in pvp MMO's.  It's the lack of imagination on developers part to reward players for their participation/performance in pvp because their systems tend to be highly rigid, and cater towards FoTM or standardized meta's.  Even when popular, popular != good.

 

22 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

Cool, then it shouldn't be difficult to understand that players who can not excel in all of those things are not good players.

Opinion != fact.  I agree that there are plenty of 'bad' players in MMO's, but usually they are not out to be 'the best' at whatever game they choose.  Similarly, what if the best harvester, or crafter is not the best pvp'r?  According to some of these arguments, they will be labelled as 'not good players' because they choose a different path?  Alternatively, what if a fully trained crafter or harvester wipes the floor with you when you are fully combat trained?  Will that make you (all other things being 'equal') the 'not good player'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...