Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

Why not give all ships bow and stern chasers? Currently there is a division of beautiful and fun-to-sail ships that are rarely (although a select few will use them) touched for open world PVP because they lack the ever-important bow chasers. :( Here is a list off the top of my head, I may be missing  some:

Essex,   Belle Poule,   Cerberus,   Brig,   NavyBrig,    Mercury,     Niagara,     Lynx,     Privateer,      Cutter,    Pavel

 

Now, here are the ships without bow chasers that you do see used for open world PVP: 

Bucentaure,   Renommee

Why are these two ships used fairly often, and not all the others? I'd say it has to do with their speed (especially Renommee) and firepower (especially Bucentaure). 

 

Here is the logic behind giving all ships chasers:

1. ANY ship could have bow and stern chasers in real life. All you need to do is move a gun from your broadside battery. 

2. Ships used their chasers to hopefully cut away some important rope or shatter a spar, crippling their opponent and giving them time to escape or catch the prey.

3. In game, running is so common, if you don't have a ship with bow chasers, it can be quite hard to keep an enemy ship tagged (especially if they took advantage of the almost non-existent speed difference in open world and they counter tag you [discussion for another thread though]). Furthermore, if you want to run, you had better have some stern chasers to whittle down your enemy's sails, or hope he gets a bad tag on you.

4. If all ships have at least 2 bow chasers (one for the fore and-aft rigged ships) and 2 stern chasers, then you can stand a fighting chance (up to your skill level to take advantage of that chance) to catch your prey, or escape your enemy. 

 

Now, another point: don't give accuracy bonuses to the stern guns. That is dumb, I have said it before, the stern is no more stable on a sailing vessel than the bow, if you don't believe me, watch how the ships in game wiggle their sterns around on the waves. 

 

Potential concerns: 

Some ships (especially the fifth rates), like ________  (Renommee), will be OP with chasers. To this, my response is: "If I catch your ____ in a speed built ship, then I have built my ship properly for the task I was doing with it." Some ships may need a rebalancing, sure, but I think it would be much better to see a plethora of fifth rates gracing the waters of Naval Action, rather than the standard six chasing ships: Trincomalee, Surprise, Frigate, Pirate Frigate, Renommee, Constitution (I guess Indefatigable and Endymion fit in here as well, but without being able to craft nice ones, its hard to find a place for them).

 

What about ships with four chasers on one end? Will we reduce those cannons? NO! Leave them be, the Trinc keeps her lovely four bow chasers and gets two stern chasers in addition :)

 

I say give it a shot and lets see if we can't have the Belle Poule turn into the poor man's Santa Cecilia, the Cerberus finally have a use, the Essex be the smaller and better-turning Constitution, and finally see the sixth and seventh rates represented a bit more in open world, at least in the shallows. Furthermore, the Bucentaure and Pavel would also finally have the bow chasers they deserve.

What does everyone else think?

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the devs reason, to balance certain ships.  If some ships had them it would prob make them way OP.   I kinda like the mix of the ships and load outs cause it makes folks bring diffrent ships to the table. If every ship had fore cannons we would see the same ships over and over even more than we all ready do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Willis PVP2 said:

Now, another point: don't give accuracy bonuses to the stern guns. That is dumb, I have said it before, the stern is no more stable on a sailing vessel than the bow, if you don't believe me, watch how the ships in game wiggle their sterns around on the waves. 

Have you ever sailed on a ship?

Ok, so neither have I, but I have sailed several times on a brig, including an Atlantic crossing and an exhilarating passage across the Bay of Biscay in a force 10 with the wind dead aft. Rolling is much the same fore and aft; yawing is slightly worse fore and pitching is considerably worse fore. Okay, so the pitching angle of the ship is the same throughout its length, but forward you get vertical motion on top of the pitch angle, whereas aft it's mostly just the pitch angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.. and ships are generally trimmed to have a deeper draught abaft. To provide the best maneuvering possible. There are exceptions to this rule.

On your question: no. delete chasers on ships that should not have theirs. Rattlesnake -> get rid of those. Trincomalee -> get rid of the two below. To name a few examples. Bridle ports were rarely armed. Only when there was this "arms race" french vs brits when the brits felt the need to arm those ports. But that was only done in rare occations.

Au contraire I suggested something different a long itme ago by now:

give forward facing guns an extended gunarc. Essex as an example has a very round bow with ports facing forwards at like 30 degrees+. If your guns would also face forward as much you had semi-chasers. We would only have to turn the ship a few degrees here an there. Turning means a loss of speed eh voila an additional balancing factor.

And this could be done with about every ship. The curvanature of the bow would determine the angle you can fire to the front.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there has to be some historical reference or you might as well just have made up imaginary ships that have no relevance to history ....

Renommee and Buc  were both french and therefore you have take into account how the ship would have been used in action against an enemy ship ...both ships would have  had no use for bow chasers ..so why add the additional weight

however they would have needed guns at their stern ... due to the percentage of time the ships stern would have been facing the enemy

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Remus said:

Have you ever sailed on a ship?

Yes sir, sure have. Been on several boats, including commercial trawlers, a small sailboat, a couple schooners and various other small craft, though nothing quite like one of these beautiful sailing warships.

36 minutes ago, Remus said:

Rolling is much the same fore and aft; yawing is slightly worse fore and pitching is considerably worse fore. Okay, so the pitching angle of the ship is the same throughout its length, but forward you get vertical motion on top of the pitch angle, whereas aft it's mostly just the pitch angle.

How the ship pitches and rolls depends on the sea that is running and the way the sails (or lack thereof) are driving the ship. Set more sails on a reach and you increase the heel, set too few sails and your ship will try to roll her masts out (at least that is my understanding of it). Yes, the pitch (up and down) is felt more in the bow than the stern, but neither bow nor stern is significantly stable enough to turn a naval cannon into a rifle (one of the points of my post).  From my observations, the sea state and the sails set--that would have the most impact on how the ship behaves.

 

43 minutes ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

Like with Buc and Reno, just check that all ships without bow chasers have some other good thing included.

Some of the ships do, indeed, have a good quality, but that does not redeem them for lacking bow chasers. When was the last time you saw a solo 12pdr frigate sailing about? Twelve pound frigates were exceptionally common in this time period, and we only have two in game: one is so rare, nobody (who is lucky enough to own one) really takes it out [Santa Cecilia], the other is a great ship as well [Belle Poule], but lacks the bow chasers needed to be able to chase down and keep a fleeing target tagged. Not to mention, the Belle can be more or less replaced (for hunting) by the more powerful Frigate or Pirate Frigate, both of which have bow chasers. If you gave it bow chasers, I bet it would see a lot more use for hunting and OW PVP because it trades the turning of a Frigate for some thicker armor and curvier hull (good for bouncing shots while raking the sterns). What about the Cerberus makes it a good ship compared to Surprise or Renommee besides needing the least amount of crew and having the smallest BR of the 9pdr frigates? If it had bow chasers, maybe you'd see them being used as trader hunters because of the good sailing profile. The little unrated ships (schooners and fore-and-aft-rigged ships) are used in shallows for trader hunting, sure, and I suppose the narrow bow would make cannon mounting difficult, so perhaps they do not need bow chasers.

 

42 minutes ago, BungeeLemming said:

give forward facing guns an extended gunarc. Essex as an example has a very round bow with ports facing forwards at like 30 degrees+. If your guns would also face forward as much you had semi-chasers. We would only have to turn the ship a few degrees here an there. Turning means a loss of speed eh voila an additional balancing factor.

And this could be done with about every ship. The curvanature of the bow would determine the angle you can fire to the front.

I could go along with this, anything that gives the skippers of these wonderful frigates the ability to keep a fleeing target (and lets face it, most of our targets flee if they are in something smaller, and I've even had some flee when they out-classed my ship). At any rate, I'd like to see some kind of chasers on all the rated ships (frigates especially) so that they have a purpose for hunting.

3 minutes ago, Grundgemunkey said:

Renommee and Buc  were both french and therefore you have take into account how the ship would have been used in action against an enemy ship ...both ships would have  had no use for bow chasers ..so why add the additional weight

Ah, but that is the beauty of it, you don't *have* to put the chasers on the bow of your ship, but if you are chasing a fleeing target, you can move one or two of your broadside guns forward to bear on the enemy. And honestly not sure where the "ships would have had no use for bow chasers" comes about, it seems to me that  if any ship pursues another, it would be good to have a bow chaser or two to harass his rigging in the hopes it may come down.

7 minutes ago, Grundgemunkey said:

there has to be some historical reference or you might as well just have made up imaginary ships that have no relevance to history ....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_gun  A quick Google search came up with what I was after: "Bow chasers could be regular guns brought up from the gundeck and aimed through specially cut-out ports on either side of the bowsprit, or dedicated weapons..." There ya go, bow chasers could be regular guns brought up from the gundeck on pretty much any ship you wanted to. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Willis PVP2 said:

the Belle... If you gave it bow chasers, I bet it would see a lot more use for hunting and OW PVP because it trades the turning of a Frigate for some thicker armor and curvier hull

What about the Cerberus makes it a good ship compared to Surprise or Renommee besides needing the least amount of crew and having the smallest BR of the 9pdr frigates?

The little unrated ships

How historical in general are the cannon setups?  I do not know to be honest, some told that are upgunned in the game.

Belle could probably take Frigates position if it had bow chasers.

Also, I think that BR should have a meaning as well.  I would not compare low BR ships to higher ones.  But I have to admit that Cerb probably needs some love.  Not sure if that love should come in form of bow chasers, but something could be ok.

Unrated ships are probably more or less ok atm.  Pagan Pete is doing ok with his Privateer if I have understood correctly.  Lynx and Privateer at least should be more or less correct, not sure about Cutter.

 

How would Belle and Frig do if they were not chasing anyone, but instead just fighting to the end?  Just an idea but...

What if traders and escorting would be more important?  Belle as an escort and Frig then as a hunter?

 

Maybe we should see where development takes us, and after that think about ship balance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO, putting a bow chaser in where it wasn't is not simply a matter of moving a cannon or two from one place to another. You need a secure post to mount tackle to so you can move the cannon forward after reloading, and to keep the cannon from careening down the length of the deck when it fires. You need space to put spare shot/ball cartridges for faster reloading. The gunnels may be built too high for the guns elevation adjustment preventing accurate ranging.

Gun positions are thought of and designed in while the ship is in the planning stage. Moving a couple of guns (about 1100 - 1200 pounds for 9 lb guns IIRC) without making adjustments to the load balance will put the ship out of trim seriously affecting both maneuvering and speed. This isn't something normally done on the fly.

If this escape problem is something you have a consistent issue with, perhaps you should change to a ship with chasers or match your tagging tactics to the ship you're using. Adaptability is the key to successful tactics. ;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Willis PVP2 said:

Ah, but that is the beauty of it, you don't *have* to put the chasers on the bow of your ship, but if you are chasing a fleeing target, you can move one or two of your broadside guns forward to bear on the enemy. And honestly not sure where the "ships would have had no use for bow chasers" comes about, it seems to me that  if any ship pursues another, it would be good to have a bow chaser or two to harass his rigging in the hopes it may come down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_gun  A quick Google search came up with what I was after: "Bow chasers could be regular guns brought up from the gundeck and aimed through specially cut-out ports on either side of the bowsprit, or dedicated weapons..." There ya go, bow chasers could be regular guns brought up from the gundeck on pretty much any ship you wanted to. 

you miss my point which was why would a french ship be chasing another ship ... ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Challenge said:

NO, putting a bow chaser in where it wasn't is not simply a matter of moving a cannon or two from one place to another. You need a secure post to mount tackle to so you can move the cannon forward after reloading, and to keep the cannon from careening down the length of the deck when it fires. You need space to put spare shot/ball cartridges for faster reloading. The gunnels may be built too high for the guns elevation adjustment preventing accurate ranging.

Gun positions are thought of and designed in while the ship is in the planning stage. Moving a couple of guns (about 1100 - 1200 pounds for 9 lb guns IIRC) without making adjustments to the load balance will put the ship out of trim seriously affecting both maneuvering and speed. This isn't something normally done on the fly.

If this escape problem is something you have a consistent issue with, perhaps you should change to a ship with chasers or match your tagging tactics to the ship you're using. Adaptability is the key to successful tactics. ;)

You can place a gun anywhere it will fit (within reason) you like if your frigate is in good shape. All you need is a run of deck large enough to handle the recoil the gun will have and fasten your tackle to the ribs (or other significant timbers) in the bow of the ship. A place to put ball and powder is as simple as a wooden crate sitting next to the gun, no need to get fancy with it. The chaser would likely be served by the most experienced guncrew (there wouldn't be much else for them to do in the chase, besides make minute adjustments to the sails to eek out the most speed possible, and the rest of the crew can handle that), to give the highest probability of carrying away something critical from the enemy's rigging.

A simple answer to the gunwales being too high is to simply cut open a hole. Sounds horrible, I know, but it is not unheard of. As long as you keep your gunport well above the waterline (if it is on the forecastle then you have no problems to worry about) and make sure that you properly reinforce the area around it with additional timbers to preserve the strength of the side. It should take a competent carpenter and his team about 4 or 5 hours at most to do so. An example from memory: the Confederate commerce raider Shenandoah sailed from England (IIRC) as a "trade ship," brought guns up from the hold, cut holes in the bulwarks and fitted guns. She then proceeded to sail to the whaling grounds and take prey. 

Twelve hundred pounds shifted (from pointing straight out to the side, to pointing forward, not far at all from where it originally was positioned), on one of these ships is not a big deal at all. It sounds like a heavy weight, but really it is just the equivalent weight of about 8 men moving forward to trim the sails. And I would wager that it takes a heck of a lot more than 8 (or 16, or 20) men to make a noticeable difference in the way one of these vessels (especially the frigates) handles.

I don't have an issue with people escaping because I make a point to sail ships with bow chasers. I have speedy Bellonas and Ingermanlands that will run down almost any warship afloat, and I have a fast Surprise for hunting traders.

My point of this post is that the ships without bow chasers rarely see use because they can't keep a fleeing enemy tagged reliably, and they are not good as support ships because other ships fill the role just as easily. Think about it, why would I use an Essex to support a fourth rate squadron when I can use a Trincomalee (more guns, bow chasers) or a Pirate Frigate (Essex's near sister, but with better turning, bow chasers, and only 200 side structure less), or even a Constitution (bigger, much more powerful, worse turn rate, much tougher, bow and stern chasers).  Where these ships would shine, and be able to show their usefulness, would be if they could sail alone (as frigates often did) and effectively hunt targets. When was the last time you saw an experienced player in an Essex or Belle Poule doing something like that?

10 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

How would Belle and Frig do if they were not chasing anyone, but instead just fighting to the end?  Just an idea but...

What if traders and escorting would be more important?  Belle as an escort and Frig then as a hunter?

Belle vs Frig is a fairly equal fight, the Belle can bounce shots, but the Frigate turns so well, it may be hard to get a good broadside landed. The main advantage of Belle, besides the armor and sloped sides, is the fact that 12pdrs take less crew to reload, and reload faster than the 18s on the Frig, especially if the Frig loses some crew. The Frigate has every other advantage: better turning, heavier broadside, bow chasers, and, if I remember correctly, a very similar sailing profile. Not denying the fact that Belle and Frigate can fight each other, that is not the problem, the problem is that if Belle needs to chase anything, it becomes quite hard to do. And if Frigate needs to run, she has a hard time doing that as well if the enemy is in a similarly-fast vessel with bow chasers.

11 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

Belle could probably take Frigates position if it had bow chasers.

Hmm... personally, I don't think so, they would both be popular though if they both had chasers on each end (as I suggested, lets not forget the stern chasers on ships like Frig, PFrig, Trinc, Essex, etc.). They both have the similar sailing profile (again, this is from my memory here, I haven't sailed an equal build of each in a LONG time), and both have the same side structure and mast thickness. Frigate would still have the 18pdrs and the great turn rate. Belle would trade some firepower for a bit of armor and sloped sides. BR would have to be adjusted to make the ships have the same BR (currently Frig=170, Belle=180). This conveniently ignores the Pirate Frigate having more broadside than either, the same speed and specs as a Frigate and more crew to boot. Its only negative compared to the Frigate and Belle is the lack of stern chasers (Frigate lacks those too) and about 200 HP less (really not much) than the Frigate and Belle.

4 hours ago, Grundgemunkey said:

you miss my point which was why would a french ship be chasing another ship ... ?

LOL maybe because the DREAD PIRATE WILLIS is sailing her! :P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ships in the game need to be different ... have different attributes and cannon layouts..otherwise we all end up sailing the same type of ship ... Buc is fast for its size downside is it doesnt have bow chasers ...  it adds to the diversity within the game why change what isnt broken when other things are

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  1. Make "area control" a default function. (Wonder if this has been suggested before...?)
  2. Consider the situation when choosing what ship to take. Essex and Belle Poule might be at a disadvantage when you sail out alone, but they are both great when sailing together with a friend in a ship that has chasers and can keep a fleeing ship tagged.
  3. I always wondered how the chasers on all ships fire straight ahead. On most ships the chaser positions look more like the guns would actually be firing more like a 60 degree angle to the bowsprit in each direction than parallell to the bowsprit. Chaser accuracy and effectiveness on most ships seem actually way too high, although for gameplay reasons I understand this.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of chasers, what if the 'chaser-less' ships could have a weaker version in the form of a swivel cannon mounted at the front? Seems less ahistorical than non-existent bow gunports, shorter range, smaller caliber, but still better than the major disadvantage those ship get solely because of our gamey tagging mechanics. You're still going to get a good advantage for other ships, say for example the Trinco being able to chop sails with its 4x bow chasers, vs an Essex with a swivel gun that just tags the ship while trying to catch up.

Or, as Anolytic said, permanent area control, might have to tweak the range. Off the top of my head I cant think of what the downside would be.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anolytic said:
  1. Make "area control" a default function. (Wonder if this has been suggested before...? [..]

I did :lol:

My version would look like this:

  • Every ship has an area of control - larger than now
  • The controlled area is shrinking over the course of the battle.

If the shrinking speed and circle size are tuned properly, running away will still work and faster ships may yet escape - without fruitless chases dragging on forever like now and it won't get in the way of combat either.

It would make the Belle Poule such a sweet ship to use.

 

Quote

The way I think this can work is that every ship gets a zone around it that makes exiting the instance impossible - control perk basically, but far larger (and maybe visible when clicking on the enemy), and crucially: it is gradually shrinking with time.
Ships start out in each others zone. If one ship is a lot faster it will be able to close the distance faster than the circle is shrinking and get in cannon range. If he is not, at some point the fleeing ship will clear the control zone and is allowed to escape. This completely eliminates the bow chaser issue, ships that don't have them are no longer incapable of keeping an enemy in battle. The jarring effect of ships vanishing into thin air from under your bowsprit when they haven't been tagged for 2 minutes is gone.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2017 at 9:12 AM, Grundgemunkey said:

 

ships in the game need to be different ... have different attributes and cannon layouts..otherwise we all end up sailing the same type of ship ... Buc is fast for its size downside is it doesnt have bow chasers ...  it adds to the diversity within the game why change what isnt broken when other things are

 

But see, that is what we already do. Everyone sails the same frigates and lineships in open world fighting: Connie, Trinc, Surprise, Inger, Aggy, Bellona, Buc, Renom, and occasionally Indy/Endy. Nobody sails the Essex, Belle, Cerberus, or Pavel because they don't have bow chasers (ok, maybe Pavel for other reasons because its worse than Buc in almost every regard). I consider that quite broken when an entire group of wonderful ships are almost never sailed. They are simply inferior in any position for open world fighting/hunting/running.

BTW, Buc is not the fastest hotshot lineship, actually. I have a Bellona that is faster (well, it would be if I had gold studding sails on it) than the fastest Buc, and it has bow chasers! 

On 4/12/2017 at 3:38 AM, Duncan McFail said:

 

So many ships would become viable in open world pvp if they had chasers. I like it. I would actually use the essex if it had chasers.

 

100% agree! I would love to see these ships get used for fighting, instead of decorative paint holders or dueling ships. It would add a lot of diversity to open world.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chaster only fer ships wot had chasers, i say.

I used to want chaser's back when I were just a cabin boy, but then I leant proper how to handle my craft. Now, I wouldn't have em if I didn't have em. 
Pagan Pete, Keepin it Real (™).


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/04/2017 at 1:44 AM, Willis PVP2 said:

But see, that is what we already do. Everyone sails the same frigates and lineships in open world fighting: Connie, Trinc, Surprise, Inger, Aggy, Bellona, Buc, Renom, and occasionally Indy/Endy. Nobody sails the Essex, Belle, Cerberus, or Pavel because they don't have bow chasers (ok, maybe Pavel for other reasons because its worse than Buc in almost every regard). I consider that quite broken when an entire group of wonderful ships are almost never sailed. They are simply inferior in any position for open world fighting/hunting/running.

BTW, Buc is not the fastest hotshot lineship, actually. I have a Bellona that is faster (well, it would be if I had gold studding sails on it) than the fastest Buc, and it has bow chasers! 

100% agree! I would love to see these ships get used for fighting, instead of decorative paint holders or dueling ships. It would add a lot of diversity to open world.

btw  the buc is a 2nd rate and a bellona is a third rate .....and 1v1 i would back the buc against a bellona  .especially if the buc had bow chasers

maybe they should buff the sailing qualities of the ships without bow chasers such as a better turn rate or better trim .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the issue is not the lack of chasers but the "tag to keep in instance" mechanic ?

Control as a mechanic could replace all these chaser needs.

( most ships I like have no chasers. Privateer, Lynx, Navy Brig, Cerberus. I rely on control and a good tag or else I have to let the prey go away, that's how it is. )

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2017 at 7:09 AM, The Red Duke said:

Maybe the issue is not the lack of chasers but the "tag to keep in instance" mechanic ?

Control as a mechanic could replace all these chaser needs.

( most ships I like have no chasers. Privateer, Lynx, Navy Brig, Cerberus. I rely on control and a good tag or else I have to let the prey go away, that's how it is. )

YES! Myself and several others have made posts regarding a control mechanic being default, here is my general idea of how it would work:

1. Control is effective to 2000 meters and everyone has it.

2. Timer to leave is 5 minutes (that may be too long and a waste of time, so testing would be needed there) unless you are tagged.

3. All players have an option "enable enemy to leave." If you, and all the members of your team, have that option enabled, the enemy can leave battle any time he chooses to, regardless of what distance or timer he has. This is for the people who may want to do a friendly duel, or if you tag an LGV because he was AFK but all of a sudden came to life and is easily outrunning your Live Oak Constitution. It saves everyone some time sitting there waiting on the timer to go away.

4. For this to work, OW AND INSTANCE SPEEDS HAVE TO RELATE TO EACH OTHER. Currently, a tank build with extra planking fourth rate is only slightly slower in OW than a speed build fourth rate. It takes ages to catch up with them, and in some cases, OW speeds of ships that are fast in battle (like the P. Frigate) are too slow to use for hunting other ships.

5. Tag range in OW is exactly 2000 meters. Once you enter battle, you are under control till you run out of range and run out your timer.

This would make it so that if you are fast enough to catch your enemy in open world, and manage to tag him reasonably well, you will have your prey unless he manages to out-fox you. 

 

But I still want to see bow chasers & stern chasers on available on all ships (at least 5th rates and up). Shoot, make it an upgrade you can buy out of the admiralty with the new system on testbed.

At the very least, do as others have suggested here and arm the bridle ports on ships without bow chasers and give us a special aiming mode for them. It would require us to turn to one side or the other to fire our "bow chasers," every time we touch that rudder, we lose speed.

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...