Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Capt Aerobane

Members
  • Content Count

    390
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Capt Aerobane

  1. I think timers could work for this just like normal PBs, at least until a different system is devised. Eco warfare at night might not be very fair to a clan, so I think allowing clans to limit the general spawn times for their port's AI would be fair.
  2. Might I draw your attention (and that of all those discussing hostility) to my proposal for reworking the way PBs are set/Hostility? I made the thread to hopefully change the boring nature of grinding hostility and replace or enhance it with a bit more spicy pvp and pve.
  3. Most people don’t really like hostility missions, and I have found them incredibly repetitive on the few times I did do them. With the recent changes to ports and the addition of port management, customization, and a real reason to own them (awesome changes btw!) it opens the door for much more interesting port battle setting mechanics. I propose getting rid of the hostility mission system and replacing it with any one or combination of the following ways to set a port battle. Blockades. The premise simple, the details more complex, a large group of players sail to the port they want to blockade and when a sufficiently large battle group is near the port, they can trigger a “blockade” event. To successfully blockade a port and either set a PB or complete one step in setting a PB, the attacking team would have to prevent the defending team from bringing more than a certain amount of “relief supplies” –food supplies and gunpowder for instance— into the port. Lineships and frigates would not be able to carry relief supplies, only merchant ships and smaller vessels; the defenders must protect a big merchant (Indiaman) or create a distraction allowing several light ships to sneak through. The blockade would have to be kept up for a standard amount of time, probably somewhere between 1 and 2 hours, but if the defenders do not show up and get at least one ship within a certain range of the port within 30 minutes, the blockade is counted a success so that people don’t have to sit in the blockade for hours waiting for nobody to show up. “But aero you noob, it’s impossible to blockade a port in NA because you will just get screened out and people can sneak by once ur in an instance, also tagging mechanics make blockades so hard!” Here is the big trick: the blockade is an instance of its own. If you trigger a blockade, a battle instance is created in and around the port. The open world continues somewhat normally, with players who aren’t involved coming and going like normal. The catch is that if you want your supplies to count towards breaking the blockade, you must drop them off into the port from the combat instance, having sailed into the port through or around the blockade while they can chase or block you. When the blockade is triggered, all ships in the attacking clan/attacking alliance of clans are pulled into the instance based on their relative position to the port in the open world. When the defenders join the instance, they join also based on their relative position but at least 10 minutes sail (in the battle instance mind you) away from the supply drop off point, which would be right in the center of the port. The wind in these blockade instances will always be set to a neutral position so that nobody spawns in down wind with 0 chance to make it to the port.*a small caveat is that the blockading ships might need unlimited chain or sail repair mechanics may need to be nerfed in these particular instances, to stop spamming and sail repping as a cheesy break-through tactic. In this type of engagement, port defensive batteries and towers will actually be extremely important because the closer you can bring your blockade to the port, the easier it is to cover all the gaps and stop a small ship sneaking through. Enormous and expensive shore batteries can destroy warships at long range, creating a “safe zone” for blockade runners that will be very difficult to prevent them from reaching, as opposed to a port with no defenses where the blockaders can keep shooting the supply ships even as they are slowly unloading their supplies into the port. If team composition and size is unrestricted, it will be extremely easy to break a blockade because the defenders have the advantage of being able to use any one of multiple strategies ranging from a powerful fleet to smash the blockade, to a swarm of blockade running lighter ships to shotgun the defense and hopefully make it through. Because of this teams would have BR limits, with the blockaders getting more BR so they can bring a combination of powerful warships and interceptors. Also remember that depending on the layout of the port and any spits of land with defenses, the attackers may be required to bring a mortar brig to neutralize particularly problematic shore batteries. Ideally, the BR limits are shaped for each port so that a fully exposed port with no defenses is easy to blockade, and a heavily protected port that the clan has invested in is very difficult to blockade without some way of destroying the defenses first... This would require fine tuning on the BR limits for each side. Raids and Assaults. Been suggested a million times before, and other people have put a lot more thought into it so take what I write here as a general idea. The premise is simple, but here the details are pretty simple too. You show up with a bunch of ships and you start blowing shit up right way, mainly those defensive fortifications. Defenders trying to break up the raid spawn in at any time from the moment it starts and with any ships they want. They would spawn rather close to the attackers. Towers destroyed in these attacks would not be available in blockades and PBs for the next week or so. So yeah. Show up and start blowing shit up, guaranteed action, high chance of PVP. You don’t even have to do it because you want to launch a port battle, you can just do it because you want a fight, or just because you don’t like the clan that owns the port and you want to give them a head ache. Economic Warfare. As the developers alluded to in their post about port mechanics upgrades, economic sabotage in more indirect ways could play an important role in RVR and with port battles. The possibilities are endless, so I’ll only list a few ideas I’ve had. Sinking shipping to weaken port defenses Sinking shipping to increase PB/RVR timer window. (Sink AI merchants near an enemy port to create a window for a raid or blockade or to increase the length of the existing one.) Sinking shipping to decrease the prosperity of a port and reduce its output of materials. Hiring “privateer” players to go attack merchant shipping around an enemy port or to suppress piracy around your port waters. (pls I just wanna be a pirate come on). Rewards for escorting AI merchants and for intercepting them (if on a contract to do so by a clan.) Etc, etc. Lots of possibilities that give people meaningful reasons to go out and look for trouble, and giving them central focus points around which to focus their activity, increasing the likelihood of encounters that turn into fighting. Escort and intercept rewards would also give rewards to players even if they can’t find PVP, leading to less of those frustrating instances where you spend an hour searching the OW but find little of interest and log off with nothing. Those are my three big ideas for how to change mechanics around port battles and ports to improve the conquest aspect of RVR and introduce a more “sustained” aspect, with spontaneous raids and constant economic warfare being important to weaken an enemy clan before the decisive confrontations. Couple this with the “front lines” that admin confirmed: https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28606-manage-ports-and-save-time-coming-soon/?do=findComment&comment=627960 and you will (hopefully) end up with more RVR action, and a lot more different types of RVR action. My favorite part of this idea is the privateering and merchant raiding, because it’s a way to get solo players involved in RVR, and it offers a smooth transition from PVE to PVP. I don’t think that requiring a clan to tick all the RVR boxes to have a PB is necessary either, as these mechanics could flow together. Raids and eco warfare make it easier to blockade, blockades trigger PBs. If the impact of coastal defenses on blockades are well balanced, then players will have to perform raids and destroy them before trying to perform the blockade and set the PB. Some sort of screening nerf may be needed, however, because I think if players must sustain economic warfare, conduct raids, and blockade ports to set a PB with no guarantee that they won’t be stopped by an impossibly big screening fleet or just really cheesy delaying tactics, then people may not go through the trouble of trying to set PBs. Alternatively, blockades, raids, and merchant sinking could all work together to build hostility, so after either several blockades, several raids, or a combination of the above, a port battle could be set. I might not have the specifics down pat, or there might be a glaringly obvious weakness in this idea that I was blind to in my excitement, but please look at this as a suggestion for a type of mechanic change, not a hypothetical set of patch notes. I fleshed this out quite a bit because its an exciting prospect to me and because I wanted to propose solutions to a lot of the problems pre emptively, not to try to tell the developers how to do their job. Thanks for reading this and kudos to you if you actually did read most or all of it, I hope it wasn't a waste of your time. I'll check to see how people have responded in the morning. o7.
  4. Port management opens up the possibility for better port battle triggering mechanics. Hostility missions aren't very fun, but what about using a combination blockades, economic warfare, and/or raids/assaults to create PB opportunities? I have several ideas about this, are people even remotely interested in changing PB creation mechanics? If so I can write up a suggestion about it.
  5. Now that clans can build defenses for their ports, its time for port raids so we can blow them all up!
  6. Confederate soldiers routing towards the enemy. Its a bold strategy cotton lets see if it pays off for them.
  7. Y'all remember when premium ships were just going to be blueprints that allow you to craft a ship? Pepperidge farm remembers :C
  8. I'm all for wiping the shit out of everything, the game becomes boring when people just amass billions of resources because of exploitable economics and keep them after changes make them harder to get. Then nobody has to do anything or make the "player driven economy" work because they have 1,000,000,000+ gold or reals or whatever and don't do anything. I have 20k+ Iron for instance, now its much harder to get but I don't have to do anything to work for Iron ever again basically because I stockpiled while it was easy to get (planning to be a cannon salesman) And as for ranks, I think without an xp wipe, the release will be a disaster with half the players at rear admiral slaughtering the other half, who are all on brigs. Obviously, doubling back on previous promises is really bad, but I think that if you didn't see this one coming you might want to visit the optometrist. I am fully aware however that as someone who doesn't really enjoy sailing anything over a corvette, this wipe is going to take a lot more skin off of other's peoples backs than mine.
  9. Ok this is beautiful :''') Makes me want to come back it really does. gloire aux grenouilles!!
  10. I agree that there are too many nations. There should be 1 nation, where newbies learn how to sail in a small safe zone. Everything else should be clans based. Thats how I see it.
  11. I haven't played Eve much, but from what I've seen and heard I would argue that it is a great example of how you can have a strong PVE section population supporting both a much smaller hardcore PVP population and a very dedicated RVR population. Also how you can have varying degrees of PVP and PVE so when a player goes from PVE to PVP it isn't so frustrating for them. (Like getting attacked while fighting AI, full PVE to full PVP unexpectedly and without consent) If the player had to go directly into enemy territory to find AI, and if their sinking that AI somehow affected the clan/nation whose territory they were in, it would feel more fair to be retaliated against by the enemy while raiding, instead of getting interrupted while farming. The player would have to consciously put themselves at risk in order to kill the AI, so that if they were attacked it wouldn't feel as unfair. I feel the complete dichotomy between what is "pvp content" and "pve content" serves to prevent people from "crossing over" from one to the other. The existing PVE content does nothing to push people towards fighting, it encourages people to avoid PVP while farming, and only do PVP when solely focused on it. Also I don't propose purely PVE based content being added, rather more content that offers some PVE aspects while pitting different players against each other and giving them meaningful reasons to fight (something sorely lacking from the OW right now). Here's an example: For me, what I want to do most in this game is play as a pirate. Not the pirate nation, a pirate's pirate. No big ships, small hideouts, raiding ports instead of besieging them, attacking smaller merchants or ganging up on larger ones, squabbling with other pirates, unable to sail too far from the hideout, etc etc. I don't like sailing ships larger than a heavy brig or corvette anyway. I can think of so many mechanics that would not only make piracy interesting but also pit the pirate class against the clans that own ports they operate around, generating conflict between the two and encouraging clans to try to drive away pirates and assault their hideouts. This is a specific example of what I consider new "content," and while its not 100% PVP focused like RVR or solo dueling, it still would involve and encourage a lot of PVP. If you would like to know more about my proposal for a pirate class in game, I can PM you about it (don't want to derail this into a discussion of pirates.) I'll give one little example though: A port raid. Pirates just show up and if they have 6+ they can attack the port. They then sail into the port and have to shoot up a few AI ships, maybe destroy a tower or two depending on the port, and then get to special points where they can drop off pirates to go "raid the port" they can also sink stationary anchored AI ships in the harbor. They can continue doing this until the raid is completed or they get chased away by the port's owners who can show up as quickly as they realize they are being raided and sail to the port or join from in it. This would be somewhat PVE but still push players towards PVP, not only in the battle itself but also because clans would want to extirpate pirates from their territory to make it impossible for them to stage a raid. (successful raids would destroy buildings, steal materials or maybe even warehouse goods, and reduce the prosperity of the port). Anyway suppose I should write it all up in a suggestion. I think overall my big complaint is the lack of diversity in ways to play the game, and the way it does so little to push people towards fighting each other voluntarily or semi-voluntarily. The roles that are not available currently also happen to be the ones which appeal to me most.
  12. I don't mean to attack @jodgi, I am genuinely curious what parts of NA they enjoy and what they would consider good content to add. Everyone wants something different, a game that already exists in such a small niche (age of sail mmo) cannot afford to only pander to one type of player. To implement the kinds of content I would like by sacrificing what people like Jodgi like would achieve nothing.
  13. So what would you enjoy? What would you consider to be content? There must be something you do enjoy!
  14. No he isn't! He so totally isn't that its not even funny!
  15. You are using what the game is make claims about what it ideally should be. Of course nobody got excited about a trading route. There are no trading routes... What trade route? "This one here is a cool trade route, you sail in a straight line from generic_port_17 with generic_resource_7_profit_200%_hold_weight_x to generic_port_35 and earn credits 7.3% faster than this other path." Risk is equal, navigational difficulty is equal... Thats not a trade route, that is a mathematical equation! The game is at its very core nothing but combat because it has been put together that way, not because it has to be. People want content that isn't just the same brand of PVP. Yes, you can get some new or improved content by improving PVP, but ultimately very few games are 100% PVP RVR based with 0 relevant and enjoyable PVE type content. As I said, if the open world has no open world type features like other games, what is the point? A 2D navigation system or just straight up matchmaking system could achieve that type of gameplay much more efficiently. We've had innumerable patches working on PVP, and almost none working on what happens in between the pvp or in place of it. PVP isn't working because carrying the weight of the entire playerbase without any support from other content. PVP development is going in circles trying to find an impossibly good and universally enjoyable meta that just cannot exist. An entire game based around sailing around an empty and barren open world looking for players to fight. I enjoyed sea trials combat more. As for the marketing... https://www.navalaction.com/#open-world "build, trade" "navigate" as main subsections. This isn't a lobby based game with no trading. What would be the point of having an open world whatsoever if every effort is then made to turn said open world into a de facto lobby system? Just use lobbies then!
  16. " How about finding and destroying a pirate outpost? Sink the pirate ships, then shell the hideout and land troops. That would involve more interesting combat, relevant land to ship interaction, and much more challenging navigation/ship control to not beach oneself while approaching the shore and fighting among the shallow water and sandbanks where pirates would have a base. " Scouting and smuggling would be about evading combat and sailing through difficult to navigate waters, not just sail, point gun at enemy, fire. Suppressing piracy would involve finding pirates and their hideouts, which would be a completely new combat environment and mechanic, trying to predict their locations and sneakily stalk them back to their base, maybe try to estimate the base position from reported pirate attacks, again, not just sail from one place to another. If you simplify things to the extent you simplify naval operations, all open world games can be broken down into "go here and kill or deliver something" over and over again. But its not that simple. I simplified RVR to some extent as well of course, but RVR IS actually all fleet vs fleet combat.
  17. For me, content is different ways to play the game and more immersive/detailed missions and roles. Right now you can play as a national member of a large, powerful clan, fighting RVR fleet battles, or you can play a solo raider with a heavily kitted out superfrigate ambushing people and killing them 1v1 or 1v2 before they can escape or get reinforcements. Thats it. You do one of those two for hours on end, or you derp around in a gunboat or something. You can also trade, but that really falls under the RVR umbrella as most materials trading (the interesting trading) happens with protection of clans in large fleets. All other playstyles are just not there. Want to be a pirate? No. Even if you limit yourself to realistic pirate ships and focus on raiding, you still can't do it because you are locked into nation based mechanics there is absolutely 0 framework for piracy or pirate playstyles, there is no smuggling to be done, and you are just playing as a normal solo player and artificially limiting yourself without any benefits you would expect from being a pirate (lack of rules, concealed hideouts, smuggling missions, etc.). The lack of unique playstyles and "content" in this regard shoe horns everyone into playing the same way, in the same ships, in the same places. For me, that just gets boring. The only content that this game has that is interesting enough to warrant doing it is RVR or dueling type pvp. All RVR boils down to the same thing, fleet vs fleet combat in lineships or frigates. (sometimes shallow water stuff two, then meta shifts to whatever is the most potent shallow ship, requins and hercs? Even port battles have nothing to do with a port, naval bombardment, or landing operation. It is fleet vs fleet lineship battles just like the ones in the OW, except with more precise BR limits. If you see a player you either attack them or run from them, there are no allied nations to help or alliances to foster, just kill kill kill sink sink sink in the same settings and with usually the same ships. All non RVR or solo dueling is only worth doing to prepare you for RVR and duelling. PVE grinding isn't fun enough to do on its own for sure, and trading isn't stimulating or interesting, its just rolling the die to see if there is a fleet waiting for you at your destination. I found it very boring for 99% of the open ocean voyage where I never encountered anyone, and then frustratingly out of my control when I arrived and departed because if I saw an enemy ship there was no possible escape for a merchant vessel, and nobody would ever attack without overwhelming odds. So basically you either just sail in uneventfully or get ganked. Incredibly rarely do you actually kill an attacker or fight them off, because if that was even a possibility of happening they wouldn't attack at all. I don't want to play the RVR MMO focused meta scrutinizing role that you must in naval action to get non repetitive (well, still pretty repetitive) content. This lack of diversity is also reflected in missions. Sail here, kill something. Sail around here, and kill several somethings. Deliver this to there.That is missions in naval action. I can think of so many possible missions that would actually be really fun to do in 10 seconds that it makes it so frustrating to have the absolute bare minimum in that regard. How about finding and destroying a pirate outpost? Sink the pirate ships, then shell the hideout and land troops. That would involve more interesting combat, relevant land to ship interaction, and much more challenging navigation/ship control to not beach oneself while approaching the shore and fighting among the shallow water and sandbanks where pirates would have a base. If there were missions like that (or if pirate players could make hideouts and they could be raided) then that would be the kind of content that would bring me back. How about a smuggling mission, telling you to sneak into enemy territory and deliver supplies to a waiting ship? How about running a blockade to relieve an embattled town? Bombarding a small fort before infantry assault it? Sail here, sink this. "ok, i've done that." Sail here, sink this. "ok sure, i'll do that again." Sail here, sink this. "ok commander, are you sure that there arent other matters to be attended to? ok fine." Sail here, sink this. "ok piss off mate." I absolutely don't agree! The age of sail consisted of SO MUCH more than just sailing from one spot to another with a fleet and shooting other fleets of identical ships to yours. Escorting things, smuggling things, raiding things, scouting things, suppressing piracy (via sinking pirates and attacking their safe havens), transporting troops and supporting ground campaigns and sieges, etc, etc. Of important distinction, is that these aren't just PVP/single player events. Piracy and suppression of piracy could be player driven, so could blockade running and smuggling, if the game just had a framework for it. Navigation, ship management*, and role specialization have been completely removed from the game, sure, but that doesn't mean these things couldn't be fun content. It just means that they aren't in Naval Action. Is it too late for NA to add these things back without starting over from scratch? Probably, but I'm not trying to change the game at this point, I'm just explaining why I rarely play it anymore. I don't fault the game developers for not making the game I want, I just think I didn't quite understand what NA is supposed to be when I started playing. I just want a different game than the devs and a lot of the community I guess. I just don't see the point of an open world if it exists solely as a frame work for creating pvp battles. You can get matchmakers to do the same thing faster and more fairly. *at sea not in port
  18. I'd like the ranging shot firing order to be optimized on ships like renommee or st pavel; the upper deck guns are annoying to have because if you have them equipped, they fire first by default and make aiming the entire broadside difficult instead of adding to it. To avoid this you can disable them, but keeping track of when they are loaded and if you want them to fire makes them annoying to micromanage for a really small increase in firepower. I would like the firing order for ships with weird configurations to be tweaked so that they fire in a pattern that is more useful to aim or range a larger broadside. For instance on the pavel, have the 2nd from top deck of guns fire first with ranging shots, and only the top deck guns fire when the natural progression of shots from the lower deck reaches that point along the ship. Crudely drawn example of gun layout for a ship like renommee: Currently the game would fire in this order: 8, 9, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. I would prefer either 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. or better 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 5, 9, 6, 7. A small change, but one that would make the quality of life better for any ship with a huge gap in its upper deck or very few guns there.
  19. A small ship delaying a big ship in real life does not get to take advantage of time compression. If a prince attacked a bellona the bellona might not even beat to quarters, just have one or two gun ports open to make sure the prince stays away. It could continue on its mission quite normally. In NA, the light vessel can just tag them and wait while the Bellona is trapped in slowed down time and the approaching revenge fleet travels at warp speed relative to the victim. This is unrealistic and exploitative. Time compression makes delay/immobilize tagging so overpowered when small ships do it to large ones; and as we cannot remove time compression it is the non-aggressive tagging and running away that must be dealt with.
  20. Capt Aerobane

    blame prussia

    Prussia sold Bambi to Jabba the Hutt.
  21. A lot of people are saying that before we continue to work on balance between ship classes, we should fix the economy. I think that until the economy is top notch and balanced, ship classes cannot be balanced in a satisfying way. Naval warfare wasn't team fortress 2: different classes of ship were NOT balanced in a 1v1 or even any fighting situation. If a frigate saw a 1st rate, they kept their distance or took one or two cheeky shots at the stern. People still made frigates because lineships were ludicrously expensive and not practical for protecting trade or suppressing piracy. In naval action, there is no economic reason to not use lineships because players can farm up the resources for them relatively quickly, and as others have stated the difference between ship classes is linear not exponential. In addition fir/fir lineships can still catch fully laden traders, so frigates are even less useful. As a result, if we make lineships as lethal as really were, nobody uses anything else for serious PVP. So lineships are nerfed to allow some diversity in gameplay, which means they are frustrating and unrealistic to use. To return to the tf2 analogy, lineships are like the heavy while frigates are like the soldier or scout. The specifics of the analogy aren't important, what's important is that the trade-offs are relatively fair. Lineships' increased damage correlates "fairly" to their lack of mobility. This works balance wise because they are all available relatively easily to players willing to grind a little; however, its not very satisfying for the lineships and first rates to get beaten by smaller ships because of hugging, sterncamping, etc etc. The key to balancing them is to add the historical balancing factor: cost. This requires a difficult game design decision and a very refined, difficult to exploit economy where players cannot garner obscene amounts of wealth very quickly. Early on in the development of the game I remember the question of ship cost and rarity was discussed, and the following conclusion was arrived at: every player should be able to play the ship they want, if they are willing to put a reasonable amount of effort towards crafting or buying it. I believe this is a mistake with unavoidable ramifications for game balance and realism. Players being able to play whatever ships they want Lineships being satisfying and realistic to sail. An vibrant open world full of all ship sizes and classes. The above three goals cannot be achieved simultaneously. You can have at best two: If players can access any class of ship easily and pvp is to feature a diverse range, then lineships must be unrealistically nerfed to make them fair fighting alongside smaller vessels. (stern camping, hugging, shot damage based on diameter not weight.) For pvp to be diverse and lineships satisfying, they must cost too much for most players to acquire. (my preferred scenario) If line-ships are available to all and realistically powerful vs other classes, very few players will sail frigates or smaller lineships and consequently fleet composition will be uniform/stagnant. (thickness meta best meta, 25 LOWO oceans vs 25 LOWO oceans) As someone who rarely sails lineships in favor of brigs and corvettes, I know that making 1-3 rates an extremely rare clan wars or hyper rich trader only option is easy for me to suggest but would be a lot more painful for solo players who really want to sail 1st rates, but as I argued above, we can't have it all here. A full fleet of 25 LOWO oceans should be so mindbogglingly valuable that no sane clan would risk them except for the most absolutely important PB imaginable. Sailing a lineship out into the OW alone and un-escorted should be crazy. For a normal solo player like me, a medium to large frigate or maybe 4th rate should be the maximum ship I can comfortably buy, equip, and insure. The big problem with making cost a balancing factor is that it doesn't affect all players equally. Some have found ways to grind currency so efficiently that cost is meaningless to them. To balance ships based on cost and have it actually effect how players sail and what ships they command, the economy must be more clamped down and tougher, with fewer get rich quick techniques and farming methods. In addition if RVR becomes "who can buy the most 1st rates wins every time" that would defeat the purpose and do more damage than good. It's an incredibly complex topic. But anyway these opinions are probably quite outdated, I haven't played the game too much in the past year.
  22. Single player Naval Action could be just as incredible as the multiplayer game. The level of detail in combat but with realistic map sizes and time compression at the player's will, less concessions towards pvp balance, missions/quests, more realistic progression within the navy/trading company/pirates, specialization, single player focused trade, etc. When I first started playing NA, that is the game I wanted (I didn't realize how incompatible my ideal game is with the MMO nature) Obviously Naval Action is an online multiplayer game, but one day after Naval Action is more or less done, I hope Game Labs considers the possibility of single player naval game sharing much of the combat module with NA. As for the whole "pve server vs pvp server" thing, I suggest making the Caribbean a PVP zone and the Pacific a PVE/exploration zone. Assets and characters unable to be transferred between the two in general, but with some Pacific only loot and Caribbean only loot trade-able between the two, allowing some interaction between the two groups and an unusual player driven trade option. That way everyone is on the same server and can chat to each other while still playing the game their own way. I'm unaware of if this is even technically possible however.
×
×
  • Create New...