Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Laik

Why people don't fight.

Recommended Posts

WOT can also be played easily in 15 minute chunks, which is not even remotely the case with NA. That is going to have a significant effect on how players approach the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of this devolves down to the Min/Max theory.    Everyone wants to minimize the bad stuff and maximize the good stuff.  If getting sunk is going to hurt, you have to have to have a reason that significantly outweighs the risk to get large number of players to participate on a regular basis.  And I'm not really talking about monetary rewards.

 

You can't give the victors huge monetary rewards as I think that would only make the situation worse.  There needs to be a strategic reason to fight and, in a perfect world, you'd have a relatively risk free way to fund that fight.  The second part is somewhat negotiable but the more you move in that direction, the more you open up pvp for the casual gamer. But, without a strategic reason to fight (and a reasonable chance of succeeding), you're sort of working against human nature when you try to force large numbers of people into pvp with a heavy death penalty. 

 

A lot of this stuff just hasn't been added to the game yet and hopefully a whole pile of new players jump starts the pvp situation even in the current state. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest raat

I think a lot of this devolves down to the Min/Max theory.    Everyone wants to minimize the bad stuff and maximize the good stuff.  If getting sunk is going to hurt, you have to have to have a reason that significantly outweighs the risk to get large number of players to participate on a regular basis.  And I'm not really talking about monetary rewards.

 

You can't give the victors huge monetary rewards as I think that would only make the situation worse.  There needs to be a strategic reason to fight and, in a perfect world, you'd have a relatively risk free way to fund that fight.  The second part is somewhat negotiable but the more you move in that direction, the more you open up pvp for the casual gamer. But, without a strategic reason to fight (and a reasonable chance of succeeding), you're sort of working against human nature when you try to force large numbers of people into pvp with a heavy death penalty. 

 

A lot of this stuff just hasn't been added to the game yet and hopefully a whole pile of new players jump starts the pvp situation even in the current state. 

 

Unfortunately, I agree with you.  People won't fight unless they feel they aren't really losing anything and/or they are strategically choosing to fight for some in-game agenda of theirs.

 

However, I hoped (perhaps naively) that certainly in an ALPHA testing phase that everyone here would realize THEY AREN'T LOSING ANYTHING...it'll be wiped.  You're just perhaps losing time.  But again, not really, because you've invested that time into acquiring something that you won't keep anyway.

 

I wish people would just put on their big boy pants and say hey, "PvP is fun and I don't mind losing, because it's a more thrilling fight than anything else in this game atm."

 

But you're right, people are too worried about losing...a ship dura that they will lose anyway when the next wipe happens.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume after that we're now both in agreement that a PVPer will contribute no more financially than a player playing as a merchant or a player farming NPCs as they're just as likely to buy the premiums and superficial items as the rest of us.

PVP'ers won't contribute more per person, I'm just assuming they are the largest group of potential NA players.

 

 

However, I hoped (perhaps naively) that certainly in an ALPHA testing phase that everyone here would realize THEY AREN'T LOSING ANYTHING...it'll be wiped.  You're just perhaps losing time.  But again, not really, because you've invested that time into acquiring something that you won't keep anyway.

That is exactly the thing the worries me. If it's like that among us why should it get any better?

For my part, the solution may already be there; just spam premium ships and take on any player that wants.

I wish people would just put on their big boy pants and say hey, "PvP is fun and I don't mind losing, because it's a more thrilling fight than anything else in this game atm."

You may remember I did that yesterday. I knew I would lose tagging those two trincs with friend otw, I didn't care. The feedback from the game mechanics: 146 gold, 152 xp, one surp dura lost and 6000 gold repair bill. In the current game economy that is not a slight slap on the wrist for being silly, it's a freaking carronade up my anus. What will happen when Prater's John Blow is presented with that?

I strongly dislike being coerced away from risky PVP. I might learn something from attacking a stronger enemy, I might have fun, they might have a bit of fun. How terrible...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, Sir, you are completely wrong.

 

Sorry sir, You can join any side you want if the two sides are not my own nation. I can join the side that have much much higher battle rating to kill the other side faster. I can join the lower side to help. But it is my decision. My statement remain right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, I hoped (perhaps naively) that certainly in an ALPHA testing phase that everyone here would realize THEY AREN'T LOSING ANYTHING...it'll be wiped.  You're just perhaps losing time.  But again, not really, because you've invested that time into acquiring something that you won't keep anyway.

 

I think it speaks to how deeply ingrained that min max thing is.  Even in a situation where we know we are going to lose all our stuff with the next wipe, losing it for the limited time till we would have it is enough to give players pause. And it kind of makes sense, if it takes you a few nights worth of shopping or farming to find\pay\transfer what you're looking for, a couple of duras equates to another night worth of shopping and farming, etc.

 

For me, part of the problem is I naively came in expecting Sea Trials type pvp with Open World thrown in as a bonus.  But, by it's persistent nature, Open World is kind of a totally different beast.  Sailing and shooting skills will be the same between both types of pvp.  But there's this huge meta game surrounding the pvp in OW.  Which changes the overarching dynamic which then has an inevitable impact on the low level tactics used in battles.  IE always running when you're outnumbered in OW versus sticking it out for god and country when your SOL disco'd in Sea Trials because, who cares, it doesn't cost anything and you might even win.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A motivating factor could be promotion if you sink or take enemy prizes and demotion if you fail to engage or shy away from battle too often.  In theory your encounters would be recorded in the Log, so the Admiralty (or equivalent) would know what occurred when you returned to port.  This can be simulated in game with a promotion/demotion dynamic.  You fill your patrol quota or else.  Your quota should include a certain amount of PvP's as well as NPCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you got something like 2 free dura's per day, ppl would be a lot more likely to pvp...ofc then you're gonna have the ppl that complain pvp should have permanent consequences...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...ofc then you're gonna have the ppl that complain pvp should have permanent consequences...

Why should the few ruin it for the many?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I guess now the question is: Who are going to be the better men by being the first to stop this nonsense?

No open world pvp game can hope to get by on an honor system.  Its just not going to happen.  People will always gank, if they can.

 

I take these as maxims:

 

1.  All players are extremely risk averse.  This risk includes not just loss of a ship, but also time, pride, national standing, and just the sick feeling of getting griefed/trash talked/let down their friends/etc.

2.  The majority of people don't want to 1v1 or other high stakes PvP.  75%+

3.  Those who do are extremely adept at it, and will hunt and gank people as long as the mechanics allow it.  They do this not for sadism, but because that's what the game is -- hunting, stalking, killing.

4.  No game can ever be successful by forcing people to PvP who don't want to.

5.  But, a decent chunk of the non PVP crowd will participate in pvp activity in proper conditions (good rewards, their clan/friends need them, team play, etc)

 

So given that, it seems to be we can conclude:

 

1.  The hardcore pvp crowd (25%, which includes me btw) want active zones, lots of good balanced fights, but above all action with limited restrictions.

2.  The nonpvp crowd wants to avoid getting pointlessly ganked.  If they are, they will stop playing.  So don't force it on them.

3.  But if properly rewarded, the nonpvp crowd won't see all pvp activity as a negative.

 

For example -- reward pve players with extra experience and money for playing in pvp areas -- completely optional.  If games like GW2 are any indication, this lures in a small portion of the population (10%, who tend to grow into pvpers once they get comfortable).  Some people will chose to take a risk.  Same with trading or exploring.  There should be some limited opportunity to play alone in safety...but if you want the big bucks, you need to take a risk.  How much risk?  If eve is any guide, give them 3-5x as much income per hour.  It needs to be MUCH higher than actual risk -- even if they regularly lose ships they need to come out ahead of playing in safe zones.  If you think about it, that's the idea for everyone.  Lots of risk/loss, but lots of money.  Other ways to incentivize people to go into pvp zones include missions, doing things their friends need (ie, helping ship stuff the clan needs to build cool ships), helping friends or their country, and so on.  Each of these needs to be carefully looked at to coax as many people into voluntarily assuming the risks as possible.  You should also give players great rewards for protecting another player from attack -- for example national patrol fleets might get a cut of profits earned by shippers.  You should do this KNOWING that even still, many people will refuse all pvp.  And that's ok.  As long as enough are willing to participate that you have traders/explorers/pve/casuals in zones, the game will be healthy.

 

Finally, I firmly believe some game mechanic has to be in place to prevent completely one sided fights.  I don't believe this mechanic can be a game mechanic, per se, such as speed, camo, and so on.  The reason why I think this is that the gankers will always be better equipped and better informed.  Instead, I think there just needs to be some hard rules -- if they outnumber you worse than 2:1, or have X% better ships, or so on they can surrender with no penalty.  It needs to be a draconian denial of one sided ganks to completely prevent them, or else they will become the only thing that happens.  The reason is back to maxim #1 -- pvpers fear risk too.  Not just the risk of a ship, but the fear of wasted time, humiliation, and so on.  Better to constantly gank noobs 15vs1 than risk an equal 1v1.  And that's exactly what literally every open world pvp game becomes. 

 

So what about the elite pvpers?  First off, they need to be funneled into constructive activity.  Zero rewards for ganks.  A hard barrier to prevent ganks and griefing, even if they want to.  Then on top of that give them reasons to take risks in pvp.  Leaderboards are fun, so are personal stats they can share if they want.  Very high money/experience rewards for equal fights should be in place, especially in group fights.  And that's just for the hardcores.  Casual pvpers should get some reward for making a valiant effort.  They should be rewarded for doing things that aren't directly winning but still pvp (such as escorting traders).  They should never be made to feel like their presence in a pvp zone hurts their team/clan/reputation/wallet, even if they lose more than half of the time.

 

TL;DR: 

 

1.  Heavily, heavily incentivize and encourage casual pvpers and pvers to voluntarily assume risk and go into pvp areas.

2.  Accept that some people don't want PvP regardless, and that's ok.

3.  PvPers should be highly encouraged to fight each other, win or lose.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PVP'ers won't contribute more per person, I'm just assuming they are the largest group of potential NA players..

 

They could be but then why would there be so much excitement over an open world? If all players really want is PVP, like yourself, then they'll be all about the skirmish mode, so there's little need imposing the same matchmaking onto the open world. Players quickly got bored of the sea trials because they need more than PVP to stay interested.

 

ofc then you're gonna have the ppl that complain pvp should have permanent consequences...

 

In a skirmish mode/arena game, no it shouldn't.... In a open world with economy, trade and crafting, yes, it should, in fact you could go as far as saying it has to have it to work...

 

They are making an MMO, not 2 arena modes aren't they?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.  Heavily, heavily incentivize and encourage casual pvpers and pvers to voluntarily assume risk and go into pvp areas.

2.  Accept that some people don't want PvP regardless, and that's ok.

3.  PvPers should be highly encouraged to fight each other, win or lose.

 

do this and we dont need a pve server. we just need some good ideas how to implement it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I'm not in the game, so I'm just going to be using made up numbers, if anyone has actual numbers please insert if you want)

 

Scenario:  I'm making a trade run from Port A to Port B.  Actual cost of goods: 100.  Cost of dura for ship: 200

 

Why not allow me to surrender my goods (hard code surrender into game) instead of fighting?  If I know I'm going to lose before it begins, it is cheaper for me to just surrender.  Once, I've surrendered, I'm immune from being pulled into a fight for X number of minutes.

 

The goods are divided up among the attacking fleet captains.  The fewer captains the more per share.  The trader is immune from every captain who got a share for the time allotted above.  At the very least, it would incentivize captains to run in smaller groups in order to get a larger share which increases "gold per hour".  If the opposite happens and captains create ever increasing fleets (they aren't concerned with gold per hour), then more safe trade routes will open because there will be a higher concentration of ships in a particular place (there could even be an Eve like function that lets captains know where the fights are happening and those areas could be avoided).

 

If the mechanic that pulls ships in or the contract system get implemented, this would still allow for the attackers to get a fight (whether NPCs or contracted players), but it would give the trader a cost effective way to go about his business (which is not only realistic but good for gaming).

 

Just some quick thoughts

Edited by John Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- More PvP will take place when the playerbase gets much higher soon ( OW release to the rest of the pre-orders)

 

With that said, i really do think, that right now, without economy , without siegable ports, without a default player base online like 500 players, it is really early to demand changes and come up with stuff to encourage it. Because encouraging it right now, is taking the whole thing as it is right now. And that is without all the extras.

 

There will be a skirmish thinghy, there will be more players online on average pretty soon. Thus much more to do.

So in my opinion, it is not the case whether people want to PvP or not, it is the case to actually  prevent ganking and having patience.

Because we have been spoiled with sea trials, but OW is not sea trials, it is something different, and far from complete.

 

I fully agree, that PvP could be made more interesting, but i am also realistic and right now, we do not even have 5% ( made up number) of the total number of pre-order players online of an average basis. So i still believe, that the whole PvP thing will balance itself out pretty soon when there are more players and therefore more ships with brains to fight. 

 

My $0.02

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PVP'ers won't contribute more per person, I'm just assuming they are the largest group of potential NA players.

 

 

That is exactly the thing the worries me. If it's like that among us why should it get any better?

For my part, the solution may already be there; just spam premium ships and take on any player that wants.

You may remember I did that yesterday. I knew I would lose tagging those two trincs with friend otw, I didn't care. The feedback from the game mechanics: 146 gold, 152 xp, one surp dura lost and 6000 gold repair bill. In the current game economy that is not a slight slap on the wrist for being silly, it's a freaking carronade up my anus. What will happen when Prater's John Blow is presented with that?

I strongly dislike being coerced away from risky PVP. I might learn something from attacking a stronger enemy, I might have fun, they might have a bit of fun. How terrible...

 

This.... If loosing PVP Loss: -1 dura (for a Trinc that is -12k gold) -6k repair bill, gold gain 146g + 152xp

 

If Winning (and in best case you manage to capture enemy ship not sink it) + lets say 300 gold and 300 xp + 6k gold from selling captured ship

 

 

That means Net gain for the community from PVP will be some -12k gold, each time a player kills another player in PVP.

 

..taken this a bit further. If players would only play PVP the community as a whole would be sailing in a Lynx becasue they would not be able to afford anything else.

 

Net gain (that is potential win - potential loss from PVP must be positive to have an insentive to play PvP)

 

regards

KM

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could be but then why would there be so much excitement over an open world? If all players really want is PVP, like yourself, then they'll be all about the skirmish mode...

If I have limited time, sure I'll skirmish. I would like to see the OW become as fun as possible = plenty PVP. I don't understand why PVP incentives breaks everything else!?

 

- More PvP will take place when the playerbase gets much higher soon...

It might. But I fear it's closely tied to player psychology reacting to the current penalties and won't change significantly as other things are thrown into the mix. If you're right I'm happy too.

***

I've started looking for PVP fights where the other guy has some advantage in order to bypass his or their fear of loss. The guy in the pics talked to me and was reasonable but didn't want to risk his trinc. I choose not to blame him, he just reacts logically to the current system. Even with an advantage, it's always better to farm bots. Fuck bots!

oqCLtoe.png

F7980RC.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest raat

I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for that player.  I'm going to have to hunt French Trincomalees now.  That's just disgraceful in my opinion.  It may be harsh, but there's a reason why my ship is named the USS Non Plebeiis (No Plebs)... :P

Edited by Raatha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I have limited time, sure I'll skirmish. I would like to see the OW become as fun as possible = plenty PVP. I don't understand why PVP incentives breaks everything else!?

 

They don't... The right incentives, like admiralty orders and need for food, crew and resources will improve everything else because they work in an MMO.

 

There is NO WAY to incentivise more PVP by rewards and have an organic MMO with crafting and trade etc. It works in WoT because it's only an arena game..

 

If we start rewarding players even when they lose it does break everything. If you reward players exponentially by BR for damage done they'll suicide derp their way through the ratings until it stops working and then they'll gank the suiciders. If you reward them for kills, they'll still run from fights where they're outnumbered.

 

They won't risk losing their ship just for XP as they'll not want to grind back up (or lose their ship they're attached to, have just renamed and customised) and if they don't have to grind back up we might as well be playing an arena style game...

 

If you want a game that rewards a loss, it has to be arena style, not MMO. Maybe the devs are to blame for this confusion as they've added so many arena style mechanics that don't belong in an MMO, not least sea trials, that some players have come to expect arena style PVP ut it's fact.

 

Admiralty orders can force players to fight or be reprimanded, they can give players a ship to fight in so they aren't risking their own. They can reward you when you lose and give you a feeling of accomplishment even when the enemy flee. Until this happens console  yourself with the fact that there'll always be a skirmish mode to fall back on. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If at least equip guns was free (or caped ships with their highest heavy guns it can carry) or We could sell cannons or modules... I could to have captured ships for PvP.

 

Now, capture a ship like frigate is 8000 gold equip the 18 pounders in her (6k or 8k gold for the two chasers guns is not worth it.). 8k gold is too many effort earn for lose a ship in a 5 minute duel PvP. And I also prefer gain gold for sell her.

 

Jodgi, You can sign a pact where you promise not fight until sink the other ship. If you can accept duels in inferiority, I am sure that you can accept a non sinking/capturing pact too. Obviously, the ships must go without custom modules... they are too expensive too.

 

But, in the way sailing to duel PvP, I can have encounters with other players without honour this pact.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't... The right incentives, like admiralty orders and need for food, crew and resources will improve everything else because they work in an MMO.

 

There is NO WAY to incentivise more PVP by rewards and have an organic MMO with crafting and trade etc. It works in WoT because it's only an arena game..

 

If we start rewarding players even when they lose it does break everything. If you reward players exponentially by BR for damage done they'll suicide derp their way through the ratings until it stops working and then they'll gank the suiciders. If you reward them for kills, they'll still run from fights where they're outnumbered.

 

They won't risk losing their ship just for XP as they'll not want to grind back up (or lose their ship they're attached to, have just renamed and customised) and if they don't have to grind back up we might as well be playing an arena style game...

 

If you want a game that rewards a loss, it has to be arena style, not MMO. Maybe the devs are to blame for this confusion as they've added so many arena style mechanics that don't belong in an MMO, not least sea trials, that some players have come to expect arena style PVP ut it's fact.

 

Admiralty orders can force players to fight or be reprimanded, they can give players a ship to fight in so they aren't risking their own. They can reward you when you lose and give you a feeling of accomplishment even when the enemy flee. Until this happens console  yourself with the fact that there'll always be a skirmish mode to fall back on. 

It does NOT break everything to not make PVP a huge net loss even if winning 50% of the battles.

 

Take a look at the majority of MMO s out there with PVP. Most of them, the vast majority in fact ghave a pure net gain from PVP. That is zero loss from death in PVP and an XP gain, sometimes rewards in form of items as well. And that is without breaking the economy at all. Take a look at GW2. It is NOT an arena game. It has a huge PVP in form of World Vs World where the only loss from death is re-spawn timer. ..Arch age (open PVP everywhere -re spawn timer only) Perfect World (open PvP) etc etc

 

I would like you to develop on your assumption that a net gain from PVP means a broken economy.... Yes I you would give a player a good reward (net gain) from suicide runs that could lead to unwanted player behavior. Bur right now the issue is not that. The issue is that the Net gain from Winning is so much smaller than the loss from loosing that you will go broke in a few fights even if you win more than 50% of the engagements. 

 

If people do loose a fight and sink they should loose gold (you sink the enemy but the repair cost is higher than the gold from damagee). I agree. But right now you could actually loose gold even if you win the fight, and if you sink one time you will have to win about 7-9 times before you made up for the loss. (and that is if you actually manage to capture the enemy ship and not only sink it)

 

As long as there is a net loss from suicide runs nothing will break just because the overall net gain is positive from PvP.

Edited by -KM-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't... The right incentives, like admiralty orders and need for food, crew and resources will improve everything else because they work in an MMO.

 

There is NO WAY to incentivise more PVP by rewards and have an organic MMO with crafting and trade etc. It works in WoT because it's only an arena game..

 

If we start rewarding players even when they lose it does break everything. If you reward players exponentially by BR for damage done they'll suicide derp their way through the ratings until it stops working and then they'll gank the suiciders. If you reward them for kills, they'll still run from fights where they're outnumbered.

 

They won't risk losing their ship just for XP as they'll not want to grind back up (or lose their ship they're attached to, have just renamed and customised) and if they don't have to grind back up we might as well be playing an arena style game...

 

If you want a game that rewards a loss, it has to be arena style, not MMO. Maybe the devs are to blame for this confusion as they've added so many arena style mechanics that don't belong in an MMO, not least sea trials, that some players have come to expect arena style PVP ut it's fact.

 

Admiralty orders can force players to fight or be reprimanded, they can give players a ship to fight in so they aren't risking their own. They can reward you when you lose and give you a feeling of accomplishment even when the enemy flee. Until this happens console  yourself with the fact that there'll always be a skirmish mode to fall back on. 

I think you cannot be certain that it will break everything. 

One simple but effective solution could be is somekind of

PvP ranking system:

 

Win a pvp fight with 1vs1 = 0.5 ranking point ( because its more likely that when you allow players enough points for duels, it will become exploitable.)

Win a PvP fight with 2vs2/3vs3 = 1 ranking point

Win a PvP fight with 4vs4/5vs5 = 1,5 ranking point

Win a PvP fight with more than 6 = 2 ranking points

------------------------

 

This will allow more fleet versus fleet fights, I dont believe in rewarding losing players other than gold and xp. Winning should be the only focus.

This will ensure that the real PvP'ers will try to balance the fleet fights, and lets say when the PvP is off by 2 or 3 more ships on one side you will get negative ranking points, to prevent ganking also. Offcourse everything needs to be balanced with BR and such. Maybe a special PvP battle match could be implemented so that no Ai will join and stuff.

 

Ranking point rewards:

25 ranking points = 10.000 gold ( maybe some free xp? )

50 ranking points = 20.000 gold ( maybe some free xp? )

100 ranking points = free outpost + gold?

150 ranking points = Free ship to purchase  available, according to your rank ( can only be a ship that can be manned with full crew)

 

Offcourse, Every number is just based on gutt feeling, but i think you can see where i am going with this.

More possibilities for PvP'ing are:

 

- Monthly based PvP ranking points system with nice rewards ( modules/ recources ( when implemented)

 

----------------------------------

 

But afterall, this is a suggestion for how the game is at this very moment, and surely to my opinion it would make ganking more useless and only troll friendly, but over time people will know which players will be the gankers, because real PvP'ing will be rewarded by points which will give you stuff:) But the game as it is right now is with a low playerbase and far from complete. So im just trying to think along with you guys here, but my initial opinion still remains, i think we all should make conclusions when the average playerbase that is online, is around 200 players?.

 

Regards,

Konali

Edited by Konali89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a look at the majority of MMO s out there with PVP. Most of them, the vast majority in fact ghave a pure net gain from PVP.

 

Do they have weapons (ships) you must at least repair, often lose every time you PVP? do they have to be crafted by players or taken in PVP in the first place?

 

How are they tracking progression? Is it by the level of kit (ships) you have on your person or is it by leader boards and XP levels?

 

As long as there is a net loss from suicide runs nothing will break just because the overall net gain is positive from PvP.

 

The overall gain from PVP has to be positive, this isn't the issue. What you can't have is no loss when you lose, like some are advocating. It doesn't just break behaviour it impinges on every aspect of the game .....and with loss comes the behaviour we have at the minute, running at the very sight of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Economy

  • If you lose a ship it means you lost the durability - ship should not be repaired, it's brand new - just lost 1 durability
  • Rewards are significantly increased
  • Money rewards for PVP are doubled
  • Several bugs with XP calculations are fixed
It's moving in the right direction.

Hey! People! Leave those bots alone!

All in all they're just some numbers on the serv-er

daaadaaadaaa.. tararatt tarraratt ta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...