Kankou Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 Let's knock off 10 years from the current scale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Lynneth' timestamp='1332893371' post='2943879'] I like Lyn's scale. I'm biased. Sue me. [/quote] Yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanis777 Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Lynneth' timestamp='1332893371' post='2943879'] I like my scale. I'm biased. Sue me. [/quote] What he said. Seriously, these OOC discussions are facepalming for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacharth Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 There's no doubt that back in the time before logarithms, all that math, and the vague idea of future tech, there was peace for tech. It's my fault for changing the tech system to something horrible, so in multiple ways, I agree to going back to a scale of this type. However, I disagree with making advancements so large as 500 tech. The fastest people can advance is 600 tech a month, and that's if they have the right wonders, and a good trade circle system. But for those with less than perfect situations, this tech scale makes advancement into a modern nation a multi-year process. I say make the tech cap somewhere reasonable at 7.5k. Roughly 3% of nations have over 10k tech, and would make the number far less for CNRP. Less than 10% of nations (over 50 tech) have more than 7.5k tech. Makes the process a whole lot more balanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332892578' post='2943874'] No. I dislike this concept and I am thoroughly in favor of the logarithmic time scale used. Back when I was a smaller nation, technology was effectively a bullying option of larger nations. It was never used to add interesting flavors to the battlefield, it was instead used as an instant, 'I win, you lose.' affair. Role-play was ignored as stats were the all powerful end-all. One was constantly left trying to argue for technology scavenged from some obscure Wikipage in an attempt to have any weapons that weren't considered as useless as a musket, but at the end of the day, very little of your best strategies meant anything compared to what simply came down to a stats comparison affair. The logarithmic scale grants players at any stage in the game the option of just jumping and focusing on the role-play rather then focusing in on the stats. Your game stats do provide some value overall, but it places an upper limit on what you can do and what you can do is in the happy realm of actual 'fantasy' role-play. You can actually imagine the future technologies of your nation rather then having to grab someone else's. This isn't history role-play, it's fantasy role-play and determining the various components that make up your nation if you please is what makes it so particularly fun. The above basically limits everything to essentially the cold war - so if you want to do it, why not just make a cold war era RP? -------------------- [u]Also, as a side note. While everyone happily uses them, I'd like to note that neither the F-22 nor the F-35 are in full use at the current stage, nor does that look like it will change by 2015. If my little technophiles would like to use this tech system - you can basically can the use of those fighters. You're stuck with Gen 4.5 at best.[/u] F-22s and F-35s would only be in testing, but you would never be able to use them to stock your air-force. Back to F-15s and F-16s for all XD. But as I've noted, I've enjoyed reading some of the far out space exploration bits by Lynneth and some of the other crazy technological ideas developed by other smaller nations which otherwise would be impossible with this scale. Effectively, with this scale, you're better off not even having a military until you have 5,000 tech - that way you can garner the sympathy card perhaps of some benevolent super-tech nation that wishes to intervene upon your behalf. [/quote] The point is that the back and forth 'whining' that people tend to hate, the arguments, more than half of them tend to be over some futuristic piece of technology... Oh, and all the space stuff wouldn't be scrapped anyway. Are people not paying attention or something? [quote name='Lynneth' timestamp='1332893371' post='2943879'] I like my scale. I'm biased. Sue me. [/quote] *Sues* I can see some of the objections to this, but those that flat out simply deny it? Come on people, you have to admit the tech system needs fixed SOMEHOW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332892578' post='2943874'] [u]Also, as a side note. While everyone happily uses them, I'd like to note that neither the F-22 nor the F-35 are in full use at the current stage, nor does that look like it will change by 2015. If my little technophiles would like to use this tech system - you can basically can the use of those fighters. You're stuck with Gen 4.5 at best.[/u] F-22s and F-35s would only be in testing, but you would never be able to use them to stock your air-force. [/quote] The F-22 is in full use at its current stage. The only reason we don't see it replacing the entire air force is money-related. To the scale: I'm in favor of dropping the cap to 2020 from the current system, or going with this idea with lesser tech levels for the tiers. Edited March 28, 2012 by Voodoo Nova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarfef Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1332902582' post='2943967'] The F-22 is in full use at its current stage. The only reason we don't see it replacing the entire air force is money-related. To the scale: I'm in favor of dropping the cap to 2020 from the current system, or going with this idea with lesser tech levels for the tiers. [/quote] Money related reasons are also why we don't do a lot of things. Money is just as much a function of technology as everything else - you have to wait for the technology to increase so that costs decrease. I believe that if we went here, the F-22 and it's F-35 sibling need to be banned as well (outside of the US, most of the planet which is at 2012 tech can't build them anyways). It becomes a kind of god-plane that wipes out any other type of aircraft from the sky in total without taking losses. It the very definition of a god-mod in role-playing, whether it's true in reality or not. When your airplane can wipe out an entire squadron of F-15s without taking a loss - that's ridiculous. This entirely change to the scale brings back the days of old where you had this single upper class of advanced tech users who did as they pleased and used the lower tech nations as their whipping boys - it also brings back the days of boringness where EVERYONE has nothing but the latest US fighter and no one has anything but US fighters. I really really really, dislike the idea of pulling everything back tech wise because I very much enjoy the technological aspect of the game as it is - it's a step forward. If you do need to do this though, you can go with the system mentioned - it's over too wide a time scale and it grants too much of an advantage to nations in the super-tech range. You'd need a logarithmic scale like Lynneth made, but with a lower end-point. Once again though, that's extremely boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted March 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 We live in a more militarized world. Again I'm fine with either tech scale, I'm at the top of both. But you can't complain about the F-22 when only one nation also has super carriers but no one calls for those to be restricted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac MatthewII Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) Honestly there is a huge difference between 1965 and 1999. There is also a huge difference between 1999 and 2012-what is under construction. Really things are ok the way they are. Edited March 28, 2012 by Isaac MatthewII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 Alternately, we could stop pushing the scale forward when we hit a new year. Poof! Problem solved, and everyone has time to adjust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarfef Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Subtleknifewielder' timestamp='1332908062' post='2944093'] Alternately, we could stop pushing the scale forward when we hit a new year. Poof! Problem solved, and everyone has time to adjust. [/quote] What does that necessarily change by the way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanis777 Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332904429' post='2944005'] Money related reasons are also why we don't do a lot of things. Money is just as much a function of technology as everything else - you have to wait for the technology to increase so that costs decrease. I believe that if we went here, the F-22 and it's F-35 sibling need to be banned as well (outside of the US, most of the planet which is at 2012 tech can't build them anyways). It becomes a kind of god-plane that wipes out any other type of aircraft from the sky in total without taking losses. It the very definition of a god-mod in role-playing, whether it's true in reality or not. When your airplane can wipe out an entire squadron of F-15s without taking a loss - that's ridiculous. This entirely change to the scale brings back the days of old where you had this single upper class of advanced tech users who did as they pleased and used the lower tech nations as their whipping boys - it also brings back the days of boringness where EVERYONE has nothing but the latest US fighter and no one has anything but US fighters. I really really really, dislike the idea of pulling everything back tech wise because I very much enjoy the technological aspect of the game as it is - it's a step forward. If you do need to do this though, you can go with the system mentioned - it's over too wide a time scale and it grants too much of an advantage to nations in the super-tech range. You'd need a logarithmic scale like Lynneth made, but with a lower end-point. Once again though, that's extremely boring. [/quote] You realize that money isn't an issue in CNRP, thus your point is moot. Just an fyi. Also economic size is also not an issue in CNRP, thus anyone with enough RP will RP a strength like the US by natural posting. It's almost like a law of nature. I think everyone want some "fairness" to the system... well, guess what, this world is not fair. Everybody wants to flex their muscles, but the biggest can, and still call the shots, both militarily and politically. It comes down in CNRP about hashing out the details of war, people dealing with their opponents with a balance of "Oh man, he got me with excellent tactics and I lost a ton of guys!" and "How can I counter?", instead of "LOL, I lost little amount of dudes due to my stats IG." The tech scale is fine, there is nothing wrong with it. Really. Sure, there is hazy tech being conjured up between 2020 and 2030, but that's only up to the upper tier to deal with. There is, and probably should be more fighting amongst the lower tiers amongst themselves, but I guess the treaty web is a PITA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Tanis777' timestamp='1332909234' post='2944115'] Sure, there is hazy tech being conjured up between 2020 and 2030, but that's only up to the upper tier to deal with. There is, and probably should be more fighting amongst the lower tiers amongst themselves, but I guess the treaty web is a PITA. [/quote] I have to disagree with this part. Whatever tech does come up is something everyone has to deal with. Whether it is militarization of already existing technology, expansion of abilities beyond what has been so far confirmed, mass production of material which under any normal circumstances (short of total war) would be impossible, or just pure innovation, it is something everyone should be able to consider and challenge if necessary. The main problem with this is that there is a tendency of most people (whether high or low tier) to think challenges to technology equals an attack on that person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanis777 Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1332909780' post='2944124'] I have to disagree with this part. Whatever tech does come up is something everyone has to deal with. Whether it is militarization of already existing technology, expansion of abilities beyond what has been so far confirmed, mass production of material which under any normal circumstances (short of total war) would be impossible, or just pure innovation, it is something everyone should be able to consider and challenge if necessary. The main problem with this is that there is a tendency of most people (whether high or low tier) to think challenges to technology equals an attack on that person. [/quote] The only people that really have to deal with it is a) people looking to possible war with said person, b) people that have nothing better to do but nitpick everything. I think it's fine to challenge; however, everything has a possible counter. People have to deal with it mainly because they have to enter their two cents in, when honestly, you don't. In real life, most technology requires a lot of money to get anything from the drawing board to mass production. In regards to militarization of existing technology, this issue is really moot due to the lack of economic consideration in the game. Anything in existence is up to whatever your IG abilities are and meets to the guidelines already set out. Both natural resources and economics are placed out of CNRP specifically for all the reasons stated you just stated, to in essence make the impossible, well, more possible. Since CNRP is in a constant state of militarization, mass production of military gear is a given, as long as it pertains to your IG stat levels. I just consider this an extension of bickering on economics and resources towards tech and people wanting some cool stuff down the pipeline. Sure, their will be discussion on the feasibility of the technology, but please, for arguments sake, lay out your cases, and to cover yourself... a legion of e-lawyers. EDIT: Get it in your heads people, everyone has infinite money to buy whatever their current tech is per the timescale, the earth has infinite resources in this game. Goodbye realism. End of story. Edited March 28, 2012 by Tanis777 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332909097' post='2944113'] What does that necessarily change by the way? [/quote] It means a natural progression of time will mean we eventually end up playing with 'present' tech, without having to adjust the tech scale. At all. [quote name='Tanis777' timestamp='1332911217' post='2944143'] [b]The only people that really have to deal with it is a) people looking to possible war with said person, b) people that have nothing better to do but nitpick everything. I think it's fine to challenge; however, everything has a possible counter. People have to deal with it mainly because they have to enter their two cents in, when honestly, you don't. [/b] In real life, most technology requires a lot of money to get anything from the drawing board to mass production. In regards to militarization of existing technology, this issue is really moot due to the lack of economic consideration in the game. Anything in existence is up to whatever your IG abilities are and meets to the guidelines already set out. Both natural resources and economics are placed out of CNRP specifically for all the reasons stated you just stated, to in essence make the impossible, well, more possible. Since CNRP is in a constant state of militarization, mass production of military gear is a given, as long as it pertains to your IG stat levels. I just consider this an extension of bickering on economics and resources towards tech and people wanting some cool stuff down the pipeline. Sure, their will be discussion on the feasibility of the technology, but please, for arguments sake, lay out your cases, and to cover yourself... a legion of e-lawyers. EDIT: Get it in your heads people, everyone has infinite money to buy whatever their current tech is per the timescale, the earth has infinite resources in this game. Goodbye realism. End of story. [/quote] Bolded the part that is mistaken. Because you left out the larger applicable portion--those that are not looking for a war with said larger tier nations, and yet get one. So really, in essence, anyone at any time could potentially have to 'deal with it.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac MatthewII Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 If you face a Sabre against an F-16 it is a lot different then an F-16 against a 5th gen air craft.Sure the top dogs will remain the top dogs. But the hold on tech would be a lot different. SInce you can have it in game I think it is accurate that you can have it in CNRP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) I always wondered how smaller nations manage to assemble the economic basis to produce their stuff. There is a reason the US produces F-22s and the rest of the planet has at best 4.5th generation and 5th generation prototypes. But that's still something we have to accept, as this is CNRP. Economy is not a matter. [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332904429' post='2944005'] Money related reasons are also why we don't do a lot of things. Money is just as much a function of technology as everything else - you have to wait for the technology to increase so that costs decrease. I believe that if we went here, the F-22 and it's F-35 sibling need to be banned as well (outside of the US, most of the planet which is at 2012 tech can't build them anyways). It becomes a kind of god-plane that wipes out any other type of aircraft from the sky in total without taking losses. It the very definition of a god-mod in role-playing, whether it's true in reality or not. When your airplane can wipe out an entire squadron of F-15s without taking a loss - that's ridiculous. This entirely change to the scale brings back the days of old where you had this single upper class of advanced tech users who did as they pleased and used the lower tech nations as their whipping boys - it also brings back the days of boringness where EVERYONE has nothing but the latest US fighter and no one has anything but US fighters. I really really really, dislike the idea of pulling everything back tech wise because I very much enjoy the technological aspect of the game as it is - it's a step forward. If you do need to do this though, you can go with the system mentioned - it's over too wide a time scale and it grants too much of an advantage to nations in the super-tech range. You'd need a logarithmic scale like Lynneth made, but with a lower end-point. Once again though, that's extremely boring. [/quote] About the F-22 and the F-35, I have to say, they are hard to beat, but not a god-mod plane. If someone has better tech, well, they have it. If I send in MiG-35s against MiG 15s, it'll end just as bad, for the same reason of more tech by one person. Not to say that if you cannot into 5th gen, just use 4.5th gen, if you have enough tech for that. A Su-30 is not completely hopeless. It naturally will take higher losses, but if used right (and that is the main problem), it can inflict losses too. Especially against the F-35, which isn't as near to the F-22 in terms of capability as you may think. But the point highlights that it will always allow for techstomps, regardless of it is between a F-22 and a MiG-35, between a MiG-35 and a MiG-15, a MiG-15 and a LaGG-3, a LaGG-3 and an Anatra DS or an Anatra DS and a Mongolfier. The only thing that changes is that someone who achieves air superiority with a F-22 will be able to throw FOABs at your troops, someone with LaGG-3s will sweep over you with Shturmoviks and an Anatra DS will maybe throw a few hand grenades. I'm all for limiting our tech at 1945. Just enough to have the first jet engines for high-tech nations and nukes. No more missile spam (launching loads of V-2s doesn't save you anything), no more lolnuking without air superiority, no ETC, no railguns, no battle suits, no lolstealth and no loldetection. Back then we know the usefulness of stuff, given Martens complaint in the other topic, make the AA wonder an extensive FlaK system, the Fallout Shelters can be the Maginot line (come on, the Maginot line is just as retarded and useless as the Fallout shelters ingame) and every less tech nation can try to have a reasonable chance if they can pull off a Winter War scenario. It'd be awesome. (Though I bet even then we will debate wether the Hortens was the worlds first stealth plane or not, so I'm for banning it, because it never reached operational status). Edited March 28, 2012 by Evangeline Anovilis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Minister Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 I think we should go back to the 0-500 tech=third world nation, 501-1499=middle tier and +1,500=modern nation that can RP whatever him or her wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarfef Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) Maybe we should actually implement a economic limitations. Edean already has formulas and I'm not entirely opposed to throwing them out there: National Population = IG Population x 300 National GDP = DailyTaxCollection x 30 x 1000 Tax Returns = GDP x IncomeTax% Time Scale, 1 month OOC = 1 year IC (you get the above funds to play around with every year - character aging and whatnot can take less or more time) This might seem like it grants a lot of money, but unless you spend your entire Taxation on your your military budget and all of your military budget on planes, it really doesn't amount to that much, which is why Edean has been forced to request export planes, not even buying much in the way of MBTs for it's forces (only hummer transports or maybe splurging on a helicopter) and what not. That's only going to get worse over time as most of the economic routes have been cut off because of certain wars and species limitations through the north. When you actually have to run an economic budget, the game gets a tad bit more complicated, but significantly more fun. Maybe what needs to be said is that we really really really need to have IG limitations on economics. ---------------------- As far as LOLTech - I also have another idea. I used to GM in a few other nation games over on another page, N&S: War & Peace, N&S: New Era and took on a similar position in N&S: Reborn. In all of these games, in order to use some kind of custom unit, you had to have it approved by a GM and to limit GM spamming you were limited to how many new technologies you could produce in game - about ten slots there (with far fewer players), with growth over time. So then, one possible way of getting around this, would be to use a slot based approval system rather then trying to use a tech based system. A nation starts out with three total slots, this can be grown by having their IG tech raised by an additional 1000 tech. Without using a slot, let's say any nation can utilize any known weapons up until present time that any nations outside the US could field, or any US plane in service up till 1995 to make things more even (avoiding LOL US wins - you lose). Using a slot however, you can develop a special technology up until the year 2035. So, maybe some special stealth fighter or bomber or what not. Of course, these techs are particularly powerful, but EVERYONE can have them (their particular schtick) and on top of it all, they can sell their units to other nations, making weapons trade at least far more feasible and nations more interdependent. One could also work on stuff outside of one's military with these slots as well - it's all a matter of story. So that would place all game players on an even playing field tech wise, forcing them to limit their submissions to something they believe a GM would approve of and it would even force you to consider carefully what type of units you wish to develop - because you're limited by tech levels. Edited March 28, 2012 by Zarfef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332957264' post='2944393'] Maybe we should actually implement a economic limitations. Edean already has formulas and I'm not entirely opposed to throwing them out there: National Population = IG Population x 300 National GDP = DailyTaxCollection x 30 x 1000 Tax Returns = GDP x IncomeTax% Time Scale, 1 month OOC = 1 year IC (you get the above funds to play around with every year - character aging and whatnot can take less or more time) This might seem like it grants a lot of money, but unless you spend your entire Taxation on your your military budget and all of your military budget on planes, it really doesn't amount to that much, which is why Edean has been forced to request export planes, not even buying much in the way of MBTs for it's forces (only hummer transports or maybe splurging on a helicopter) and what not. That's only going to get worse over time as most of the economic routes have been cut off because of certain wars and species limitations through the north. When you actually have to run an economic budget, the game gets a tad bit more complicated, but significantly more fun. Maybe what needs to be said is that we really really really need to have IG limitations on economics. [/quote] Sorry, but NO. Someone already dared to approach the techscale, an economic system will just stir up a great load of trouble and bickering and whatnot. It won't get implemented, regardless of you, Kankou or whoever else proposes it in any form. Not to mention that there aren't many compromising their secrecy around their financial ressources ingame. And the timescale is the absolute NO here. I wouldn't wonder if you get stoned for this post. [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332957264' post='2944393'] As far as LOLTech - I also have another idea. I used to GM in a few other nation games over on another page, N&S: War & Peace, N&S: New Era and took on a similar position in N&S: Reborn. In all of these games, in order to use some kind of custom unit, you had to have it approved by a GM and to limit GM spamming you were limited to how many new technologies you could produce in game - about ten slots there (with far fewer players), with growth over time. So then, one possible way of getting around this, would be to use a slot based approval system rather then trying to use a tech based system. A nation starts out with three total slots, this can be grown by having their IG tech raised by an additional 1000 tech. Without using a slot, let's say any nation can utilize any known weapons up until present time that any nations outside the US could field, or any US plane in service up till 1995 to make things more even (avoiding LOL US wins - you lose). Using a slot however, you can develop a special technology up until the year 2035. So, maybe some special stealth fighter or bomber or what not. Of course, these techs are particularly powerful, but EVERYONE can have them (their particular schtick) and on top of it all, they can sell their units to other nations, making weapons trade at least far more feasible and nations more interdependent. One could also work on stuff outside of one's military with these slots as well - it's all a matter of story. So that would place all game players on an even playing field tech wise, forcing them to limit their submissions to something they believe a GM would approve of and it would even force you to consider carefully what type of units you wish to develop - because you're limited by tech levels. [/quote] Just saying, people will just be using the YF-22. and it still adresses not that there is always a way to techstomp by bigger players, just because of the very fact that regardless on how you scale, 10,000 tech will always be more than 2,000. I, for my person, can see some good points in the slot system, but I don't think it'll get anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 Don't like the new technology scale! CNRP’s current technology scale is nearly the only thing about our current rule set that isn’t completely broken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1332945424' post='2944330'] I think we should go back to the 0-500 tech=third world nation, 501-1499=middle tier and +1,500=modern nation that can RP whatever him or her wants. [/quote]Generalissimo would be game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Zarfef' timestamp='1332957264' post='2944393']Time Scale, 1 month OOC = 1 year IC (you get the above funds to play around with every year - character aging and whatnot can take less or more time)[/quote]Generalissimo does not support fixed timescales for CNRP. . . Unless it's real time! Some of us still play with real time calendars after all. 2012 is better than 20XX! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 I think, Vicidalians should still use old-style dates. We aren't that modern yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Evangeline Anovilis' timestamp='1332963568' post='2944441'] I think, Vicidalians should still use old-style dates. We aren't that modern yet. [/quote]Do it! We need more nations with real-time calendars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.