 |
| |
|
|
DeepO
|
 |
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002
time: 06:30
|
|
No, Shiber, by moving 23, they would have used all their MP... the neutral road is only good if you don't get there from within an enemy border.
As to the devious plan: that would probably be a bit too much, Aeson  Plus... even if we would have roughly the same tiles, we would still be the lowest because of corruption: both RP and GoW would get close territories, while we are spread out over 2 continents and ex-Vox. Surely we could make it work, but it wouldn't be so great an advantage. And afterwards we keep the same problem: if we want to go for a domination, we need to fight 2 equally powerful nations
I agree Lego is going to profit from this, however, they're not fully build up yet. And, if we wouldn't help them in research, they can't do much by themselves. They're not going to reach the space ship soon. And I doubt they're going to stay peaceful much longer either...
DeepO
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Shiber
|
 |
Haifa, Israel
Jul 2002
time: 07:30
|
|
Suggested blocking move:
Move some knights (number to be determined) to Pamplona-96 and fortify. This leaves GoW with several options:
1. Attack Toledo: with a few less knights, Toledo is more vulnerable but still a very tough nut to crack. It has four cats, gets +60% to defense and all units inside are fortified, which means that even medinfs can put up a good fight (3.7 defense after modifications). If GoW goes for Toledo, they are going to suffer heavy losses, and they will lose mostly to cheap units (pikes and medinfs). Plus, Toledo has barracks, so survivors can heal.
2. Attack New Madrid: compared to Toledo, NM is scarcely defended. But it does give a whopping +100% defense bonus and all units are fortified, so this is where our troops can max themselves - a cheap pike with 6.75 defense will probably hold against two expensive riders before falling.
3. Attempt to move into Pamplona-96: well, what can I say? They will have to go through several knights on mountains. GoW's losses will be significantly greater than ours.
4. Take another route to Pamplona: GoW will be a bit late (at earliest, they will be able to attack Pamplona on 110 AD), but safe in the mean time. However, we'll be able to relax the defenses around Toledo and we'll have knights in a position to help RP (whereas if we don't go for Pamplona-96, our fast route to the Pamplona theater will be blocked by GoW's riders standing on the exact same tile).
Another option is to move knights to reinforce NM (they can reach NM and fortify with 1/3 MP). If GoW goes for NM and takes it, they'll have a barracks to heal units in, and our beachhead town will be defenseless.
However, I doubt that they are going to get themselves stuck in that area. ND is putting pressure on them - they must be restless to receive some aid from GoW, and they probably plan to converge on Pamplona, knowing that it is a tough nut to crack but that the fall of Pamplona will mean the end of RP.
We have to put ourselves in a position to aid RP. We absolutely can't let them lose Pamplona, even if it means risking some beachhead towns.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
zeit
|
 |
Meet my blade!
Sep 2002
time: 06:30
|
|
I agree on P69- The fast route must be blocked.
As for anticipated movements on their part-GoW aren't stupid, and have some good generals- I think its safe to expect they'll head for Pamplon. Capturing NM is nice- its a large town and also coastal, and threatens our beachead, but its too far from the core of RP, and by now plans have changed for the duo- they aim for a quick destruction of RP, so that we'll be faced without allies on the continent, and would rethink the whole thing (or at least have a very difficult fight if we decide to stay). Toldedo in that regard doesn't help GoW by one bit, so if it weren't for the Cats, I'd say we should leave T relatively undefended- as the theater certainly about to move towards the SW or maybe the SE- clearly away from Toledo.
The peace offer- it fits in just fine: ND wants to get rid of the RP menace, they both realize that a full scale war against us is the worst scenario save for Lego+Vox coming to help us as well (and we can leave that out of the picture), GoW has enough strength in the region to destroy RP, after ND severly crippled them, but we stand in their way- having peace talks, perhaps even preliminary agreement of some sort can be their winning ticket- RP will be dead in less than 5 turns without our help, and the rest will be history...
The only agreement we can reach is one in which GoW abandons ND, and returns home, thus forfeiting any chances of winning, and thrill of combat, as well handing us the game on a plate- do you believe they'll go for it?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Session Start: Mon Aug 04 18:02:09 2003
Session Ident: #GS
[18:02] * Now talking in #GS
[18:02] * Retrieving #GS info...
[18:02] * nye sets mode: +ps
[18:02] * nye sets mode: +nt
[18:02] * nye sets mode: +k Repulse
[18:12] * zeit has joined #GS
[18:12] *zeit* Hi nye!
[18:12] *nye* hello
[18:12] * nye sets mode: +o zeit
*** Snipped chat about trips to Rome
[18:35] * Aeson has joined #GS
[18:36] *Aeson* howdy nye
[18:38] *nye* allo
[18:38] *nye* how do you think we should go about bringing gow to battle?
[18:40] *Aeson* I think they may just do it themselves this next turn
[18:40] *Aeson* otherwise, they won't
[18:40] *Aeson* head for P, and finish off RP
[18:40] *nye* well, i would like to cover all eventualities
[18:41] *Aeson* only thing I can think of is if we follow up on the peace offer, make them think we are vulnerable
[18:41] *nye* not sure if that was them offering
[18:41] *nye* 4P, 3K, 3MI in Toledo
[18:42] *nye* 5P, 4K in NM
[18:42] *nye* 6K on the mountain
[18:42] *Aeson* Sounds good, I don't really like the thought of losing Knights defending toledo
[18:42] *nye* we need to offer them things they can attack, so that they engage
[18:43] *Aeson* if RP goes down, it might actually get a bit easier
[18:43] *nye* actually, yes
[18:43] *Aeson* no more worrying about defending cities
[18:43] *Aeson* at least, not more than 1 or 2
[18:43] *nye* but it would be better if we could engage them AND keep the cities
[18:44] *Aeson* aye, but it's really up to them
[18:44] *nye* true
[18:44] *Aeson* if they want to play Vox x3, they will
[18:44] *nye* i am almost positive they are going for the pinch on Pamplona
[18:44] *Aeson* yes
[18:44] *Aeson* almost foolhardy to hit Toledo this turn and not last
[18:44] *nye* that would be why nd cut the roads behind the rp army last turn
[18:46] *Aeson* they could hit NM, but they'd be more likely to just continue on to Barcelona if they are heading S
[18:46] *nye* yes. if they head south, that will be a good opportunity for battle
[18:46] *Aeson* I'm not sure I like attacking them
[18:47] *nye* we have to, if they give us the chance
[18:47] *Aeson* if they stay on Hills or Mountains, it isn't very good odds
[18:47] *nye* i agree, we do not attack while they are on mountains with 14 riders though
[18:47] *nye* if they go to hills, we should strike
[18:47] *Aeson* it could turn into a disaster
[18:48] *nye* 44% to kill
[18:49] *nye* if we trade 5 for 3, that is not bad
[18:49] *Aeson* IMO it is
[18:49] *nye* well, aeson, we have to deal with them
[18:50] *nye* and if they simply wander through rp on the mountains and hills, they will destroy all of rp, and our large forces will be nullified by fear of losses
[18:50] *Aeson* unless we go on the attack too... ND
[18:50] *nye* we might as well have gone with arrian's plan
[18:50] *Aeson* ND are tied down by cities
[18:50] *nye* that is a point
[18:51] *Aeson* and if we take cities, give them to RP, then GoW has to hit more cities
[18:51] *Aeson* It's not really RP's cities that are important now IMO, more RP's troops, and keeping them a factor
[18:51] *nye* yes
[18:52] *nye* and we have created the conditions in which much of their army can be destroyed
[18:52] *Aeson* I think their stack is in good shape
[18:52] *Aeson* this turn ND could have a 4/4 Ansar or two reach it
[18:53] *nye* they are 3 turns from safty, maybe more
[18:53] *Aeson* depends on what you call safety. Fortified their PIkes have better than 50% odds against Ansars
[18:54] *nye* and those riders appear to be moving in for dinner
[18:54] *Aeson* with cat support
[18:54] *nye* they will pull back, will they not?
[18:54] *nye* go for pamplona?
[18:54] *Aeson* RP? I forget what their Med Inf are at
[18:54] *nye* 6 of leon
[18:55] *Aeson* i mean hp wise
[18:55] *nye* with the roads all cut behind them
[18:55] * Aeson needs to go in about 5 minutes
[18:55] *nye* only one full
[18:55] *nye* would you agree that tempting gow with 4 or 6 knights on the mountain is a good idea?
[18:56] *Aeson* I think it's good to block them with the KNights, definitely want to keep that road under our control
[18:56] *Aeson* 6 Knights and a bit of luck, and they could take down the whole freaking stack
[18:56] *nye* yes
[18:56] *nye* it is strange though
[18:56] *nye* not a single units has ever been lost against our major prepared positions
[18:56] *Aeson* bad luck and we'd still probably kill 6+
[18:57] *nye* except for inchon, when vox were desperate
[18:57] *Aeson* I know...
[18:57] *Aeson* Almost like someone was reloading
[18:57] *nye* almost
[18:58] *Aeson* GoW could be going for the split though, or heading S, or going for P
[18:58] *nye* yes, but there are 2 more teams that have never lost on the attack
[18:58] *nye* nd has only taken what was good for them to take
[18:59] *nye* and the war mongers... i can see what they are doing
[18:59] *Aeson* but if they hit Toledo this turn and have good luck...
[18:59] *Aeson* not sure on that
[18:59] *Aeson* I think ND would have been better off attacking Z the first turn
[18:59] *nye* looking for softer, and or more important targets
[18:59] *nye* possibly. do we know how the rng would have gone?
[18:59] *Aeson* not at all
[19:00] *nye* it isn't the opportunities to win that are passed up that i am thinking about,
[19:00] *nye* it is that no attack to date has ever been a dead loss
[19:00] *nye* despite pleanty of opportunity
[19:00] *Aeson* yah, Vox did well against Inchon
[19:00] *nye* yes
[19:01] *Aeson* and did well when they attacked Pikes on the Mountains
[19:01] *Aeson* RP just took the first real loss I think
[19:01] *Aeson* considering the odds
[19:01] *nye* yes
[19:01] *Aeson* we did well ourselves...
[19:02] *nye* yes
[19:02] *nye* but we were only in position to ever attack one city
[19:02] *Aeson* I don't know. I can't see any team agreeing to reloading, but a turn player...
[19:02] *nye* and we took a flyer on that one
[19:02] *Aeson* yah, and Vox forced us to attack when we did, moving out in the flats
[19:02] *Aeson* not like reloading could have helped us, cities were gone if we didn't attack
[19:03] *nye* it will be interesting to watch and see if there ever is another attack like rp's last one
[19:03] *Aeson* there will be plenty of them while we are marching through ND later on hopefully
[19:03] *nye* yes, we engaged when we could see the odds
[19:04] *nye* heh. not too many, i hope
[19:04] *Aeson* and with better artillery support!
[19:05] *nye* nathan won't even take back administrative moves
[19:05] *Aeson* I gotta go though... here I was looking for a fight on the public forum and HE wen't and retracted 
[19:05] *nye* 'nope, sorry, i already moved that worker'
[19:05] *Aeson* went
[19:05] *nye* ah, ok. g'night
[19:05] *Aeson* yah, Nathan is one of the guys I trust... seen all his reload counts in GOTM's and stuff 
[19:05] *nye* haha
[19:06] *nye* how do you count reloads?
[19:06] *Aeson* there's a tag in the replay
[19:06] *Aeson* doesn't show when the reload happened, just that one happened
[19:06] *nye* for how many times the game has been loaded?
[19:06] *Aeson* makes an 'extra' turn tag
[19:07] *nye* so, when you quit for the day, the next day there is an extra turn added?
[19:07] *Aeson* that's why some replays take longer to start than others... all the reload tags are stored at the start of the turn data... so it's goign through 'turns' that nothing happens before 4000BC
[19:07] *Aeson* aye, which makes it tricky
[19:07] *nye* ahh. mine would delay a lot
[19:07] *Aeson* because valid playsessions look like reloads
[19:07] *nye* i often play 2 or 3 turns then save for the night
[19:08] *Aeson* but if someone has an average of 6 minutes a playsession, it gets fishy... or if they have several hundred playsessions
[19:08] *nye* yes, that would get a bit much
[19:08] *Aeson* we don't do much based on the reload counts.. it's just something we use to flag the fishy games for further inspection
[19:09] *nye* does it tag it when saved, or when loaded?
[19:09] *Aeson* loaded
[19:09] *Aeson* so you can save as many times as you want
[19:09] *nye* good
[19:09] *Aeson* it doesn't actually tag the save when loaded
[19:09] *nye* i save evey 5 turns max, every turn sometimes
[19:10] *Aeson* it tags the session.. .then when it's saved it adds the +1... so if you are at 1000BC, that should have 80 turn tags, if you load it, then save, it will have 81... if you save it 10 times, it will have 81
[19:10] *nye* and actually, come to think about it. i do use reloading to combat the fact that there is no warning of civil disorder
[19:10] *Aeson* I reload all the time in personal games, no point not to. I like trying a million different things from each position
[19:11] *Aeson* but, gotta run (10 minutes late, ack!)
[19:11] *nye* if i am playing slow, and careful, i check the advisor every turn to see if disorder is going to break out
[19:11] *nye* np
[19:11] * Aeson has quit IRC (Quit: )
[19:11] *nye* have fun
[19:47] * nbarclay has joined #GS
[19:47] *nbarclay* Hi. Has anything much happened here yet? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
[20:02] *nye* hi. not much
[20:02] *nye* brb
[20:04] *nye* aeson and i discussed the importance of bringing gow to battle
[20:13] *nbarclay* I went ahead and unloaded the three knights and three pikes in Sirocco. I'm a bit disappointed that NM came before EotS in the build queue, making it impossible to switch the cat there to a pike.
[20:13] *nbarclay* I'm going to post a roster of available units in the turn thread.
[20:14] *nye* ok. too bad about nm
[20:20] *nye* this is what aeson and i discussed
[20:20] *nye* *nye* 4P, 3K, 3MI in Toledo
[20:20] *nye* *nye* 5P, 4K in NM
[20:20] *nye* *nye* 6K on the mountain
[20:20] *nye* he seemed to agree
[20:20] *nye* what do you think?
[20:26] *nbarclay* I think the ratio of units in Toledo and NM ought to be more in favor of Toledo. NM has much better bonuses for us: being a city makes up for the lack of walls, and it's on a hill across a river.
[20:27] *nye* shift 2 knights to Toledo?
[20:27] *nye* that would leave 7 units in Toledo
[20:28] *nye* sorry, 7 units in nm
[20:29] *nbarclay* (Thinking)
[20:29] *nye* k
[20:30] *nbarclay* How about if we just put five knights on the mountain so we can have eight units in NM and 12 (including MedInfs) in Toledo?
[20:31] *nbarclay* Or would that make it too easy?
[20:31] *nbarclay* (to take the mountain)
[20:31] *nye* well, 5 knights would chew up at least 7 or 8 of their riders
[20:31] *nye* maybe more
[20:32] *nye* so that would be 5 knights in toledo
[20:32] *nbarclay* Let me try one of the combat calculators I got a link to in the RP chat and see what I can find out.
[20:32] *nye* ok
[20:38] *nye* 23.8% for a rider to win in one shot vs knight forted on mountain
[20:39] *nye* 29% if not forted
[20:40] *nbarclay* According to the stack battle calculator, odds are a little over 70/30 of our holding NM with seven units. Considering that GoW's army would be pretty much devastated by our counterattack even if they win, we can probably afford that.
[20:40] *nye* ok
[20:41] *nye* that is what we need, for them to charge headlong into something
[20:41] *nbarclay* (By the way, that's assuming no retreat; the fact that some riders would retreat rather than die would tilt the odds a tad more in our favor.)
[20:41] *nye* sounds good
[20:42] *nye* so, it's 5p and 2 k in nm?
[20:42] *nbarclay* So 12 units in Toledo, 6 knights on the mountain, and 5 pikes and two knights in NM?
[20:42] *nbarclay* (That would make one of the knights we just landed one of the mountain units.)
[20:42] *nye* ok
[20:51] *nye* any other plans?
[20:52] *nye* it would be good to get that last tile in the north covered
[20:53] *nye* the idea of blocking access to PI might be good as well
[20:55] *nbarclay* I have a pike ready to take over for a WC, letting me move the other WC to cover the remaining tile.
[20:55] *nbarclay* PI?
[20:56] *nbarclay* You mean using our galley to stop GoW from moving their galleys into Port Isolation next turn?
[20:56] *nye* that was proposed
[20:57] *nbarclay* I'm the one that proposed it.
[20:57] *nbarclay* And I do still like the idea.
[20:57] *nye* well, i guess you would
[20:58] *nbarclay* Unless I changed my mind, of course.
[20:59] *nye* i guess just 2 knights to load this turn
[21:00] *nbarclay* Just one. The new one in EotS doesn't quite have the range to load this turn.
[21:01] *nbarclay* We have two galleys that can load this turn and unload in Sirocco next turn, and three more that can load this turn and unload into Sirocco next turn from the tile next to it.
[21:02] *nye* ok
[21:02] *nye* is there much left to do?
[21:02] *nbarclay* That's a total of nine slots aside from the knight to decide the force mix for.
[21:03] *nbarclay* I don't think there's much left. Mostly just the force mix to load on the galleys.
[21:03] *nye* what do you feel is the right mix?
[21:04] *nbarclay* Good question. It depends a lot on what GoW and ND do.
[21:05] *nye* well... gow don;t seem inclined to attack us
[21:06] *nye* i would go 4 pike and 5 mi, or 3 and 6
[21:06] *nbarclay* Any idea whether NM or Sirocco would get precedence regarding tile ownership if GoW takes NM?
[21:06] *nye* sirocco, i think
[21:06] *nbarclay* NM is older and bigger, but will have been in the hands of its current owners a shorter time.
[21:07] *nye* it would go on total culture and precedence. 0 each, so we would hold the tile
[21:07] *nye* based on precedence
[21:08] *nye* which would be a nasty shock for them
[21:08] *nbarclay* In that case, I'm tempted to put 3 MedInfs on the galleys that can unload in Sirocco next turn in case they take NM.
[21:08] *nbarclay* (In addition to the knight, which we want to be able to unload ASAP no matter what).
[21:08] *nye* wait one moment
[21:09] *nye* they can take sirocco if they take nm
[21:10] *nbarclay* If they have a unit left to do it.
[21:10] *nye* yes
[21:10] *nye* would there be any gallies in sirocco?
[21:11] *nbarclay* No. All our galleys had enough movement after they unloaded to start back.
[21:11] *nye* it does not look like it
[21:11] *nye* ok. it is worth the risk to hold nm
[21:12] *nye* i agree with the 3 mi's who can unload next turn
[21:12] *nbarclay* If they can take NM with us focusing on holding there, they could take both NM and Sirocco if we held units back from NM's defense to try to protect Sirocco.
[21:12] *nye* if we engage, we will be more worried about killing everything we can touch
[21:13] *nbarclay* Right.
[21:14] *nbarclay* Actually, if GoW attacks NM and fails, the MedInfs could help clean up the survivors.
[21:14] *nye* yes
[21:15] *nye* bombard the riders?
[21:16] *nbarclay* Will do.
[21:17] *nbarclay* Sir Ghengis and Sir Acrylic are now 3/4.
[21:17] *nbarclay*
[21:17] *nye* excellent!
[21:18] *nye* that leraves them with 12 4 pip riders
[21:18] *nbarclay* That should give GoW a little extra incentive not to dilly-dally around.
[21:18] *nye* better odds all around
[21:18] *nbarclay* Definitely.
[21:22] * nye sets mode: +o nbarclay
[21:22] *nbarclay* I just tentatively renamed Grog on Wheels to Sons of Grog. Do you think it would be fitting to put that unit on the mountain?
[21:22] *nye* heh. yes.
[21:23] *nye* knights of st grog?
[21:26] *nbarclay* Okay.
[21:28] *nbarclay* I have our troops redeployed according to plan.
[21:28] *nye* cool
[21:28] *nbarclay* That still leaves the question of what to load onto our remaining three galleys.
[21:28] *nye* maybe post that in the thread. aeson seems to be there
[21:29] *nye* maybe theseus will drop by too
[21:36] *nbarclay* Posted.
[21:38] *nbarclay* I almost forgot to switch our build to the Great Wall!
[21:38] *nye* that would have been unfortunate
[21:39] * Aeson has joined #GS
[21:39] *Aeson* still at it eh?
[21:40] *nye* i take it we don't gift nm back this turn
[21:40] *nye* hi again, aeson
[21:40] *nye* i'm going idle for a bit
[21:40] *Aeson* k
[21:40] *nbarclay* Okay.
[21:41] *nbarclay* I'm thinking I'll irrigate by Arashi to shift some laborers over to working mountains.
[21:41] *Aeson* good idea
[21:41] *Aeson* how many workers overall do we have?
[21:42] *nbarclay* Aeson, any thoughts on the unit mix for the last three galleys loading this turn?
[21:42] *nbarclay* 24 workers total.
[21:43] *Aeson* we don't have any Knights right?
[21:43] *nbarclay* We had one knight that could load on the first two galleys, and we have one that won't be able to load until next turn.
[21:43] *Aeson* I'd say mostly Pikes... we probably want Pikes all over on the mountains eventually, so GoW can't just walze around RP territory forever
[21:45] *nbarclay* That depends on whether they keep waltzing or whether they finally decide to attack.
[21:46] *nbarclay* But in any case, I'd rather have pikes to absorb ND's attacks instead of forcing knights to defend.
[21:46] *Aeson* well, whatever mix you feel is best
[21:47] *nbarclay* As I posted in the thread, I'm inclined to go with six pikes in the remaining three galleys. We're already heavily overbalanced toward offensive units with all the knights we brought over.
[21:47] *Aeson* it's pretty much up to GoW which mix is going to be most useful
[21:48] *Aeson* sounds good
[21:48] *Aeson* do we have any cities on cats?
[21:48] *nbarclay* There's not a whole lot GoW can do that would make MedInfs more useful than pikes.
[21:49] *nbarclay* I switched Blizzard and Santa Ana over to cats (3 and 9 turns, respectively). Tempest can make a very nice cat factory if we want it to after it finishes the Great Wall next turn.
[21:49] *Aeson* the other question I have is ho wmuch food is in EotS' food box?
[21:50] *nbarclay* The northern cities, we can decide later.
[21:50] *Aeson* yah, Tempest would be a good spot
[21:50] *Aeson* GW finishes in 2 turns?
[21:51] *nbarclay* GW finishes next turn.
[21:51] *nbarclay*
[21:51] *Aeson* even better
[21:51] *Aeson* switch to it this turn?
[21:51] *nbarclay* EotS grows next turn; it's at exactly the right food produciton.
[21:51] *Aeson* GoW couldn't beat us unless they get a tech
[21:51] *Aeson* and it might force an attack?
[21:51] *nbarclay* Yes, I switched production to the Great Wall.
[21:52] *Aeson* do we want to delay EotS growth and add workers?
[21:52] *Aeson* it can get to 20 shields at size 12 with 1 food deficit... using a hurricane fur
[21:52] *Aeson* IIRC
[21:53] *nbarclay* Why would we? EotS is at size 8, so delaying its growth wouldn't make any difference in what the granary does when it grows.
[21:53] *nbarclay* We'd just be throwing food away.
[21:54] *nbarclay* Oh, I get it.
[21:54] *Aeson* would only be worth it if we were going cats or MI's there
[21:55] *Aeson* Knights only need 18 shields for 4 turns
[21:55] *nbarclay* Right now, growing EotS past size 9 would basically just mean boosting EotS's production at the expense of other cities' growth/production.
[21:56] *Aeson* ah, ok
[21:57] *nbarclay* At size 9, EotS should net 14 shields unless corruption kicks in - good enough for 5-turn knights.
[21:57] *Aeson* can I be added to the save list? My aeson@direcway.com account seems broken.. haven't gotten anything there in about a week
[21:57] *Aeson* so I'd need aeson@gotm.civfanatics.net
[21:57] *nbarclay* I thought I had you added. Let me check.
[21:58] *nbarclay* Oh, okay.
[21:58] *Aeson* you might have, my email is just screwed
[21:58] *nbarclay* Switch your address to aeson@gotm.civfanatics.net?
[21:58] *Aeson* yes please
[21:59] *nbarclay* I just forwarded you the current save.
[21:59] *Aeson* thanks |
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-08-2003 00:12
|