Reply to topic  [ 3601 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 141, 142, 143, 144, 145  Next
Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:38 pm
Posts: 247
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
What if you took away strength entirely? Chess doesn't rely on it - I don't see a reason why this game couldn't be engaging without it. A pawn can capture a queen if your opponent is dumb enough.

What if the game board was extended to 13 hexes to encourage maneuver (and deception via maneuver) as the primary gameplay element? This would allow the city and tower rings to be larger and accommodate more pieces, and also allow army-to-army combat on them. A skilled player could develop her forces in a feint while building towards her actual strategy (such as pushing towards the enemy line when actually setting up for a push on the castle), all the while doing her level best to hide her intentions in sanzai.


Thu Aug 30, 2018 3:41 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
I can see that I shouldn't have posted the unfinished Crossfire information. I didn't really provide enough for meaningful feedback, and I seem to have left people with the incorrect impression that I was inviting them to design the game for me. Sometimes when I'm enthusiastic about an idea, it's hard to avoid saying more than I should about it. I will try to avoid repeating this mistake in the future.

However, since it's already out there, I suppose I might as well run with it.

dragoongfa wrote:
1) 11 hexes across with the same layout and number of pawns seem to be best in regards to versatility.

I had a similar thought. The 9 hex version is clean but a bit cramped.

The piece names are somewhat abstract; it's an ancient game and traditionally the board and pieces are shaped to represent armies fighting around a hill, but modern versions of the game (and, it is suspected, the original version) represent the board and pieces as fleets fighting around the gravity well of a planet. I haven't figured out all of the piece names, but they are not "Teidar", "Mizol" etc., as the game predates these terms.

orion1836 wrote:
What if you took away strength entirely? Chess doesn't rely on it - I don't see a reason why this game couldn't be engaging without it. A pawn can capture a queen if your opponent is dumb enough.

Agree that the rules should be as simple as possible, but I am trying to achieve gameplay that is significantly different from chess. The two qualities that I'd like to have are 1) fleet movement instead of individual piece movement, and 2) to accommodate the central capture mechanism. If any piece can take any other piece, then capturing the city/planet in the center is either trivially easy (or impossible, depending on how the towers' rules work).

Avalon Hill had an interesting chesslike game called Feudal in which each player could move all of his pieces every turn. The existence of blocking terrain prevented this from being completely broken, but it did cause problems of turn order advantage, especially for more than two players (there could be as many as six). My idea was that limiting the number of pieces moved, combined with a surround system (in which pieces are captured at the end of the turn rather than piece-takes piece) could make it more tactical. Being required to surround pieces and only removing captures after your turn means that you might take casualties as well as the enemy (and allows the neutral towers to inflict damage without having to "move").

Zorg56 wrote:
Any chances for human cloaking devices after technological exchange?
As i can see most of loroi weapons and tools is based on artifacts they obtained during space travels, not their own research.
They can just do not notice the possibility of creating thing like this.

Nobody has a functional cloaking device, so it seems unlikely to me that the humans could invent one with technologies that they had just learned.

_________________
Outsider


Thu Aug 30, 2018 5:01 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Posts: 1084
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
hi hi

Not trying to say how the game must be constructed, but I'd like to share some observations and thoughts.

With the idea that the game originates from fighting around a gravity well, it makes sense for the board to be cramped. In terms of the scale of space, going into a pitched battle around a planet is like jumping into a knife fight. Unlike chess, where people who play at high levels tend to make a lot of very cautious moves, I imagine Crossfire's opening moves would involve a lot more bloodletting, just on account of the board size.

Although, if anyone else here has played Banner Saga, there's a lesson you learn early on that depending on how the actions to unit count ratio is set up, a larger force can be sluggish and have difficulties responding to smaller, faster groups. In its own way, having a negative feedback loop like that is the kind of game design that I like. It makes it so that the winner isn't always decided in the opening moves, and makes it easier to put up a meaningful challenge throughout the entirety of play.


Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:18 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 10:43 am
Posts: 104
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
I seem to have left people with the incorrect impression that I was inviting them to design the game for me.

Didn't even think that way. It's just a funny thing to play with while waiting for the next page.

dragoongfa wrote:
Nice SVlad, I knew that a Russian would have a better grasp of Chess stuff :)

It's not about chess (or country), but about playing many different tabletop games. Actually, crossfire is far from chess because it has completely different mechanics for movement and taking.

Werra wrote:
Just one thing about unit strengths. As your numbers now stand, to take out a command unit, you'd need literally three pawns. How about giving pawns strength 2 and special units strength 3, command units strength 2 and the King Piece 3 again? This way specials would be dangerous to pawns and command units but pawns remain a threat to everything on the field. They'd be further differentiated by movement.

My idea was to make 1♔ = 2♟, so ♔ can't be taken that easy. It should be compensated by slow movement.
Also at the taking phase each figure can be used to take only one enemy figure, otherwise 1♘ could take 3♟ in one turn just by standing adjacent to all three.

_________________
Outsider in Russian
Image


Last edited by SVlad on Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:14 am, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Aug 31, 2018 12:48 am
Profile
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1477
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
I can see that I shouldn't have posted the unfinished Crossfire information. I didn't really provide enough for meaningful feedback, and I seem to have left people with the incorrect impression that I was inviting them to design the game for me. Sometimes when I'm enthusiastic about an idea, it's hard to avoid saying more than I should about it. I will try to avoid repeating this mistake in the future.

However, since it's already out there, I suppose I might as well run with it.

dragoongfa wrote:
1) 11 hexes across with the same layout and number of pawns seem to be best in regards to versatility.

I had a similar thought. The 9 hex version is clean but a bit cramped.

The piece names are somewhat abstract; it's an ancient game and traditionally the board and pieces are shaped to represent armies fighting around a hill, but modern versions of the game (and, it is suspected, the original version) represent the board and pieces as fleets fighting around the gravity well of a planet. I haven't figured out all of the piece names, but they are not "Teidar", "Mizol" etc., as the game predates these terms.

orion1836 wrote:
What if you took away strength entirely? Chess doesn't rely on it - I don't see a reason why this game couldn't be engaging without it. A pawn can capture a queen if your opponent is dumb enough.

Agree that the rules should be as simple as possible, but I am trying to achieve gameplay that is significantly different from chess. The two qualities that I'd like to have are 1) fleet movement instead of individual piece movement, and 2) to accommodate the central capture mechanism. If any piece can take any other piece, then capturing the city/planet in the center is either trivially easy (or impossible, depending on how the towers' rules work).

Avalon Hill had an interesting chesslike game called Feudal in which each player could move all of his pieces every turn. The existence of blocking terrain prevented this from being completely broken, but it did cause problems of turn order advantage, especially for more than two players (there could be as many as six). My idea was that limiting the number of pieces moved, combined with a surround system (in which pieces are captured at the end of the turn rather than piece-takes piece) could make it more tactical. Being required to surround pieces and only removing captures after your turn means that you might take casualties as well as the enemy (and allows the neutral towers to inflict damage without having to "move").

Zorg56 wrote:
Any chances for human cloaking devices after technological exchange?
As i can see most of loroi weapons and tools is based on artifacts they obtained during space travels, not their own research.
They can just do not notice the possibility of creating thing like this.

Nobody has a functional cloaking device, so it seems unlikely to me that the humans could invent one with technologies that they had just learned.


I didn't take it as an invitation to design the game for you and I apologize if it came out like that from my end. I just took it as an interesting thought exercise and I wanted to offer some feedback that may have come out wrong. Also I understand the enthusiastic part, I fell into that trap more than one time on various projects I worked for.

In any case:

The names of the pawns being abstract makes sense, on chess the names are also abstract when one thinks about it. For example the Rook is meant to represent the raw straightforward hard power of the state, all reaching but always confined into a straight line. The bishop represents diplomacy and treachery, not straightforward and only confined to one avenue of accomplishing things. The horse represents human unpredictability and flexibility. The King represent the head of a state, the one who is obeyed, all powerful and moving but always visible to all and thus limited in actions. The Queen represents the best of all, the elite that a nation calls upon when they are needed. The pawns are interesting in their own ways, the average person, weak as an individual but can harm anyone who fails to take them seriously especially if they earn the experience necessary to be counted as an elite.

I also agree on the need for simplicity in the rules, I mentally approached it as a modern board game instead of a cultural defining classic (and my respect to anyone who tries to do this). Modern board games are a mess in regards with rules which is why none of them can reach the status of classics like chess.

My advice would be to not try to either avoid or imitate chess in regards to the rules of the game, there should be some similarity in regards to the games being strategic in nature but I think it is best not to unessecarily restrict the planning to avoid being seen as a chess adaptation.

The chief issue I had while thinking about it is the multiple movements of the pieces and how that would relate to capturing pieces but if the movement phases are different than the capturing phase then things can be different. I can picture that the players positioning their pawns in the respective movement turns while declaring at the end of the combined movement turn who the target(s) of the ensuing capturing engagement is.

If the engagement phase is different that the movement phase then there is no need to take measures on who gets to move first because for all intents and purposes the movement phase is simultaneous for both players and the 'engagement' happens after the fact. This would ensure that there are bound to be casualties on both sides while still ensuring a 'fleet movement' feeling.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:10 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 10:43 am
Posts: 104
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
dragoongfa wrote:
The names of the pawns being abstract makes sense, on chess the names are also abstract when one thinks about it. For example the Rook is meant to represent the raw straightforward hard power of the state, all reaching but always confined into a straight line. The bishop represents diplomacy and treachery, not straightforward and only confined to one avenue of accomplishing things. The horse represents human unpredictability and flexibility. The King represent the head of a state, the one who is obeyed, all powerful and moving but always visible to all and thus limited in actions. The Queen represents the best of all, the elite that a nation calls upon when they are needed. The pawns are interested, the average person, weak as an individual but can harm anyone who fails to take them seriously especially if the earn the experience necessary to be counted as an elite.

Very interesting. And what do you think about Russian names, where "bishop" named "elephant", rook - "longship" and "queen" - "vizier"?

_________________
Outsider in Russian
Image


Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:29 am
Profile
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1477
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Depends on the cultural weight the words had when chess took hold of Russian society.

Early Russians were Sea Raiders like the Vikings, the assaults on Byzantium and Constantinople being well known so I can see how the Rook can be seen as a Longship since the longship was a force 'projector' of Russian force.

The queen being seen as a Vizier, this probably comes from the Mongol influence on Russians. The Mongols used Viziers to describe the local ministers and overall lords.

Elephant for Bishop, that would probably be a cultural parallel to the Rook. Large animals that Russians knew very little about. Like ships of the land in terms of strength but tamperamental so they always move diagonally.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:07 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 286
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Since chess came from India and Persia, the names of the pieces might simply be taken from those cultures. Makes sense for chess to have elephants and viziers this way.

Perhabs the discussion about crossfire and chess should be moved into its own thread?


Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:16 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:28 pm
Posts: 692
Location: Central Florida
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
GabrielGABFonseca wrote:
What is that I hear? Did someone say forum-wide Crossfire play-testing...? :P


I'm totally down. *fires up Tabletop Simulator*

_________________
Hoenn


Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:45 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:24 am
Posts: 24
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
SVlad wrote:
dragoongfa wrote:
The names of the pawns being abstract makes sense, on chess the names are also abstract when one thinks about it. For example the Rook is meant to represent the raw straightforward hard power of the state, all reaching but always confined into a straight line. The bishop represents diplomacy and treachery, not straightforward and only confined to one avenue of accomplishing things. The horse represents human unpredictability and flexibility. The King represent the head of a state, the one who is obeyed, all powerful and moving but always visible to all and thus limited in actions. The Queen represents the best of all, the elite that a nation calls upon when they are needed. The pawns are interested, the average person, weak as an individual but can harm anyone who fails to take them seriously especially if the earn the experience necessary to be counted as an elite.

Very interesting. And what do you think about Russian names, where "bishop" named "elephant", rook - "longship" and "queen" - "vizier"?


Keep in mind, that the names and the capabilities of the units changed over time, and due to cultural influences. Like queen and bishop were weak units until the late 15th century when they have been promoted by rule changes, some coming from a line of ruling queens and other female rulers in the Iberian and Italian peninsulas.

Names are also a mixture of local tradition and/or influences.
Like in Hungarian:
pawn - either gyalog (shortened version of gyalogos, literally footsoldier) or paraszt (peasant)
rook - bástya (bastion)
bishop - futó (runner)
knight - ló (horse) or csikó (colt)
queen - vezér (leader or prince)


Mon Sep 03, 2018 3:18 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 3:59 am
Posts: 7
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Is there any mine fields near important systems?


Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:10 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Zorg56 wrote:
Is there any mine fields near important systems?

No. Mines don't really work well in space. Space is too big compared to the small area of effect of an explosion, mines don't stay put (they must orbit or will fall toward the nearest mass), and they are too easy to detect and avoid.

_________________
Outsider


Mon Sep 03, 2018 9:44 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 3:59 am
Posts: 7
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Well i dont meant stationary mines like in WW2, i meant somthing more like mines from Dead Space 3, when they detect target they move.
If you have 1000 of this things in jump space you will be able to cripple even Battleship.


Mon Sep 03, 2018 12:47 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Zorg56 wrote:
Well i dont meant stationary mines like in WW2, i meant somthing more like mines from Dead Space 3, when they detect target they move.
If you have 1000 of this things in jump space you will be able to cripple even Battleship.

Even if they were essentially torpedoes, I don't think they would work very well. 1000 torpedoes in a jump zone would be spread across millions of cubic kilometers; only a few would be close enough to attack any given ship, and they'd be very easy to shoot down. And 1000 torpedoes are pretty expensive; I think you could find better uses for them.

The advantage of naval mines is that they're inexpensive, concealed, and they mostly stay where you put them. None of these things would be true of mines in space.

_________________
Outsider


Mon Sep 03, 2018 2:37 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 8:27 am
Posts: 179
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Zorg56 wrote:
Well i dont meant stationary mines like in WW2, i meant somthing more like mines from Dead Space 3, when they detect target they move.
If you have 1000 of this things in jump space you will be able to cripple even Battleship.


If the mines detect something 10 thousand miles away and start moving towards it at the necessary speed to ever reach it, then you're dealing more with missiles than with mines.


Mon Sep 03, 2018 2:38 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 10:43 am
Posts: 104
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Due to orbital rotation any passive object like torpedo would leave a 1 000 000 km zone after a week or two depending on orbital height.
So torpedo platforms should have it's own maneuver engines.
Also the platform should have some detecting and monitoring equipment. The torpedo itself have some tracking equipment, but target search and recognition require more complex equipment.

And some numbers: if you want to create a flat wall of torpedoes (not even a sphere) a 1 000 000 km in diameter with platform every 10 000 km, you need approximately 1800 such launch platforms.and every platform is more like gunboat with own engines and radars.

_________________
Outsider in Russian
Image


Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:20 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 286
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Do Torrai ranks differentiate between Torrai from Soroin and Tenoin and Torrai from other castes?

For example, if a Gallen gets promoted to Torrai for the internal hierarchy of the Gallen caste, does her rank show her former caste? And if so, what would that look like?


Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:14 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Werra wrote:
Do Torrai ranks differentiate between Torrai from Soroin and Tenoin and Torrai from other castes?

For example, if a Gallen gets promoted to Torrai for the internal hierarchy of the Gallen caste, does her rank show her former caste? And if so, what would that look like?

Sort of. Most of the Torrai titles are fairly specific, and often require a specific background. For example, a Torret would be the commander of a ship (and therefore a former Soroin or Tenoin), whereas a Gallen who reached an equivalent Torrai rank would have a different administrative title.

_________________
Outsider


Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:35 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 286
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Say Teidar A telekinetically pushes Teidar B, can Teidar B then defend herself? If so is that automatic or does she have to spent conscious effort on her defense?

If it's automatic, does that mean that the weaker Teidar can't ever push the stronger Teidar? (barring other forms of attack, for simplicities sake)

If it's not automatic, doesn't that mean that all Teidar battles are decided by speed and surprise?


Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:17 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Werra wrote:
Say Teidar A telekinetically pushes Teidar B, can Teidar B then defend herself? If so is that automatic or does she have to spent conscious effort on her defense?

If it's automatic, does that mean that the weaker Teidar can't ever push the stronger Teidar? (barring other forms of attack, for simplicities sake)

If it's not automatic, doesn't that mean that all Teidar battles are decided by speed and surprise?

Two psychokinetics can apply different forces to the same object, and one can try to counter the other, but it's not automatic, and the second PK needs to have some way of observing what the force to be countered is. Reaction time is a factor, and if one PK is trying to "break" the object rather than just move it and is powerful enough to do it quickly, this will be very difficult to counter. So PK vs. PK Teidar battles are a little bit like a quick-draw contest.

_________________
Outsider


Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:31 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 286
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Did the quick nature of such combat reflect in uniforms for Teidar on ancient Deinar? I can't imagine it smart to have your Teidar stick out in that case.


Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:39 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 2:10 pm
Posts: 40
Location: Taton mi Dshaneiro
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
GabrielGABFonseca wrote:
Now that the topic of sanitation has been dealt with and appropriately crossed from my Little Questions Notebook, the next topic seems to be... Loroi! So, questions for the questions god, answers for the answer throne!

(...)

Regarding Loroi Style:
- If, hypothetically speaking, the shuttle our Fearsome Foursome now find themselves on was, oh, I don't know, hit by an Umiak EMP missile, would Alex be indiscernible in the darkness due to the terrible human oversight of not having cool glowy-bits on their uniforms? (A vital flaw, I say!)


I have only one thing to say:

Spoiler: show
Image

_________________
Tauntingly: "Enzin tii Eilis mé sibreg ranii tó lanzedad..."


Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:26 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 3:59 am
Posts: 7
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Not sure where i can ask this...

Supreme commander tech level by your standarts?
Soia had mass fabricators or somthing like this?


Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:27 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Zorg56 wrote:
Supreme commander tech level by your standarts?
Soia had mass fabricators or somthing like this?

I haven't played Supreme Commander, so I'm not familiar with the setting.

Most of the recovered Soia-era artifacts tend to be from settlements of the various "subject" civilizations, and so are thought to be kind of "hand me down" technology. Not much is known about what the apex Soia tech was like, or how it was manufactured (no remains of the legendary "dread-stars" have ever been found).

I think if we extrapolate our improving 3D printing capabilities into the future, we can guess that ultra-tech fabrication techniques will be very sophisticated. But I think they will fall short of the far-reaching direct energy-to-matter synthesis that we see in many RTS games (or Star Trek's transporters/replicators) until you get up to TL 14 or so.

_________________
Outsider


Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:25 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 3:33 am
Posts: 481
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
Most of the recovered Soia-era artifacts tend to be from settlements of the various "subject" civilizations, and so are thought to be kind of "hand me down" technology. Not much is known about what the apex Soia tech was like, or how it was manufactured (no remains of the legendary "dread-stars" have ever been found).


Which sort of begs the next question: How much of the current Loroi tech base is

  1. directly copied from what they dug out of some ruin one time (amplifiers may be one thing)
  2. based on Soia tech, and simply scaled up or down to its current use (like jump drives, they found just one design, but incorporated it on various ship classes)
  3. based on Soia tech, but adapted/improved to its current use (as in, they may or may not have made substantial changes to a design and used the result for a different purpose than it was originally intended to - think Sildenafil, it was originally developed to treat headaches and heartburn, but is nowadays solved to cure a completely different ailment)
  4. completely invented on their own

This question may be extended to the other races as well and would be interesting to follow up, as it says much about the mentality of the given species.

Slightly off-topic:
Spoiler: show
Am I too much of a nerd if I can translate this
Quote:
"Enzin tii Eilis mé sibreg ranii tó lanzedad..."

good enough to discern the meaning without using the dictionary...? :)


Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:05 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 3601 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 141, 142, 143, 144, 145  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dragoongfa and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.