Turn peneals into long range unit. No damge at close and med range but very high dmg at long.
At least long range unit is very needed.
That role is kinda filled by Guards, though.
Idea for Penals
5 Apr 2016, 21:16 PM
#161
Posts: 73
That role is kinda filled by Guards, though.
5 Apr 2016, 23:52 PM
#162
Posts: 677
Part of the idea of buffing penal is to make more doctrine viable, to free the soviet from needing to use shock and guards.
In other words you changing faction design in order to replace call in infantries with Penal, while makng the early play style of soviet similar to USF. The question still stands why? is the soviet faction under-performing?
In addition, with the exception of defensive tactic, none of the soviet doctrine come close to fully replace support weapon. Even defensive tactic lack a decent atg.
Soviet do not need all their support weapons, even if they did building both T1 and T2 cost less fuel than a single USF and 1 officer gives less access to less cost efficient weapons...
a svt-40 with 5.99-1.4 is still going to maintain semi-auto characteristic. The grenadier k98k 's 5.76-2.26 is going to be a bit better at long range but worst at close range. The only reason a penal squadis going to win at long range is due to the two extra model, but even then it's a costly fight.
You seem to be missing the point of weapon profiles. One is to have categories of weapons with similar behavior the other is to have range where one infatry has an advantage over the other.
A shock troops for instance is more expensive than gren yet it would badly if it fight a gren if they fight at range 35 while it win over an Ober who is more expensive if they fight close. What you are suggesting make gren volks lose at all ranges...In addition even PG and ST will lose far (around 45% less DPS and around 40% less HP)and will probably lose if they try to close in from 35 under fire or probably lose at all ranges if Penals have flamers...In other words axis will be forced to either spam HMG or go for vehicles.
You also seem to forget that the difference in DPS will become even worse for axis units at vet 3...Penal vet abilities and vet bonuses need to change...
Remember that both the volks and the grenadier are both cheaper units to begin with. trading long range fire is an inefficient use of resources. Even just stalling and depleting a more expensive unit is a strategic victory.
Gren bleed far worse then Penals. By vet 2 Penal will be able to ourah to mid range and obliterare both gren and Volks.
The penal doesn't need to stay at 270 mp either.
Glad to see that you realize that you can't simply buff a unit massively and expect that everything will be fine...
Penal also lack smoke. M3 can be zoned by grenadiers. Soviet snipers are also more vulnerable to rush than the german sniper.
Try rushing a Soviet sniper supported by Penal with the number you suggested...you might find harder than you think.
And once more why do object in giving Penal a bolt action rifle?
6 Apr 2016, 02:35 AM
#163
Posts: 1930
In other words you changing faction design in order to replace call in infantries with Penal, while makng the early play style of soviet similar to USF. The question still stands why? is the soviet faction under-performing?
Soviet do not need all their support weapons, even if they did building both T1 and T2 cost less fuel than a single USF and 1 officer gives less access to less cost efficient weapons...
You seem to be missing the point of weapon profiles. One is to have categories of weapons with similar behavior the other is to have range where one infatry has an advantage over the other.
A shock troops for instance is more expensive than gren yet it would badly if it fight a gren if they fight at range 35 while it win over an Ober who is more expensive if they fight close. What you are suggesting make gren volks lose at all ranges...In addition even PG and ST will lose far (around 45% less DPS and around 40% less HP)and will probably lose if they try to close in from 35 under fire or probably lose at all ranges if Penals have flamers...In other words axis will be forced to either spam HMG or go for vehicles.
You also seem to forget that the difference in DPS will become even worse for axis units at vet 3...Penal vet abilities and vet bonuses need to change...
Gren bleed far worse then Penals. By vet 2 Penal will be able to ourah to mid range and obliterare both gren and Volks.
Glad to see that you realize that you can't simply buff a unit massively and expect that everything will be fine...
Try rushing a Soviet sniper supported by Penal with the number you suggested...you might find harder than you think.
And once more why do object in giving Penal a bolt action rifle?
how is it breaking soviet to buff a useless pre-existing unit? how is it breaking soviet to make the soviet less dependent on a selected few doctrinal choice? it would change the current soviet meta, but that's different from breaking soviet design.
going both t1 and t2 also cost more manpower than going either lt or captain for the USF, and even more manpower if soviet actually intent to make use of the new units.
USF vs SOV is also ultimately irrelevant. the game is about Allies vs axis, not USF vs SOV. I'm using the USF rifleman as an guideline of what work, not as competition.
What really matter is How would the axis handle t1 + t2, and my answer is the fact that going t1 +t2 will delay the soviet light vehicle due to the amount of manpower required. The german 222 will especially punish a heavy t1+t2 building
actually the rifleman can match/beat the grenadier at long range, it's just not efficient. What give the wehr supremacy at long range is their support weapon, specifically their mg42. The volks is also a superior base unit compared to the grenadier, but the volks evolve into an anti-tank squad while the grenadier evolve into an anti-infantry squad.
A big enough price difference can also overcome the inherent advantage from weapon profile. A Panzerfusilier will flat out beat conscript regardless of range.
1 penal + 1 sniper vs 1 mg42 + 1 grenadier. the mg42 pin down the penal while the grenadier chase down the sniper. Honestly it wouldnt have been any different from conscript + sniper vs a grenadier + mg42.
6 Apr 2016, 02:58 AM
#164
Posts: 5279
Price of soviet units are never ever expected to say the same when made useful, for example when people say "I want the shit medium tank in my final tier to be worth building" they dont expect a panther for 80 fuel just that you shouldnt need 1/5 of your population in a single unit in order for it to be any use... Same with penals. Obviously they arnt up to snuff atm (you can tell by the overall lack of game time they see... Ever.)
#stalinwept
6 Apr 2016, 07:15 AM
#165
Posts: 677
how is it breaking soviet to buff a useless pre-existing unit? how is it breaking soviet to make the soviet less dependent on a selected few doctrinal choice? it would change the current soviet meta, but that's different from breaking soviet design.
First of all Penal are not useless, they have limited use which is different thing, second I never claimed that they should not be buffed. What I am saying is that they should not buffed to level that would allow them to beat both Grens/Volks and PG/SP...
The soviet design is dependence in call in units and that is why soviets have the widest variety of call in and some of the most cost efficient ones.
going both t1 and t2 also cost more manpower than going either lt or captain for the USF, and even more manpower if soviet actually intent to make use of the new units.
And USF will also have to side tech and bleed more. Even so Soviet do not have to Both T1 T2, see 222 pop Guards or Partisans, see HMG Spam pop a 120mm...
I'm using the USF rifleman as an guideline of what work, not as competition.
And it is the wrong guideline if you need a guideline use Soviet units and not USF units...
What really matter is How would the axis handle t1 + t2, and my answer is the fact that going t1 +t2 will delay the soviet light vehicle due to the amount of manpower required. The german 222 will especially punish a heavy t1+t2 building
Given the strength of suggested Penal (being able to beat PG/ST), soviets will simply have map control so 222 will also be delayed...and Soviet do not need light to counter 222...
actually the rifleman can match/beat the grenadier at long range, it's just not efficient.
and that is way USF have weaker late game than Soviet or why Wer against USF use Ostrruppen.
A big enough price difference can also overcome the inherent advantage from weapon profile. A Panzerfusilier will flat out beat conscript regardless of range.
and that is why P.F. are a doctrinal unit and not a T1 unit or why they come with 6 bolt action rifles and not with 6 G43s as you suggest for Penals....
If you have a scout like a sniper and you allow your cover infatry to be pinned then you deserve to have to hit the retreat button...
...the mg42 pin down the penal while the grenadier chase down the sniper...
Things are simple either mod this changes or use miragelfa mod and see what affect similar changes to Penals have...
7 Apr 2016, 01:21 AM
#166
Posts: 1930
First of all Penal are not useless, they have limited use which is different thing, second I never claimed that they should not be buffed. What I am saying is that they should not buffed to level that would allow them to beat both Grens/Volks and PG/SP...
The soviet design is dependence in call in units and that is why soviets have the widest variety of call in and some of the most cost efficient ones.
And USF will also have to side tech and bleed more. Even so Soviet do not have to Both T1 T2, see 222 pop Guards or Partisans, see HMG Spam pop a 120mm...
And it is the wrong guideline if you need a guideline use Soviet units and not USF units...
Given the strength of suggested Penal (being able to beat PG/ST), soviets will simply have map control so 222 will also be delayed...and Soviet do not need light to counter 222...
and that is way USF have weaker late game than Soviet or why Wer against USF use Ostrruppen.
and that is why P.F. are a doctrinal unit and not a T1 unit or why they come with 6 bolt action rifles and not with 6 G43s as you suggest for Penals....
If you have a scout like a sniper and you allow your cover infatry to be pinned then you deserve to have to hit the retreat button...
Things are simple either mod this changes or use miragelfa mod and see what affect similar changes to Penals have...
the soviet meta is dependent on doctrinal call in units, but there's nothing to say that's the design. Soviet are dependent on using shock/guards and is2/t34-85/kv8 because their non-doctrinal alternative is crap. There would be a more convincing case if the soviet were outright missing the t34/76 and penal instead of them being crap.
The soviet already have access to to elite infantry anyway. The shock especially are one of the best anti-infantry infantry in the game. The Penal would be acting as an cheaper alternative to the shock at best. If the wehr can handle shock + t2, then they can handle buffed penal + support weapon. Getting the first penal out cost 430 mp, 160 of twice is toward the production building. In between dealing against a shock or an ersatz flame rifle, the flame rifle is a lot easier to deal with.
the flamethrower is an anti-infantry + anti-garrison upgrade. it significantly boost the unit's firepower against infantry, similar to how stuff like the lmg42 boost the squad's firepower against infantry.
7 Apr 2016, 03:47 AM
#167
Posts: 5279
The soviet design is dependence in call in units and that is why soviets have the widest variety of call in and some of the most cost efficient ones.
and we know that once relic makes up their mind they dont change it!
i dont know about you but I sure love filling my pop cap with nothing but heavy tanks!
that is of course when im not building t1 then t4 for a quick katy supported by call in t34-85s
also something something okw income
something something usf will NOT ever have a heavy tank
but yea we should probably stop discussion because relic designed them this way.... what was it 3 years ago?
it sure is a good thing the game hasn't changed at all since then or the soviet design might seem a wee bit dated!
additionally their call ins should be more efficient, or offer an alternative play style, they shouldn't be an excuse for a sub par stock line up, i mean the OKW have a f*cking king tiger in their line up....the russ just want something as a non doc alternative to cheese...
..... see 222 pop Guards or Partisans, see HMG Spam pop a 120mm...
unless of course you are trying to use one of those paid commanders that you have for the soviet that lack those because you forgot that you needed certain commanders to make up for crap core units because you were playing on of the other 4 factions who DONT need to be pigeon holed so they can build infantry that can shoot in a straight line...
in the end no matter what they do to penals they WILL overlap with someone in the soviet rooster (heres that outdated design again) and currently they overlap with the worse and most accessible one...
give them a pair of scoped SVTs maybe that improve their long range dps as suggested but make it reduce close DPS enough that sturms and pgrens will beat them
adjust price accordingly
#stalinwept
7 Apr 2016, 10:06 AM
#168
Posts: 677
and we know that once relic makes up their mind they dont change it!
Faction have been design to have strong points and weak points. Is that set in stone? No but when one wants to change the some of the strong and weak points of faction one usually has to completely residing the faction itself as it was done with OKW.
So they question are: Does the soviet faction need a redesign of having better stock units and less dependency in call in units? Is the idea of turning Penals to riflemen clones enough reason to redesign the faction?
in the end no matter what they do to penals they WILL overlap with someone in the soviet rooster (heres that outdated design again) and currently they overlap with the worse and most accessible one...
It has been suggested that penal become osttrupen type unit something soviets miss both in stock and in doctrinal and that some of the utility of Consc should be shared with them. So there are solution that do not overlap...
give them a pair of scoped SVTs maybe that improve their long range dps as suggested but make it reduce close DPS enough that sturms and pgrens will beat them
adjust price accordingly
Or simply give them bolt action rifles for far DPS and SVT weapon upgrade for mid DPS...
7 Apr 2016, 10:27 AM
#169
Posts: 677
the soviet meta is dependent on doctrinal call in units, but there's nothing to say that's the design.
Any idea why soviet some sort of doctrinal infatry call-in in most of their commander? Any idea why some of these call in infantries are some of the most cost efficient units? Any idea why most of the Soviet stock units do not excel in anything? It could be pure chance on hand or it could design...
...the flame rifle is a lot easier to deal with.
Not if the rifle that is suggested has great DPS in all ranges allowing to beat early stock axis infatry in all ranges. Shock troops are great only if and when they can move in close, with the suggested weapon Penal would dominated in all range and that is bad design.
What do you think would happen in the game if axis suddenly had T1 access to P.Fuss that come with 6 G43 (no At grenade)?
Creating 6 men stock units that are very good in all ranges will create more problem than it will solve. Penal should either use SVT and be average (close) very good (mid) average (far) or bolt action rifles and be average average very good.
At least that is my opinion.
Flamer and LMG are both weapon upgrades but the similarities end there...Flamer are weapon designed to deal with cover and garrison. Why you insist in this? If penal need a new role they need a new role regardless of what their previous one was...
the flamethrower is an anti-infantry + anti-garrison upgrade. it significantly boost the unit's firepower against infantry, similar to how stuff like the lmg42 boost the squad's firepower against infantry.
7 Apr 2016, 15:58 PM
#170
Posts: 5279
It has been suggested that penal become osttrupen type unit something soviets miss both in stock and in doctrinal and that some of the utility of Consc should be shared with them. So there are solution that do not overlap... .
except that the soviet dont need MORE units that cant fight, they already have cons for that, cons who when vet up get absurd amounts of recc acc you will AGAIN rin into overlap because you have to chose
"do i want the 6 man squad that never gets hit and cant shoot his rifle or do i take the 6 man squad who is cheap to reinforce and cant shoot his rifle?"
and reducing the utility of cons just to make another unit more attractive will just make t1 mandatory and while it is a cheap tier its another unnecessary manpower cost
what the soviet need is a unit that can make picking one of the many doctrines without call in infantry viable, not more cannon fodder
#stalinwept
7 Apr 2016, 18:11 PM
#171
Posts: 677
...
what the soviet need is a unit that can make picking one of the many doctrines without call in infantry viable, not more cannon fodder
Are you trying to make Penals more attractive or residing the faction? The faction is rather balanced and is designed to utilize commander's specific units.
Redesigning the faction and making Penal more attractive are 2 separate issues...
If some commanders without call in infatry do not work that is the problem of the commanders and not faction....
7 Apr 2016, 18:32 PM
#172
Posts: 5279
Are you trying to make Penals more attractive or residing the faction? The faction is rather balanced and is designed to utilize commander's specific units.
Redesigning the faction and making Penal more attractive are 2 separate issues...
If some commanders without call in infatry do not work that is the problem of the commanders and not faction....
both are linked, making penals halfway decent would open up a wealth of choices for the soviet
and i maintain that true balance will come when all factions can fight against each other (by that i mean axis v allies, not expecting a usf vs ussr matchup) without needing a doctrine as then the only thing that needs adjusting is the doctrines themselves, which wont be needed to stand a chance, just diversify play and cater to playstyles/ add flavour
#stalinwept
7 Apr 2016, 18:42 PM
#173
Posts: 677
both are linked, making penals halfway decent would open up a wealth of choices for the soviet
No redesign the faction and making Penal useful is not linked...one can happen without the other
and i maintain that true balance will come when all factions can fight against each other (by that i mean axis v allies, not expecting a usf vs ussr matchup) without needing a doctrine as then the only thing that needs adjusting is the doctrines themselves, which wont be needed to stand a chance, just diversify play and cater to playstyles/ add flavour
I don't agree that making doctrines flavor only is needed for the game to be balanced. And you are actually talking about redesigning the whole game not only Penal and the soviet faction...
7 Apr 2016, 19:04 PM
#174
Posts: 5279
No redesign the faction and making Penal useful is not linked...one can happen without the other
[/qoute]
except it isnt, the soviet rely on call ins almost entirely- that is their (outdated) design, by buffing penals to make it so a doctrine that doesnt have call in infantry becomes viable you have alleviated some the stress of the stupid and outdated design. its not a full redesign of course but the soviet dont NEED a redesing, just to be updated.
I don't agree that making doctrines flavor only is needed for the game to be balanced. And you are actually talking about redesigning the whole game not only Penal and the soviet faction...
all of the other factions function mostly well without doctrine choice, you can pick almost any docteine and be fine, sure some are leaps ahead of others but the core still holds strong.
for example:
as the brits if you pick royal arty
you still have infantry capable of fighting, you still have armour that can take a hit and dish it, you still have access to a damage sponge you still have AT infantry
but now you ALSO have other units (crappy ones, but more choices none the less)
as the usf if you pick recon support
you still have infantry that can fight, you still have a great TD ou still have weapon upgrades, you still have self repairing crews, you still have squad wipe machine medium tanks.
as OKW if you pick firestorm
you still have a heavy tank, you still have great AT options, you still have AI troops, you still have fantastic light armour, you still have a unit that can counter tanks and buildings/ garrisons/ take some aggro
as wehr if you pick luftwaffe
you still have assualt infantry, you still have amazing AT, you still have heavily armoured armour, you still have weapon upgrades, you still have core infantry that scales
as the soviet and you pick NKVD
you have DONT have any good infantry, you DONT have a tank that will ever bounce/ pen you DONT have a TD that can reliably pen heavy armour, you DONT have weapon upgrades
i own all the commanders except the newest ones for the wfa and brits (4 newest) as any faction i COULD pick any commander and have a blast EXCEPT as the soviet (who have an ASS tonne of commanders to choose from) you cant say that that doesnt implicate something...
#stalinwept
7 Apr 2016, 19:09 PM
#175
Posts: 677
...
as the soviet and you pick NKVD
...
If the NKVD commander does not work redesign the commander not the faction. Currently doctrine selection is very important in all faction. Thus at high levels you see the same commander again and again..
7 Apr 2016, 19:20 PM
#176
Posts: 5279
If the NKVD commander does not work redesign the commander not the faction. Currently doctrine selection is very important in all faction. Thus at high levels you see the same commander again and again..
ifeel having a working (read effective) infantry option nondoc may make it viable without redesigning the commander
and the reason that some commanders are selected more often than others is that some doctrines bring more to the table.
what im saying is (imma use just numbers to show what imsaying here)
if the base "power" of a faction is 5, and a commander brings another 5 you have a power of 10
(5+5=10)
now if you pick a commander that only has a power of 2 you are quite worse off
(5+2=7)
now that is indeed a problem with the commander
but what we have is the soviet being say.. a 3 and the okw as a 5
this means if the okw pick a commander that is a 3 the soviet NEED a 5 to be on par
this also means that the soviet need commanders that brin at least a 7 to the table incase the okw pick a 5
okw- (5+5=10)
soviet - (3+7=10)
my hope for balanced core is that everyone starts off as a 5, so that all commanders can be balanced as well instead of requiring there to be more in the commander than in the faction
because ATM something like NKVD brings a 1
so soviet- (3+1=4)
vs OKW (5+0=5)
by that i mean even without a doctrine the okw outmatch the soviet with one
to be on par MANY commanders would need quite a few buffs
whereas buffing the core might mean that those many commanders need only smaller changes (or even none at all!)
commanders can still counter each other but you arnt left with horrible awful cheese AND requiring only a handful of doctrines to make up for a weak core
im sorry if thats a mess
#stalinwept
7 Apr 2016, 19:34 PM
#177
Posts: 677
im sorry if thats a mess
No need to apologise
Think we are drifting away from topic a bit but I have to point out here that Soviet have plethora of doctrinal infantries with some of them being the most cost efficient ones so if one want redesign the Soviet faction one would also have to redesign most of these infantries.
Partisan and AT Partisans are prime examples of them being some of the most cost efficient units in their role...
7 Apr 2016, 22:51 PM
#178
Posts: 1930
Any idea why soviet some sort of doctrinal infatry call-in in most of their commander? Any idea why some of these call in infantries are some of the most cost efficient units? Any idea why most of the Soviet stock units do not excel in anything? It could be pure chance on hand or it could design...
Not if the rifle that is suggested has great DPS in all ranges allowing to beat early stock axis infatry in all ranges. Shock troops are great only if and when they can move in close, with the suggested weapon Penal would dominated in all range and that is bad design.
What do you think would happen in the game if axis suddenly had T1 access to P.Fuss that come with 6 G43 (no At grenade)?
Creating 6 men stock units that are very good in all ranges will create more problem than it will solve. Penal should either use SVT and be average (close) very good (mid) average (far) or bolt action rifles and be average average very good.
At least that is my opinion.
Flamer and LMG are both weapon upgrades but the similarities end there...Flamer are weapon designed to deal with cover and garrison. Why you insist in this? If penal need a new role they need a new role regardless of what their previous one was...
having duplicate units in the doctrine is not unique. Fallschirmjager is an alternative to the ober. stormtrooper is an alternative to the panzergrenadier. The croc is an alternative to the regular churchill. The wehr mortar HT is an alternative to the regular wehr mortar
Just because the faction have access to a possibly stronger doctrinal alternative, it doesn't mean the non doc version needs to be weak. The regular wehr mortar is still quite good even if the ht mortar outclasses it.
To say that penal is weak because that's the way it's intended is just affirming the consequent. The effects alone is not enough to prove the cause to true, unless it's the only cause. The penal could be weak just as due to balancing error.
base Penal lack abilities like the rifleman's smoke or even the conscript's oorah. Their firepower is their main draw. Going t1 also put the soviet in a slight resource disadvantage due to the cost of the building itself.
the intent of the boost is to allow the Penal to fight the grenadier on roughly equal ground before the upgrades arrive. 1.4 is number that might or might not work. I believe it will work and am willing to test it.
Any one who ever buy a flamethrower for their sapper, pioneer, sov engineer, or US rifleman will easily see the boost in damage, even against unit out of cover. That boost in damage easily qualify the flamethrower as an anti-infantry upgrade as well as an anti-garrison upgrade.
8 Apr 2016, 00:24 AM
#179
Posts: 677
To say that penal is weak because that's the way it's intended is just affirming the consequent. The effects alone is not enough to prove the cause to true, unless it's the only cause. The penal could be weak just as due to balancing error.
I did not claim that Penal should be weak. I don't even think that they are actually weak, I have even seen games be won with an early aggressive use of them against OKW trucks...
base Penal lack abilities like the rifleman's smoke or even the conscript's oorah.
And that is why I have suggested that one should not try to fix them only by boosting their DPS, and should also get more abilities/utility...
the intent of the boost is to allow the Penal to fight the grenadier on roughly equal ground before the upgrades arrive. 1.4 is number that might or might not work.
It is an idea worth trying, so give them Gaurds Mosin that have 1.4 far DPS instead of giving them 6 weapon that will be superior in all ranges and will allow them to bit G43 grenadier (at all ranges)and even win against PG and SP...The problem is not that they will have to much DPS far but that they will have too much DPS in all ranges, axis units should be able to have an advantage at some range
I believe it will work and am willing to test it.
You can probably test it in miragelfa's mod it has numbers that are that high if I remember correctly
Any one who ever buy a flamethrower... or US rifleman will easily see the boost in damage,...
R.E. or assault engineers not riflemen...Any one buying a flamer will actually see a drop in damage against target further than 20. Is there any real point in debating flamers? Penal currently can fight infatry but their kit of flamers and satchel charges makes the unit excel in clearing garrison fighting units in heavy cover and blowing up buildings...
8 Apr 2016, 00:55 AM
#180
Posts: 556
I like to see penals serve a shock troop light role, thinking along the lines of suicidal charge through MG fire as a special ability at VET 1.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
21 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
234 | ||
|
|
|
|
47 | ||
 |
|
|
29 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
655 users are online:
655 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM