|
On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups.
Well, I guess I'm a lazy bum for not preferring an unintuitive interface restriction revolving around the arbitrary number of 12. Maybe I should stop being lazy and start playing a mechanically challenging game with no production queues, no control group hotkeys, no rally points, hotkey requirements for every command, and a 4-unit selection limit. Surely such arbitrary interface restrictions should greatly improve my gaming experience.
|
On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... .
Somewhat agree. I think it's far too easy to avoid disadvantageous fights, and it's hard to force an opponent to commit into a slugfest without putting yourself in a horrible position.
Macro is now a joke. It's hard to distinguish yourself with macro when you're stuck at 3 mining bases and a very easily maxed out unit cap. I used to struggle to 200/200 with upgrades in BW, but let's face it, I could probably sip some tea while doing just that in 15 minutes in HotS (or less).
Mostly it is just about moving around the map and not getting caught (which is part luck part skill)
|
GM boards have always been stupid because it rewards those who grind and make GM first then just sit there. Never understood why GM wasn't pure meritocracy top 16 or whatever. Either you're top ELO in the region or you're not.
|
On March 20 2013 19:38 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 19:29 JustPassingBy wrote:Well, as of now, on race distribution on the Korean Grandmaster ladder is: P: 71 (35.86%) T: 59 (29.8%) Z: 68 (34.34%) And the race distribution across all leagues in Korea is: P: 7346 (35.36&) T: 6733 (32.41%)
Z: 6695 (32.23%)I think the numbers are pretty even, I cannot say that statistically one race is overrepresented than the other in the GM league. edit: so my opinion is: how about we wait a month, before jumping to conclusions? my only conclusion was that terran is the least played race
Interesting, Terran has practically the same amount of players than Zerg players on what he posted.
|
On March 20 2013 20:49 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 19:38 nkr wrote:On March 20 2013 19:29 JustPassingBy wrote:Well, as of now, on race distribution on the Korean Grandmaster ladder is: P: 71 (35.86%) T: 59 (29.8%) Z: 68 (34.34%) And the race distribution across all leagues in Korea is: P: 7346 (35.36&) T: 6733 (32.41%)
Z: 6695 (32.23%)I think the numbers are pretty even, I cannot say that statistically one race is overrepresented than the other in the GM league. edit: so my opinion is: how about we wait a month, before jumping to conclusions? my only conclusion was that terran is the least played race Interesting, Terran has practically the same amount of players than Zerg players on what he posted.
he posted only one out of 4 regions; have a look yourself
|
On March 20 2013 20:54 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 20:49 Godwrath wrote:On March 20 2013 19:38 nkr wrote:On March 20 2013 19:29 JustPassingBy wrote:Well, as of now, on race distribution on the Korean Grandmaster ladder is: P: 71 (35.86%) T: 59 (29.8%) Z: 68 (34.34%) And the race distribution across all leagues in Korea is: P: 7346 (35.36&) T: 6733 (32.41%)
Z: 6695 (32.23%)I think the numbers are pretty even, I cannot say that statistically one race is overrepresented than the other in the GM league. edit: so my opinion is: how about we wait a month, before jumping to conclusions? my only conclusion was that terran is the least played race Interesting, Terran has practically the same amount of players than Zerg players on what he posted. he posted only one out of 4 regions; have a look yourself
You were argueing about his stats, and his stats are from korea. What's the point to look for different regions when you are discussing the race distribution in Korea ? I don't know how is that any relevant.
|
On March 20 2013 19:56 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups. Well, I guess I'm a lazy bum for not preferring an unintuitive interface restriction revolving around the arbitrary number of 12. Maybe I should stop being lazy and start playing a mechanically challenging game with no production queues, no control group hotkeys, no rally points, hotkey requirements for every command, and a 4-unit selection limit. Surely such arbitrary interface restrictions should greatly improve my gaming experience.
You completely miss the point ... it might be NECESSARY for BALANCING REASONS to limit the number of selected units to 12 because of the "unit density problem".
Just a quick reminder about that problem:
A Marine and a Stalker have roughly the same dps. Their differences in health, armor and mobility is balanced with the differing cost. The problem starts to appear when you have MANY Marines against a mediocre amount of Stalkers ... for the same cost. Since you can "stack" roughly 3 Marines in the space each Stalker occupies you end up with a vastly superior Marine force which has three times the dps. As long as the numbers stay small the Stalkers can win and use their shield regeneration, but as soon as numbers increase the Marines will have a far bigger power.
The only thing that changes is NUMBER OF UNITS, but in the process the balance shifts from "balanced" to "totally one-sided". This is BAD because it makes the game harder to balance due to the shifting power depending upon numbers. If you dont see it and rather want to keep your stupid unlimited unit selection and super tight pathing then you are too lazy. A limit on number of units is NOT unintuitive, you are just too lazy to split your units into squads.
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
On March 20 2013 20:54 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 20:49 Godwrath wrote:On March 20 2013 19:38 nkr wrote:On March 20 2013 19:29 JustPassingBy wrote:Well, as of now, on race distribution on the Korean Grandmaster ladder is: P: 71 (35.86%) T: 59 (29.8%) Z: 68 (34.34%) And the race distribution across all leagues in Korea is: P: 7346 (35.36&) T: 6733 (32.41%)
Z: 6695 (32.23%)I think the numbers are pretty even, I cannot say that statistically one race is overrepresented than the other in the GM league. edit: so my opinion is: how about we wait a month, before jumping to conclusions? my only conclusion was that terran is the least played race Interesting, Terran has practically the same amount of players than Zerg players on what he posted. he posted only one out of 4 regions; have a look yourself
yes, because kr is the only most relevant region, obviously..
when balancing, I def. agree that we should look at different leagues, but IMHO, there should be a bit more focus on the highest level of play.
|
On March 20 2013 21:15 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 19:56 eviltomahawk wrote:On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups. Well, I guess I'm a lazy bum for not preferring an unintuitive interface restriction revolving around the arbitrary number of 12. Maybe I should stop being lazy and start playing a mechanically challenging game with no production queues, no control group hotkeys, no rally points, hotkey requirements for every command, and a 4-unit selection limit. Surely such arbitrary interface restrictions should greatly improve my gaming experience. You completely miss the point ... it might be NECESSARY for BALANCING REASONS to limit the number of selected units to 12 because of the "unit density problem".
There is no real reason whatsoever that you would require it for balancing reasons. That would just be lazy balancing, and making the game worse because they would be too lazy to do proper balancing (luckily Blizzard doesnt seem to be inclines to ever introduce such a horrible idea).
I got another balancing idea: Currently Terran bio is too strong (just as example). What if at random intervals your screen would become black for 2 seconds? And we increase the chance it happens when units start dying. I don't think I have to argue that bio is pretty high on the list of micro-intensive compositions. So we can nerf that by blacking out your screen for a few seconds at a time, and then relatively often during fights. That way bio becomes alot less effective, and for example banelings become a way better counter. And if you disagree you are just too lazy to remember where your units were before your screen turned black.
|
On March 20 2013 21:42 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 21:15 Rabiator wrote:On March 20 2013 19:56 eviltomahawk wrote:On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups. Well, I guess I'm a lazy bum for not preferring an unintuitive interface restriction revolving around the arbitrary number of 12. Maybe I should stop being lazy and start playing a mechanically challenging game with no production queues, no control group hotkeys, no rally points, hotkey requirements for every command, and a 4-unit selection limit. Surely such arbitrary interface restrictions should greatly improve my gaming experience. You completely miss the point ... it might be NECESSARY for BALANCING REASONS to limit the number of selected units to 12 because of the "unit density problem". There is no real reason whatsoever that you would require it for balancing reasons. That would just be lazy balancing, and making the game worse because they would be too lazy to do proper balancing (luckily Blizzard doesnt seem to be inclines to ever introduce such a horrible idea). I got another balancing idea: Currently Terran bio is too strong (just as example). What if at random intervals your screen would become black for 2 seconds? And we increase the chance it happens when units start dying. I don't think I have to argue that bio is pretty high on the list of micro-intensive compositions. So we can nerf that by blacking out your screen for a few seconds at a time, and then relatively often during fights. That way bio becomes alot less effective, and for example banelings become a way better counter. And if you disagree you are just too lazy to remember where your units were before your screen turned black.
That is probably the stupidest thing I've ever read... Thank you for your "contribution" to this thread.
My opinion: Don't change anything yet. Zerg was OP during most of WoL and they just didn't realize it until Destiny (and a few Koreans) came by and showed us all how powerful infestors are.
No, I don't like speedivacs and mines, but that doesn't mean they're OP in any way. We just have to figure out the best way to deal with it all.
|
Russian Federation125 Posts
Yeh lets nerf medivacs and widow mine so that we can return to wol balance...
except... terran is the least played race
http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all
oops[/QUOTE]
I really doubt that race distribution in GML depends on number of playes for each race in all the leages.
GML is about top 0.5%. There allways will be enough top ml terrans who potentially might go to gml.
We don't have situation like there are only 100top terran players who deserve gml so the rest of terran places go to other races.
Anyway my point was that even now terrans don't dominate neither ladder nor gml. And if blizz nerf speedvacs or mines - terrans will vanish from ladder and tornaments like in wol.
Yes i agrree that speedvacs are very strong but i also agree that zerg was too strong in wol and speedvacs are the only thing that compensate other races imba.
|
On March 20 2013 18:40 mostevil wrote:
Personally I'd like to see medivac boost just send them forwards and lock the direction of the medivac while active. Would mean using it randomly to get places faster has a risk and theres an element of skill and timing in using it well. It would also make it more viable for escape and less for attack as the medivacs would overshoot the drop unless activated at the perfect range.
Energy use is the easier change though, which is how blizzard usually does these things.
That has the oposite effect, in that a low energy medivac can't escape, whereas a high energy one is less vulnerable to feedback. Seems less cool all round to me.
Another possibility that would play a little more intuitively than forcing a straight line would be to make load/unload impossible while afterburners are on. That way, it would be a way to get in/out, would have to be timed for perfect use and would give the enemy some time to react.
|
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now.
|
Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch one month after the Queen patch:
On August 20 2012 01:40 Giantt wrote:
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset.
They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance.
MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn.
(Source.)
TLDR: Terrans don't adapt. Give it time. Mvp beating euro Zergs proves that game is fine.
Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch sevens months after the Queen patch:
Zergs are boxed in to playing infestor only builds because of stupidly weak hydras and mutas working only if your opponent fell asleep - of course that eventually most will figure out how to use them to their maximum potential and it would seem imbalanced - after all it took 2 years of practice. Let Terrans and Protoss players sweat a while figuring out solutions. I play on EU GM level and can tell you that the top Terrans have figured it out. For Protoss I think the issue is non-existent - players need to change their mindset away from the "before broodlord push - fingers crossed it works" to more balanced style of pokes, harrasment with macro and tech behind.
(Source.)
TLDR: Terrans and Protoss don't adapt. Give it time.
Giantt on the Widow mine one week after HotS release:
On March 21 2013 01:47 Giantt wrote:
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now.
TLDR: Widow Mine is the most ridiculous thing in the universe.
Several months after the Queen/Overlord patch, when European Zergs are allowed to play several levels above their real skill, everything is still fine; we need time, we need more time. Yet suddenly, when something problematic occurs for your race, you already know, one week after release, that Zergs adapted perfectly and are playing flawlessly against it, which of course means the thing is completely broken.
Strong credibility you have there, my friend.
|
The only thing right now that obviously needs attention is the void ray.
You don't just FIGURE OUT the voidray, its an A move unit. Prismatic alignment works too well, it should be at least an upgrade at the fleet beacon.
|
On March 21 2013 02:09 TheDwf wrote:Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch one month after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:40 Giantt wrote:
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset.
They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance.
MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans don't adapt. Give it time. Mvp beating euro Zergs proves that game is fine. Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch sevens months after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +Zergs are boxed in to playing infestor only builds because of stupidly weak hydras and mutas working only if your opponent fell asleep - of course that eventually most will figure out how to use them to their maximum potential and it would seem imbalanced - after all it took 2 years of practice. Let Terrans and Protoss players sweat a while figuring out solutions. I play on EU GM level and can tell you that the top Terrans have figured it out. For Protoss I think the issue is non-existent - players need to change their mindset away from the "before broodlord push - fingers crossed it works" to more balanced style of pokes, harrasment with macro and tech behind. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans and Protoss don't adapt. Give it time. Giantt on the Widow mine one week after HotS release: Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 01:47 Giantt wrote:
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now. TLDR: Widow Mine is the most ridiculous thing in the universe. Several months after the Queen/Overlord patch, when European Zergs are allowed to play several levels above their real skill, everything is still fine; we need time, we need more time. Yet suddenly, when something problematic occurs for your race, you already know, one week after release, that Zergs adapted perfectly and are playing flawlessly against it, which of course means the thing is completely broken. Strong credibility you have there, my friend. haha, lol, nice find.
I don't agree at all that zerg is in trouble balancewise, btw. Well, i can't say anything about it tbh. I was surprised leenock lost 3-0 (at mlg), but that's about it.
|
On March 21 2013 02:09 TheDwf wrote:Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch one month after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:40 Giantt wrote:
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset.
They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance.
MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans don't adapt. Give it time. Mvp beating euro Zergs proves that game is fine. Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch sevens months after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +Zergs are boxed in to playing infestor only builds because of stupidly weak hydras and mutas working only if your opponent fell asleep - of course that eventually most will figure out how to use them to their maximum potential and it would seem imbalanced - after all it took 2 years of practice. Let Terrans and Protoss players sweat a while figuring out solutions. I play on EU GM level and can tell you that the top Terrans have figured it out. For Protoss I think the issue is non-existent - players need to change their mindset away from the "before broodlord push - fingers crossed it works" to more balanced style of pokes, harrasment with macro and tech behind. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans and Protoss don't adapt. Give it time. Giantt on the Widow mine one week after HotS release: Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 01:47 Giantt wrote:
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now. TLDR: Widow Mine is the most ridiculous thing in the universe. Several months after the Queen/Overlord patch, when European Zergs are allowed to play several levels above their real skill, everything is still fine; we need time, we need more time. Yet suddenly, when something problematic occurs for your race, you already know, one week after release, that Zergs adapted perfectly and are playing flawlessly against it, which of course means the thing is completely broken. Strong credibility you have there, my friend.
I stand for what I have said. Of course I am biased. Everybody that is even remotely interested in the game is biased towards a certain race.The posts you dug out only state that I do not have the time nor I am willing to spend the effort raising flags about something broken with another race or match up that is not affecting me.
To explain my point further, so that you might grasp my meaning:
The issue with the infestor appeared 1+ year after the unit remained unchanged(and nerfed in terms of neural parasite). It was created not by the unit itself but by the way Zerg players learned to use it - in every situation with nearly perfect efficiency.
The case with WM on the other hand appears now - only a month-two so since the last major patch - when only a few people are near mastering WM control and tactics and most of what you see is mediocre usage that yields great results. The issue is only going to become more and more obvious as more and more Terrans improve their skills with the new unit.
|
I definitely like aggressive play (that aren't all-ins every time) to be possible in many situations. HotS has definitely made this better in the short run. More fun to play and watch. As long as one race isn't pigeonholed into defending forever with no shot at doing damage till lategame without having to do a coinflip build (I'm looking at you 2012 WoL Protoss). When I play P now, I love the options recall gives you early on for instance.
There are a couple of things that probably need tweaking, but obviously it takes time to figure some of this stuff out.
Good announcement by Blizz.
|
I'm a Terran player and I don't think Medivacs and mines should be nerfed yet, but I will say its really funny to hear Terrans complain about tvt because of drops, but then argue for tosses and zergs to just have patience and figure it out. Such a perfect illustration (similar to Giantt's contradictions) of how retardedly biased people are in balance arguments.
What's also funny is that the vast majority of these players are losing due to their own terrible mistakes rather than balance. For the vast majority of players, their mistakes far outweigh balance in determining game outcomes. If you want to argue about pro games that's one thing (even though its arguable that if your game knowledge isn't pro level, then your opinion isn't worthwhile), but please stop being terrible at the game before complaining about balance. As amid master myself, I will readily admit how bad I am. I've never cared much about balance because I know I can easily overcome it by outplaying my terrible opponents.
TLDR: balance arguments are retarded.
|
On March 21 2013 02:09 TheDwf wrote:Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch one month after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:40 Giantt wrote:
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset.
They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance.
MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans don't adapt. Give it time. Mvp beating euro Zergs proves that game is fine. Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch sevens months after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +Zergs are boxed in to playing infestor only builds because of stupidly weak hydras and mutas working only if your opponent fell asleep - of course that eventually most will figure out how to use them to their maximum potential and it would seem imbalanced - after all it took 2 years of practice. Let Terrans and Protoss players sweat a while figuring out solutions. I play on EU GM level and can tell you that the top Terrans have figured it out. For Protoss I think the issue is non-existent - players need to change their mindset away from the "before broodlord push - fingers crossed it works" to more balanced style of pokes, harrasment with macro and tech behind. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans and Protoss don't adapt. Give it time. Giantt on the Widow mine one week after HotS release: Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 01:47 Giantt wrote:
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now. TLDR: Widow Mine is the most ridiculous thing in the universe. Several months after the Queen/Overlord patch, when European Zergs are allowed to play several levels above their real skill, everything is still fine; we need time, we need more time. Yet suddenly, when something problematic occurs for your race, you already know, one week after release, that Zergs adapted perfectly and are playing flawlessly against it, which of course means the thing is completely broken. Strong credibility you have there, my friend.
great post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
