Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
2053
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 13:56:00 -
[931] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:When are we getting the battleship proposals. I thought they would be out by today at the latest... you should pretty much already know what they're going to be. You mean in the same was as we should pretty much know that your posts are always going to be ship toasts then also.
What are ship toasts? BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
112
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:10:00 -
[932] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Rabbit P wrote:CCP Rise wrote: ASHIMMU Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 208(+33) / .58 / 11010000 / 5.01s
according to the formula, the align time of ashimmu should be 8.85s rise , seem you miss the post before, so i post it again, please check the align time You're right, sorry I missed it before. Will correct the OP. The Cynabel had the wrong agility modifier also. |
Abramul
StarFleet Enterprises StarFleet.
19
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:14:00 -
[933] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Rabbit P wrote:CCP Rise wrote: ASHIMMU Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 208(+33) / .58 / 11010000 / 5.01s
according to the formula, the align time of ashimmu should be 8.85s rise , seem you miss the post before, so i post it again, please check the align time You're right, sorry I missed it before. Will correct the OP. How difficult would it be to put this in in-game attributes? Assuming it's pretty straightforward math, and would be handy. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
734
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:36:00 -
[934] - Quote
why does the phantasm have such a high align time? its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
734
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:45:00 -
[935] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Rabbit P wrote:CCP Rise wrote: ASHIMMU Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 208(+33) / .58 / 11010000 / 5.01s
according to the formula, the align time of ashimmu should be 8.85s rise , seem you miss the post before, so i post it again, please check the align time You're right, sorry I missed it before. Will correct the OP.
how does the formula work? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Vadeim Rizen
TYR. Exodus.
32
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:53:00 -
[936] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:
Ashimmu: 430 Cynabal: 400 Gila: 440 Phantasm: 410 Vigilant: 450
Look for the battleship post at the start of next week.
So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:54:00 -
[937] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote: just ship toasting or trolling as usual.
everything I say is correct, but presented in a bitter shitposty way |
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Brothers of Tangra
389
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:55:00 -
[938] - Quote
Abramul wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Rabbit P wrote:according to the formula, the align time of ashimmu should be 8.85s rise , seem you miss the post before, so i post it again, please check the align time You're right, sorry I missed it before. Will correct the OP. How difficult would it be to put this in in-game attributes? Assuming it's pretty straightforward math, and would be handy. Not diffucult at all.
Harvey James wrote:
how does the formula work?
IIRC: -ln(.25)*inertia*mass/1,000,000
Edit: Nailed it.
Edit 2: not quite, fixing it by putting in a negative where I forgot it. |
Cheng Musana
Purple Space Ponys AAA Citizens
69
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 15:33:00 -
[939] - Quote
Im worried that the rattlesnake will just be a mirror of the gila. i think it will get 50mb bandwith so it can launch 2 heavy drones, gets bonus only on heavy's and damage bonus for missiles. We all know that it wont get a sentry damage bonus cause thats a gallente exclusive thing now. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
5808
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 15:36:00 -
[940] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote:CCP Rise wrote:There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:
Ashimmu: 430 Cynabal: 400 Gila: 440 Phantasm: 410 Vigilant: 450
Look for the battleship post at the start of next week. So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them.
Another one of those snipy insulting posts directed at the person making the changes. Yea, that will get him to change course!
if only people in real life could train social skills like we can in game, the world would be a better place. |
|
Vadeim Rizen
TYR. Exodus.
32
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 15:46:00 -
[941] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Vadeim Rizen wrote:CCP Rise wrote:There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:
Ashimmu: 430 Cynabal: 400 Gila: 440 Phantasm: 410 Vigilant: 450
Look for the battleship post at the start of next week. So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them. Another one of those snipy insulting posts directed at the person making the changes. Yea, that will get him to change course! if only people in real life could train social skills like we can in game, the world would be a better place.
What do you suggest, then? Not only have I posted several thought out, constructive criticism... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
116
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 15:55:00 -
[942] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:why does the phantasm have such a high align time? its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it The vigilants align time is much higher than the phantasm. I think the Cynabel should have higher align that the Vigilant though, right now they are equal. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
734
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 16:37:00 -
[943] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Harvey James wrote:why does the phantasm have such a high align time? its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it The vigilants align time is much higher than the phantasm. I think the Cynabel should have higher align that the Vigilant though, right now they are equal.
cynabal align time is a fair bit better than the vigilants Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
5819
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 17:15:00 -
[944] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote:
What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response.
I suggest you learn that this is a video game we are talking about . The DEVs don't owe you are me or anyone else a reply, but being snippy at a DEV is a surefire way to insure that you don't get one lol.
I was unhappy with the NPC AI change and posted about it a lot without getting DEV replies. I didn't then stoop to what amounts to insulting them. I had my say and was done with it. Later, after the changes I pointed out how some of my concerns can't to fruition. At the end of the day, CCP is gonna do what they want, our option then becomes "live with it and keep playing" or unsub.
Not that i'm telling you what to do, just pointing out that would you did was counter-productive to what you want to happen.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
734
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 17:52:00 -
[945] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:
Ashimmu: 430 Cynabal: 400 Gila: 440 Phantasm: 410 Vigilant: 450
Look for the battleship post at the start of next week.
why the delay? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3268
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:14:00 -
[946] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:why the delay? And the ominous foreboding begins... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Brothers of Tangra
389
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:20:00 -
[947] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Vadeim Rizen wrote:CCP Rise wrote:There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:
Ashimmu: 430 Cynabal: 400 Gila: 440 Phantasm: 410 Vigilant: 450
Look for the battleship post at the start of next week. So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them. Another one of those snipy insulting posts directed at the person making the changes. Yea, that will get him to change course! if only people in real life could train social skills like we can in game, the world would be a better place. What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response. See, one of these things is not like the others, one of these things is a simple statement of numbers that have already been determined. The others are things that have to be carefully deliberated, the preferred direction of the balance team taken into account, number tweaking, etc. And for the most part, a strong opinion is to be avoided when commenting on balance ideas until testing has been done.
Basically, he likely responded to the cargobay thing because it's as easy as copy+pasting some numbers from a spreadsheet. Responding to balance ideas... well, it's comes down to agreeing with someone, saying it's impossible, or trying to tactfully call someone an idiot. It takes some thought to do. |
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
493
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:53:00 -
[948] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:why does the phantasm have such a high align time? its an attack cruiser right ?
Because:
Sansha (san*sha) noun 1. excrement; *****. 2. an act of defecating; evacuation. 3. the *****, diarrhea. 4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense. 5. Slang. something inferior or worthless.
As in, Man that fit is totally Sansha. Or, I need a quick bio, I've got a massive Sansha to take.
or:
verb (used without object), Sansha, or Sanshat, Sanshating. 9.to defecate.
|
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
429
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:55:00 -
[949] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Harvey James wrote:why does the phantasm have such a high align time? its an attack cruiser right ? Because: Sansha (san*sha) noun 1. excrement; *****. 2. an act of defecating; evacuation. 3. the *****, diarrhea. 4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense. 5. Slang. something inferior or worthless. As in, Man that fit is totally Sansha. Or, I need a quick bio, I've got a massive Sansha to take. or: verb (used without object), Sansha, or Sanshat, Sanshating. 9.to defecate. more common use is the Dirty Sansha, a cousin the the Dirty Sanchez |
LaserzPewPew
Hard Knocks Inc.
34
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 19:00:00 -
[950] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:Imiarr Timshae wrote:Well I will simply never use my gila again. Edit : I don't ever use my gila it's so bad already. I guess I'll just continue to never use my gila. Good work as ever (SARCASM) Edit : Concerns over Gila 1. Far less damage 2. Inability to use sentry drones. 3. Removal of all shield tanking sentry ships (cruiser class) from the game. 4. Massive lack of adaptability. 5. Un-bonused light drones. In short - You have nerfed the gila, which was admittedly already one of the worst pirate cruisers. How have these concerns not been addressed in 40+ pages. Is there anyone who actually use a gila who wants these ridiculous changes that make Guristas have extreme niche application?
As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch. |
|
Arushia
Nova Labs
40
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 19:16:00 -
[951] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
PHANTASM
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 7.5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret tracking speed
Caldari Cruiser Bonus: 20% bonus to Afterburner velocity bonus (was 5% energy turret damage)
Role Bonus: 150% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage (was 100% energy turret damage)
Slot layout: 4H(-1), 6M, 5L(+2); 3 turrets, 0 launchers Fittings: 890 PWG(-35), 380 CPU(-45) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2700(+266) / 2175 / 2065 Capacitor (amount / recharge / cap per second) : 1800(+105) / 495000 (+3750) / 3.5 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 228(+64) / .62(-.06) / 9600000 / 8.25s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15 / 15 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 59km / 275 / 7 Sensor strength: 20 Signature radius: 120(-10) Cargo Hold: 410
While the speed buff is ok, I feel like this ship is badly in need of extra drone versatility. Preferably 25 bandwidth, 50 bay to allow it to field a full set of lights or salvagers and carry a spare set.
Tired of lab queues in high-sec? Check out [url]http://eve-ner.net/[/url] |
Catherine Laartii
Knights of Xibalba
142
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 19:29:00 -
[952] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Vadeim Rizen wrote:
What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response.
I suggest you learn that this is a video game we are talking about . The DEVs don't owe you are me or anyone else a reply, but being snippy at a DEV is a surefire way to insure that you don't get one lol. I was unhappy with the NPC AI change and posted about it a lot without getting DEV replies. I didn't then stoop to what amounts to insulting them. I had my say and was done with it. Later, after the changes I pointed out how some of my concerns can't to fruition. At the end of the day, CCP is gonna do what they want, our option then becomes "live with it and keep playing" or unsub. Not that i'm telling you what to do, just pointing out that would you did was counter-productive to what you want to happen.
I made a comment earlier about an interesting theory I had as to why the devs are seemingly so resistant to specific player ideas on these kinds of threads you might find relevant. I think it explains why we think there's a disconnect between the devs and us even though they set up these feature threads specifically for player feedback, even if it doesn't get changed when it needs to. Take a look at this:
Catherine Laartii wrote: Judging how the last rebalance threads have gone, I'm thinking the reason why Rise doesn't consider implementing valid player ideas that get brought up is because the credit or subsequent blame would go to the player in question, causing unintentional collateral damage to a customer.
This is the main issue with having an open forum, as the responsibility for fixing an issue lies soley with the devs, so having someone come up with a legitimately good idea to implement a change doesn't happen because the dev in charge of rebalancing a mechanic can't appear to be picking sides.
A possible solution to this to help alleviate concerns on both ends would be to have the dev in charge periodically link a poll listing concerns with the subject of the thread, ideas posted by players from the thread to vote on, and a extremely displeased to extremely pleased scale options for players to choose from.
Would you consider this an acceptable method for helping these Feature posts, both from a player and Dev perspective? The only reason why I see him boxed into odd ideas is so they don't appear to exhibit favoritism, or have one idiot posting around everywhere, "Hey, that was MY idea! (link post) everyone should be paying attention to ME!"
I think this would help solve a lot of the major communication problems we are having from the player base to the developers, and cut down on a lot of the hate and angst in these threads.
|
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
171
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 20:14:00 -
[953] - Quote
LaserzPewPew wrote:As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch.
Having a ship pigeonholed into exactly one approach is never a good thing. Add that to a medium drone ai that is completely psycho and you have a gimped ship design never to see viable use.
To add insult to injury, the capacitor is bad and the topspeed with a mwd is slower than most t1 cruisers. It can't kite in the present form and can't brawl as the mediums do not stack up to a set of heavies or sentries. Brawling would imply a vantage in a straight up, close range slugfest. It will not.
You're telling me that medium drones don't have 20% better damage application than heavy drones? Because that's the DPS difference between two Gila mediums post-patch and 5 heavies pre-patch. It's even smaller if you use augmented drones, which of course is much more viable when you only need to launch two of them.
While not being able to use sentries is an issue, "doesn't stack up to a set of heavies" is just ridiculous. |
JEFFRAIDER
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
299
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 20:34:00 -
[954] - Quote
GIVE ME THE BS CHANGES GODDAMN YOU
|
Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
137
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 20:51:00 -
[955] - Quote
Xequecal wrote:LaserzPewPew wrote:As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch.
Having a ship pigeonholed into exactly one approach is never a good thing. Add that to a medium drone ai that is completely psycho and you have a gimped ship design never to see viable use.
To add insult to injury, the capacitor is bad and the topspeed with a mwd is slower than most t1 cruisers. It can't kite in the present form and can't brawl as the mediums do not stack up to a set of heavies or sentries. Brawling would imply a vantage in a straight up, close range slugfest. It will not. You're telling me that medium drones don't have 20% better damage application than heavy drones? Because that's the DPS difference between two Gila mediums post-patch and 5 heavies pre-patch. It's even smaller if you use augmented drones, which of course is much more viable when you only need to launch two of them. While not being able to use sentries is an issue, "doesn't stack up to a set of heavies" is just ridiculous.
Don't forget that mediums are also getting a MWD speed buff and the various racial versions are being balanced too. Mediums will already be in a better spot and then the Gila will be spitting out super drones. Put a couple of Gilas in a fleet with some of the 50 bandwidth HACs/Navy Cruisers and it will be hard to tell which of the medium drones are crushing them. Additionally low slot tracking modules for drones as well as scriptable omnis make hitting frigs with mediums trivially easy. So why anyone is afraid of losing a flight of lights is beyond me. A frig pilot would have to be insane to attack the new Gila. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
116
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 22:02:00 -
[956] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:Harvey James wrote:why does the phantasm have such a high align time? its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it The vigilants align time is much higher than the phantasm. I think the Cynabel should have higher align that the Vigilant though, right now they are equal. cynabal align time is a fair bit better than the vigilants Yes you are right. Ok serves me right for skim reading the numbers. If it makes it any better, both align times comprise of exactly the same numbers, but just in a different order. :) |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3268
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 22:28:00 -
[957] - Quote
Battleships... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
LaserzPewPew
Hard Knocks Inc.
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 23:12:00 -
[958] - Quote
Xequecal wrote:LaserzPewPew wrote:As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch.
Having a ship pigeonholed into exactly one approach is never a good thing. Add that to a medium drone ai that is completely psycho and you have a gimped ship design never to see viable use.
To add insult to injury, the capacitor is bad and the topspeed with a mwd is slower than most t1 cruisers. It can't kite in the present form and can't brawl as the mediums do not stack up to a set of heavies or sentries. Brawling would imply a vantage in a straight up, close range slugfest. It will not. You're telling me that medium drones don't have 20% better damage application than heavy drones? Because that's the DPS difference between two Gila mediums post-patch and 5 heavies pre-patch. It's even smaller if you use augmented drones, which of course is much more viable when you only need to launch two of them. While not being able to use sentries is an issue, "doesn't stack up to a set of heavies" is just ridiculous.
|
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1168
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 00:06:00 -
[959] - Quote
From the locked Gila thread...
Quote:Tracking disruptor's don't work on drones. Its like ECM, you can target the drone, activate the ewar mod, but the penalty will not apply.
The only ewar that works on drones is a Target Spectrum Breaker. And yes I have tested this. You can too............ if you have a single friend, alt, random stranger you just met, etc....., and 5 minutes of free time.
Almost right. TDs and RSDs have no effect on drones, correct. But ECM does work, you can jam them.
Also, I am a bit worried about the problems the Gila will have applying DPS to fast targets, as Lazers says. Certainly light drones will do little DPS to a fast frigate as they can't maintain range. |
LaserzPewPew
Hard Knocks Inc.
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 00:39:00 -
[960] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:From the locked Gila thread... Quote:Tracking disruptor's don't work on drones. Its like ECM, you can target the drone, activate the ewar mod, but the penalty will not apply.
The only ewar that works on drones is a Target Spectrum Breaker. And yes I have tested this. You can too............ if you have a single friend, alt, random stranger you just met, etc....., and 5 minutes of free time. Almost right. TDs and RSDs have no effect on drones, correct. But ECM does work, you can jam them. Also, I am a bit worried about the problems the Gila will have applying DPS to fast targets, as Lazers says. Certainly light drones will do little DPS to a fast frigate as they can't maintain range. Edit - just tested 5 km/s Valkyries against a 3.1 km/s Vaga. Results were disappointing to say the least - about half the shots missed and drones kept on going inactive. Also tested 3.4 km/s Hammerheads against the same Vaga. While the small speed difference should be expected to help damage application, what actually happened was it took forever for the drones to catch the Vaga, before missing half their shots and then some going inactive again. So, yeah, don't bother using Gila drones against fast MWDing HACs.
The problem is every cruiser has a minimum mwd speed of 1500. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |