Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 56 post(s) |
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
227
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:16:00 -
[871] - Quote
Miktek wrote:At the moment I use my own BPOs that I copy in my corps POS, I drag the BPOs to a corp hanger in a station, set the copy jobs and collect from the POS. will this still be a valid method of copying or will I now have to physically take the BPOs to the POS in order to start the copy jobs? You will have to take the BPO to the POS in order to copy it.
Quote from devblog: Remove the ability for players to use stations to safely store their blueprints without putting them at risk in Starbase structures. Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via the use of Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills), but will now have to move their blueprints directly into the starbase structures that require it, like other materials. My signature got stolen (o.0) |
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Northern Associates.
296
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:20:00 -
[872] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Querns wrote:I thought of a potential gotcha: Will POS assembly modules also have their slots removed? Will you be able to, e.g., run an infinite number of ammo jobs from a single ammo assembly array? Yes, slots are being removed on everything, however, cost scaling will still be applicable to Starbases as well. Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details. Hrmmm Time for a new Speculation Small POS with one of each Lab type on it, overloaded, for a small corp might be more cost effective due to fuel costs than a Large POS with lots of Labs on it with the same number of Jobs being pumped through it? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20851
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:22:00 -
[873] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Have a look at the post above your. I have only covered one aspect of making inventions unprofitable with summer changes. GǪexcept, of course, that what you have covered doesn't really affect invention at all. The only thing that might hit invention is the extra materials change, and we haven't seen the actual numbers for that yet.
Quote:Basically, you are damaging the currently active game mechanic in order to support a legacy one that does not exist any more. It still exists, though, and in many forms so of course they should support it. If they should happen to fix other mechanics at the same time, then it's a definite bonus.
Miktek wrote:At the moment I use my own BPOs that I copy in my corps POS, I drag the BPOs to a corp hanger in a station, set the copy jobs and collect from the POS. will this still be a valid method of copying or will I now have to physically take the BPOs to the POS in order to start the copy jobs? If the station you're in does not have copy services, you'll have to move the BPO. So a suggestion would be to make sure your BPOs are in a station with copying services. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
227
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:25:00 -
[874] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:Basically, you are damaging the currently active game mechanic in order to support a legacy one that does not exist any more. It still exists, though, and in many forms so of course they should support it. If they should happen to fix other mechanics at the same time, then it's a definite bonus.
The ability to obtain a T2 BPO in a lottery certainly does not exist any more and I know you know that as well.
My signature got stolen (o.0) |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust
369
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:28:00 -
[875] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Tippia wrote:Quote:Basically, you are damaging the currently active game mechanic in order to support a legacy one that does not exist any more. It still exists, though, and in many forms so of course they should support it. If they should happen to fix other mechanics at the same time, then it's a definite bonus. The ability to obtain a T2 BPO in a lottery certainly does not exist any more and I know you know that as well. I can start a lottery for one of my T2 BPOs if that would make you feel better. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20851
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:30:00 -
[876] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:The ability to obtain a T2 BPO in a lottery certainly does not exist any more and I know you know that as well. Ok, but if that's what you're referring to, they're also not damaging anything to support it for the simple reason that they're not supporting it any more GÇö it's no longer there; there is nothing to support. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Destiven Mare
Ghost Net Industrialists Rebel Alliance of New Eden
9
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:30:00 -
[877] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote: Need more blogs. Any real discussion on this isn't possible until we have the whole picture.
^^ THIS. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2673
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:31:00 -
[878] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Sizeof Void wrote: CCP has repeatedly tried, and failed, to entice high-sec players to take more risks and engage in PVP. But, the highest priority of high-sec players has always been "safety" - this is why they stay in high-sec. No reason to expect this player behavior to change.
I've been watching a similar safety-vs-efficiency trade-off with high-sec mining. Retrievers/Mackinaws and Covetors/Hulks are still the most commonly used mining ships, but Procurer/Skiff usage has definitely been on a steady rise, as ganking continues to spread.
Sadly you are quite right and these players will be the first to flock over SC once it's out.
And yet, the CSM and their lackey blithely move along making changes that hurt that demographic the most, acting with arrogance, ignorance, or both. CCP must want that type of player gone from their game, because their actions constantly demonstrate that. For their sake, they better pray that they have not underestimated the size of that demographic.
I ran across a miner in low sec a few days ago (and of course, I did not shoot him. He needed help with some rats and I went on my way), a Jan 2014 char in what appeared to be a new mining / indy corp. He did not know what a POS was. Yesterday, I sent him a link to the Eve UNI Wiki on a POS. I told him that there were definite benefits and of course drawbacks with setting up a POS.
That was hours before I read the dev blog.
I will be emailing him today strongly suggesting that his group should stay as far from a POS as they can, because most of the benefits have been wiped out, such as a controllable cost of simply fuel costs on a POS. There is now some idiotic variable cost for using your own mfg slots. In fact, anyone getting into industry is in for some real pain.
I imagine this fellow will be the precise target market of SC. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
227
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:32:00 -
[879] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Tippia wrote:Quote:Basically, you are damaging the currently active game mechanic in order to support a legacy one that does not exist any more. It still exists, though, and in many forms so of course they should support it. If they should happen to fix other mechanics at the same time, then it's a definite bonus. The ability to obtain a T2 BPO in a lottery certainly does not exist any more and I know you know that as well. I can start a lottery for one of my T2 BPOs if that would make you feel better.
Likewise, I know that you know as well what kind of lottery I was talking about. My signature got stolen (o.0) |
Aeonidis
Boss Hog and Son Industrial Consortium
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:33:00 -
[880] - Quote
now the thread has devolved into a pure troll fest, as all meaningful conversation about the current topic at hand seems to have been exhausted I bid you farewell. |
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
227
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:34:00 -
[881] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:The ability to obtain a T2 BPO in a lottery certainly does not exist any more and I know you know that as well. Ok, but if that's what you're referring to, they're also not damaging anything to support it for the simple reason that they're not supporting it any more GÇö it's no longer there; there is nothing to support. The mechanics is not there... the items that were produced by the mechanics that is not there any more are still there. So, yes... they are supporting a byproduct from a discontinued game mechanics. My signature got stolen (o.0) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20851
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:36:00 -
[882] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:And yet, the CSM and their lackey blithely move along making changes that hurt that demographic the most, acting with arrogance, ignorance, or both. How are these changing in any way hurting highsec players the most?
Quote: CCP must want that type of player gone from their game, because their actions constantly demonstrate that. Yes, by constantly making their lives easier and safer, they demonstrate that they want them goneGǪ wait what?
Quote:I will be emailing him today strongly suggesting that his group should stay as far from a POS as they can, because most of the benefits have been wiped out, such as a controllable cost of simply fuel costs on a POS. There is now some idiotic variable cost for using your own mfg slots. GǪwhich can be controlled, so that along with all the other benefits remain. Hell, it even looks like they're gaining some new ones with these changes. So I can only surmise that you're making that suggestion to cut out the competition. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20851
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:38:00 -
[883] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:The mechanics is not there... the items that were produced by the mechanics that is not there any more are still there. So, yes... they are supporting a byproduct from a discontinued game mechanics. GǪand they items work the same as any other blueprint, so there is nothing outdated that is given special support at the cost of something else.
I'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways here: either they mechanics are supported and still around, or discontinued and thereby no longer supported. There is no middle ground; there is no mix; there is only one or the other. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
5358
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:41:00 -
[884] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote: We really need the rest of that information, as half of the people in this thread are pulling their hair out at the prospect of things that will probably never happen.
You have just described 80% of the humanity approach to any matter!!
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
227
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:45:00 -
[885] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:The mechanics is not there... the items that were produced by the mechanics that is not there any more are still there. So, yes... they are supporting a byproduct from a discontinued game mechanics. GǪand they items work the same as any other blueprint, so there is nothing outdated that is given special support at the cost of something else.
Do they use same ME levels as default invention - no. Do you have a chance based mechanic to get the copy - no. Can you obtain them through gameplay - no. If you can not obtain them through gameplay, are they seeded by NPCs on the market - no.
That does not look the same to me.
Quote:I'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways here: either they mechanics are supported and still around, or discontinued and thereby no longer supported. There is no middle ground; there is no mix; there is only one or the other.
Exactly what I'm saying. We are in the limbo of the middle ground right now. My signature got stolen (o.0) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20851
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:48:00 -
[886] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Do they use same ME levels as default invention other BPOs - yes. Do you have a chance based mechanic to get the copy - no, same as other BPOs. Can you obtain them through gameplay - no, same as other BPOs. If you can not obtain them through gameplay, are they seeded by NPCs on the market - no, but they are still available on the market if you want to buy one. Looks very similar to me.
The biggest difference is that they're a horrible investment, unlike most other BPOs. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
5358
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:48:00 -
[887] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:ISK sink = you're paying the workers in your facility. and for repairs, and for retooling the lines as needed. Or something.
I'd expect/hope that POS costs are lower as a baseline, as you're paying for fuel as well. But it can work out. (paying for the faster production time)
Need more blogs. Any real discussion on this isn't possible until we have the whole picture.
The addition of wardec-able additional targets over time is to bring in some life to the zombie-land called hi-sec. It will probably fail because the mindset of the affected players is to play victim not to adapt & overcome. But at least CCP can say they have tried.
The addition of ISK sinks is also extremely positive. On one side it's born to combat the current rampant ISK over-production and on the other side it's the ONLY way CCP can avoid negative repercussions on PLEXes sales. In fact the PLEX rise is not neutral to CCP, they need to fit PLEX prices within a "comfort zone" where they are seen as good ISK value but not an impossible objective to reach for those who want to buy them to extend their playtime. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Kaius Fero
24
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:49:00 -
[888] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Sizeof Void wrote: CCP has repeatedly tried, and failed, to entice high-sec players to take more risks and engage in PVP. But, the highest priority of high-sec players has always been "safety" - this is why they stay in high-sec. No reason to expect this player behavior to change.
I've been watching a similar safety-vs-efficiency trade-off with high-sec mining. Retrievers/Mackinaws and Covetors/Hulks are still the most commonly used mining ships, but Procurer/Skiff usage has definitely been on a steady rise, as ganking continues to spread.
Sadly you are quite right and these players will be the first to flock over SC once it's out. Also is the main reason why we keep throwing money at SC at an insane rate, the beauty of industry and science in EVE is already vanished.. EVE now is more about being the biggest badass and villan including the excesive ussage of mayo. Not to mention the fact that for being competitive you have to take EVE as a secondary job, not a game. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20851
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:53:00 -
[889] - Quote
Kaius Fero wrote:Also is the main reason why we keep throwing money at SC at an insane rate, the beauty of industry and science in EVE is already vanished.. EVE now is more about being the biggest badass and villan including the excesive ussage of mayo. Not to mention the fact that for being competitive you have to take EVE as a secondary job, not a game. Huh. Funny thatGǪ and here I was being competitive in the T2 ship manufacturing market and hadn't touched the S&I interface in nearly a week. I must be doing something wrong since it doesn't seem to qualify as a second jobGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
227
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:53:00 -
[890] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Do they use same ME levels as default invention other BPOs - yes. Do you have a chance based mechanic to get the copy - no, same as other BPOs. Can you obtain them through gameplay - no, same as other BPOs. If you can not obtain them through gameplay, are they seeded by NPCs on the market - no, but they are still available on the market if you want to buy one. Looks very similar to me.
T2 BPOs do not have the -4/-4 level of T2 BPCs and you know that I was referring to it. T2 BPOs can be copied with 100% success rate, unlike inventing a T2 BPC to get a T2 copy. T2 BPOs are not available on the NPC market, with a fixed price that serves as a ISK sink, available in unlimited quantities and at all times like T1 BPOs are.
My signature got stolen (o.0) |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
5358
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:53:00 -
[891] - Quote
Dast Aldurald wrote:ok, all this is interesting but: 1) no standing needed for pos? really
I have a suggestion that would let CCP reward those who (like me too) grinded standings or have standings-raise professions and so on:
Have the new POS slots fees depend (in a minor way) also from standings.
So, everyone can put up a POS but those with standings get a discount.
Voil+á, two birds with one stone!
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6964
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:56:00 -
[892] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Sizeof Void wrote: CCP has repeatedly tried, and failed, to entice high-sec players to take more risks and engage in PVP. But, the highest priority of high-sec players has always been "safety" - this is why they stay in high-sec. No reason to expect this player behavior to change.
I've been watching a similar safety-vs-efficiency trade-off with high-sec mining. Retrievers/Mackinaws and Covetors/Hulks are still the most commonly used mining ships, but Procurer/Skiff usage has definitely been on a steady rise, as ganking continues to spread.
Sadly you are quite right and these players will be the first to flock over SC once it's out. boy ccp better get its act together in the next decade Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
Otin Bison
Bison Industrial Inc Thundering Herd
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:58:00 -
[893] - Quote
removed ... I need to wait for the next few blogs |
Perkin Warbeck
Black Watch Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance
174
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:58:00 -
[894] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:I will be emailing him today strongly suggesting that his group should stay as far from a POS as they can, because most of the benefits have been wiped out, such as a controllable cost of simply fuel costs on a POS. There is now some idiotic variable cost for using your own mfg slots. GǪwhich can be controlled, so that along with all the other benefits remain. Hell, it even looks like they're gaining some new ones with these changes. So I can only surmise that you're making that suggestion to cut out the competition.
I will wait for further blogs but I'm actually with DInsdale on this one [quietly stabs himself in eye].
Unless you have some serious firepower then queuing up a job that lasts more than 24 hours (the time it takes a war dec to come into effect) presents a bit of a risk in low sec. Even if you get the notification of the war dec in time to take your POS down you will have to abandon the job to get your BPO out with a consequential loss of minerals as a result. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20854
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 13:59:00 -
[895] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:T2 BPOs do not have the -4/-4 level of T2 BPCs and you know that I was referring to it. Yes, you were referring to something unrelated. They are like any other BPO GÇö you know those things that also don't have -4/-4?
Quote:T2 BPOs are copied with 100% success rate GǪjust like any other BPO.
Quote:T2 BPOs are not available on the NPC market GǪbut are still available on the same market as the other BPOs if you want to buy one (but why you'd want to considering the poor returns is anyone's guess).
They are like any other blueprint so there is nothing outdated that is given special support at the cost of something else. You can do apples-to-oranges comparisons all day, but that doesn't change what BPOs are: BPOs. You might as well say that T2 BPCs are outdated because they are nothing like moon goo. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Maru Sha
The Department of Justice
35
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:00:00 -
[896] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: After summer, R.A.M. and R.db will instead behave like any other material in the game. However, to keep loss ratios similar we will:
Multiply number of R.AM. and R.Db. given for each run of their respective blueprint by 100. Multiply all R.A.M. and R.Db. job requirements by 100, then further multiply that number by the old damage per run percentage.
It was already mentioned that R.A.M. (and R.db) needs a volume reduction to compensate for the higher amount needed for the same item. In that context I would like to point out that some production arrays for POS (if not all) need capacity increase since you are not able to install long running jobs because not all the products will fit in the array (in addition to the fact that part of the capacity can be claimed by items in other sections of the hangar on has no access to and the total available capacity is reduced). The increase of capacity could be modular and depend on player choice (or a skill thingy), not necessarily a "hard" change in the database of EVE software.
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Stopping the damage ...
Could you also have a look at the "waste" factor of t2 blueprints. It doesn't make sense to me and seems totally random.
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Alright, here it is; for summer we are removing all industry slots. We can hear you from here: GÇ£Wait wait, you silly Frenchman, what do you mean removing all industry slots?GÇ¥
I can understand your intention behind removing industry slots, though I would like to point out from from a point of realism it makes perfect sense to have a fixed and limited number of factory slots in a station like it make perfect sense to have a limited number of offices available. I hoped there would be a different solution to the "select a slot for your industry job"-problem.
CCP Ytterbium wrote: (A) Remove the ability for players to use stations to safely store their blueprints without putting them at risk in Starbase structures. Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via the use of Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills), but will now have to move their blueprints directly into the starbase structures that require it, like other materials. (B) Improve Mobile Laboratories and Assembly Arrays to compensate for such risk GÇô weGÇÖll give you final numbers as soon as we have them. (C) Reduce copy time on all blueprints to be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it. This gives the option to use blueprint copies to build items at Starbases without risking the original.
I expect that a considerable amount of production lines will be relocated to stations because of (A) and the risk involved losing all in a moment of absence. So you introduce the means of reward for the increased risk (B). Furthermore you introduce the option to increase output by using copies (C). To me it sounds like it will be mandatory (for certain industries) to produce from copies instead of originals because it will reduce cost and increase output. Is that what you really want? With regards to blueprint copies I would suggest you adjust the production time from copies and make it equal (nut not faster) in comparison to originals. Furthermore, from a realism point of view it doesn't make sense that producing copies of blueprints take more than 1(?) minute. I would overhaul the whole concept of blueprint copies but I admit that is only loosely related to the current dev blog.
CCP Ytterbium wrote: So player corporations will now have the choice between the safety of NPC stations or the efficiency of Starbases to operate. The core goal is to motivate player entities to actually defend their Starbases if attacked or be reactive enough to take the blueprints out before they go into reinforced mode.
I think every player is motivated to defend the own POS (or outpost) since it is closest what you can call your home and I doubt any further incentive is needed. But you have to be aware that such fights are rarely fair fights. If a medium sized corporation suspect assets and blueprints in a POS worth more than 1 billion (?) isk or know about it from spying, they could just declare war on the usually small sized corporation. After a 24h war declaration delay they will put the POS into reinforced mode and then destroy it. A casual player logging in after a few days or a small corp going on holiday will return to game and find nothing. To me it does not sound like value added to the game. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
5360
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:00:00 -
[897] - Quote
Hexatron Ormand wrote: On top of the fuel costs? POS users have to pay twice otherwise... once to keep the tower running, and a second time to pay those additional scaling costs? Will this be compensated by lowering the initial fuel costs the POS eats up? Or by giving them extremely great scaling conditions? Otherwise POS users may not be able to compete with prices of station users.
Do you understand you are talking about a commodity (ices but also other fuels components) that has ZERO intrinsic ISK value and whose price is exclusively - and rightly - decided by the mrakets?
The markets will judge the best price, no you, not me nor CCP.
That's what sets EvE apart. The markets. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Kaius Fero
25
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:00:00 -
[898] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Kaius Fero wrote:Also is the main reason why we keep throwing money at SC at an insane rate, the beauty of industry and science in EVE is already vanished.. EVE now is more about being the biggest badass and villan including the excesive ussage of mayo. Not to mention the fact that for being competitive you have to take EVE as a secondary job, not a game. Huh. Funny thatGǪ and here I was being competitive in the T2 ship manufacturing market and hadn't touched the S&I interface in nearly a week. I must be doing something wrong since it doesn't seem to qualify as a second jobGǪ Yet.. you still have time to post on forums all day long. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:01:00 -
[899] - Quote
Hint: Star Citizen is a scam. They are walking away with your money.
This T2 BPO talk is all nonsense. They need to be removed, period. Sure, a few people will quit over it. They will not be missed. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6964
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:02:00 -
[900] - Quote
you're all idiots if you think that the pos congestion fees are going to be anything but zero until you do something like try to stuff an alliance's worth of battleship production into a small pos with a single assembly array
wait to start wigging the **** out until you see the cost devblog Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |