The Bears Pit: The A.I.M. Library » Vote Love hate new inventory.

Home » SIRTECH CLASSICS » Jagged Alliance 2 » The A.I.M. Library » Vote Love hate new inventory.

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233190]

Mon, 14 September 2009 14:41

herb

Messages:381
Registered:September 2007
Location: Slovenija

i dont like NIV because is not flexible. I have my own system of sorting items and NIV doesn't allow it

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233203]

Mon, 14 September 2009 17:56

Logisteric

Messages:3190
Registered:December 2008
Location: B

marko

i dont like NIV because is not flexible. I have my own system of sorting items and NIV doesn't allow it

could you be a little mor precise?

Report message to a moderator

Captain

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233325]

Wed, 16 September 2009 19:42

Archbar Bettendorf

Messages:11
Registered:August 2009
Location: Australia

I like the NIV thing, but I'm a mad keen micro-manager at the best of times. NIV adds another dimension, something else to fine tune. And like someone mentioned above, the vehicle inventory rocks. It never made sense that you had a truck but were still limited to what your team could carry on foot. A big thank you to them wot brought about all this improvement.

Report message to a moderator

Private

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233351]

Thu, 17 September 2009 02:54

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Like it very much, LBE's was introduced in JA1 but for some reason not implment in JA2 Sad

Only need some time to get familiar, but after that you just love it Smile

Never try vehicle inventory, use own mobile sector inventories where each bank has unlimited storage for different equipment.

And it is truth that NIV bring some minor problems in editor but nothing impossible to fix.

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233365]

Thu, 17 September 2009 11:32

Will Gates

Messages:1011
Registered:September 2006
Location: Far far away.

What Khorr says x 3 I think. Sorry.

Actually I shall expand on that a bit. Vehicles good. Rest not so good but nice idea. Big No No... breaking older maps... that is a PITA. Thank almighty atheismo it's optional!

@ Worg... those older mod makers you loathe are responsible for extending your gameplay in 100 or more different ways, for free, for the love of the game; don't be too harsh on them just because they're not that keen on something that you personally like. They will all have their reasons just like me.

[Updated on: Thu, 17 September 2009 11:51] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233368]

Thu, 17 September 2009 12:30

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

But it's not really optional. I mean if you mod from this version you screw up your mod.

That has been my only real complaint from the beginning.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233369]

Thu, 17 September 2009 12:36

Will Gates

Messages:1011
Registered:September 2006
Location: Far far away.

Even with it switched off? Oh shitbag. Hmm it's back to the UB editor for me then. Damn.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233371]

Thu, 17 September 2009 12:40

Heuft

Messages:19
Registered:September 2008
Location: Nederland

i like the new inv. because of that i played the game again. to bad it is't for ub.
but it gave the game a new look, and fun to play.

Report message to a moderator

Private

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233372]

Thu, 17 September 2009 12:42

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Yes. It's not really the NIV that screws maps but the scc that the niv is built on top of. This is why I was trying so hard for a stable modding platform that used a version that predated the scc. This way, we could have built mods on the smp version, tested them and then loaded them into the current version.

For some reason no one wanted to even try doing it this way.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233381]

Thu, 17 September 2009 13:58

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Interesting. So is the global modder opinion that editor should be backward compatible?
Well just finishing prototype of editor which give you an option to save maps in 5.25 version and without bugs from UB version. Converting few maps saved as 1.13 or version 6.27 back to vanilla format and they work fine with my original English version 1.03 of JA2. Still need to hide NIV stuff from item choosing, and need purge eventual new items when save in to vanilla. And yes, 5.25 mode means that you cannot add any new items, you stuck with old one.
Khor, today or tomorrow will send editor so you could check on your maps, and if any other want receive map editor progress just send email.
When everything will be fully functional Rowa will update the trunk and release new official 1.13 editor.

By the way what the hack is SCC? Search through whole latest code and can

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233382]

Thu, 17 September 2009 14:11

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

I don't know what the global modder opinion is.

The scc is the structural change code that changed objecttype and soldiertype. This is what the niv was built on. You don't really see the mess usually until you travel from one map to the other. There are weird validation problems with entry points and some times even vanilla quests are screwed up.

Anyway, backward compatibility for the editor will be good for those who want to make a full scale mod. It won't likely fix the problem with the newest version as far as quest breaking goes. I am still hearing reports of entry point problems as well.
I can't waste any more time using this version but I will try to test your map editor.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233385]

Thu, 17 September 2009 14:38

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Thanks, so SCC is just short name for switch from good old fasion C struct to C++ class.
Well in that part add new conversion operators from scc to old fashion struct when perform saving map. Now everything is clear, when you go to save map in 5.25 you saved old fashion structure without any part of SCC, so these should fix any SCC problem.
Vanilla and all 1.13 releases will have no problem reading such maps, and converting them on runtime.
Didn't test but probably it

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233389]

Thu, 17 September 2009 15:31

Starwalker

Messages:758
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany

SCC is for being able to stack items with attachments without actually losing those attachments.
It was added while NIV was added, but NIV would work without it (just being less flexible).
NIV was /not founded/ on SCC, it just happened to be that SCC was done by AalaarDB while he worked a bit on NIV (and ChrisL had a lot of work to do to keep ADB's unwanted other changes out of NIV...).

Report message to a moderator

First Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233391]

Thu, 17 September 2009 15:41

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Is it true that the scc changed the code from c to c++? Because I didn't say that. I also didn't say that the niv needed the scc only that it was built on top of it.

I build my maps from a much older version (v302). But I will still try to test your editor.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233398]

Thu, 17 September 2009 17:01

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Yes all vanilla code 98% is written in pure C with just structs with simple variables, so you could save it as they are. With C++ class definition in most cases this is no longer possible.
Well SCC bring advantage of object oriented approach but need very carefull test of everything related. All item stuff and soldier definition are put inside SCC.

Whoa your editor is way too old Wink

Just test your custom maps for A9 and A10 sector with JA2 v1.03 and of course after loading CTD Smile

Then convert them from 6.27 to 5.25 and run again. Finish both sector without problem and hired Ira.

Very nice maps you created, so don't give up, your work is not lost. Soon maybe you will switch from v302 to some v3xxx Smile

)

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233402]

Thu, 17 September 2009 17:38

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

I doubt it. But thanks for the compliment. This long and awful saga has left me none too eager to fool around with the same version that keeps biting me in the ass. I am glad someone is still working on it (people who don't mind playing the same storyline over and over seem to like it) but I consider myself a semi retired modder at this point.
The SMP seemed to be going in the right direction, but interest in that has all but disappeared lately. Hopefully it isn't a lost cause but I have pretty much given up hope (again) that anything useful for my mod is ever going to be produced. I'll just continue plunking around with my 687 version with maps built with the 302 editor. Forward compatibility with maps is no issue but backward compatibility I hardly think is possible with the scc crap.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233409]

Thu, 17 September 2009 18:27

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Khor chears up, it's not everything so dark, and your maps are more appealing than boring vanillas with one or even two houses, and plenty of rocks.
Check email there is 3023A version, after conversion your A9 and A10 runs smoothly through all ja2 releases including 687. And SCC problems slowly goes to history Smile

)
Converted maps work fine through all releases including 687, and I'm going to continue testing and fixing eventual problems.
Come on it's to early for retiring. Maybe even I became modder after so much time spent with editor Smile

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233412]

Thu, 17 September 2009 18:36

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Yeah, you should. A coder on 'our side of the fence' so to speak might go a long way towards clearing a lot of confusion up early and hopefully preventing an absolute disaster like the 2085. Besises, aren't you tempted to really see what that editor you have been working on can do?

In order to really test against the post scc versions you need to modify something with the editor (I think changing anything would do) than save and try running it in a game. Then you might see the fireworks start. For some reason the map often gets broken with even a simple change.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233413]

Thu, 17 September 2009 18:37

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Starwalker

SCC is for being able to stack items with attachments without actually losing those attachments.
It was added while NIV was added, but NIV would work without it (just being less flexible).
NIV was /not founded/ on SCC, it just happened to be that SCC was done by AalaarDB while he worked a bit on NIV (and ChrisL had a lot of work to do to keep ADB's unwanted other changes out of NIV...).

SCC is ok, and I get use to it, but ADB should build operator for backward compatibility, most conversion operator seems to be build by Chrisl, without his work things would be much worst.
Any way missing operator

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233414]

Thu, 17 September 2009 18:48

Headrock

Messages:1757
Registered:March 2006
Location: Jerusalem

Quote:

Is it true that the scc changed the code from c to c++?

No, that is not true. C-to-C++ was done in 2005, it's what kicked off the 1.13 project.

Quote:

I also didn't say that the niv needed the scc only that it was built on top of it.

That's also not true. It could (and would) have existed without SCC, with some relatively minor limitations.

Quote:

SCC is ok, and I get use to it, but ADB should build operator for backward compatibility

Don't expect ADB to come back and do anything, in fact most people around here would (rightly, it seems) prefer that he stayed as far away as possible. Apparently he was on the way to cause massive damage to the 1.13 project due to narrow-mindedness and self-serving interest.

I'm glad you've made progress with the editor. This should make things flow a bit more smoothly around here, I hope.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233415]

Thu, 17 September 2009 18:50

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

In the beginning just hate editor and want to continue working on game. Now it looks friendlier.
I will do as you said, not finish yet, but it

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233417]

Thu, 17 September 2009 19:00

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Headrock

Quote:
Is it true that the scc changed the code from c to c++?

No, that is not true. C-to-C++ was done in 2005, it's what kicked off the 1.13 project.

Quote:
I also didn't say that the niv needed the scc only that it was built on top of it.

That's also not true. It could (and would) have existed without SCC, with some relatively minor limitations.

Yikes. Here we go again.

Question: What is the difference between the niv not needing the scc and the niv being built on top of it (using the scc version of the code instead of a more reliable version).

Answer: The niv IS built on top of the scc code (i.e. is built from a version that also contains this and the goofy pathing.)

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233418]

Thu, 17 September 2009 19:01

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Agreed, scc is trouble but people overreacting.
ChrislL already solved most parts, and remaining are in right direction to became history.
Anybody could fix this, it's just need some patience working under debugger.

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233419]

Thu, 17 September 2009 19:03

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Kriplo

In the beginning just hate editor and want to continue working on game. Now it looks friendlier.
I will do as you said, not finish yet, but it
Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233421]

Thu, 17 September 2009 19:35

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

Yes please send me all of your current work. Your maps was already very helpful in detecting problems.
Free time is always luxury, there is no rush, we all do this as funs of the best game ever made Smile

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233422]

Thu, 17 September 2009 20:03

lockie

Messages:3709
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland

Kriplo , thanks for your time and attitude , just right for a common project ! Keep up the good work and thanks again from all of us here at Bearpit .

Report message to a moderator

Captain

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233424]

Thu, 17 September 2009 20:17

Headrock

Messages:1757
Registered:March 2006
Location: Jerusalem

Quote:

Question: What is the difference between the niv not needing the scc and the niv being built on top of it (using the scc version of the code instead of a more reliable version).

Answer: The niv IS built on top of the scc code (i.e. is built from a version that also contains this and the goofy pathing.)

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?

Based on your logic, NIV is also built on top of Rain Mechanics, Mobile Militia and Full-Auto Mode, simply because it was introduced after them. It is possible to remove any of these without having to remove NIV, just as it is possible to remove SCC without having to remove NIV (though adjustments to NIV would be required).
In general I wouldn't mind you calling it whatever you like, except that this mis-perception of the relationship between SCC and NIV has served to confuse a lot of people about the entire subject.

Quote:

ChrislL already solved most parts, and remaining are in right direction to became history.

Is it not possible to continue improving his soldiertype converter? Or is this part of what you've done to fix the editor?

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233428]

Thu, 17 September 2009 20:32

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Headrock

Quote:
Question: What is the difference between the niv not needing the scc and the niv being built on top of it (using the scc version of the code instead of a more reliable version).

Answer: The niv IS built on top of the scc code (i.e. is built from a version that also contains this and the goofy pathing.)

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?

Based on your logic, NIV is also built on top of Rain Mechanics, Mobile Militia and Full-Auto Mode, simply because it was introduced after them.

Yes, that's right. When you add to a project it is often called building on that project. What is your problem with that?

Headrock

It is possible to remove any of these without having to remove NIV, just as it is possible to remove SCC without having to remove NIV (though adjustments to NIV would be required).
In general I wouldn't mind you calling it whatever you like, except that this mis-perception of the relationship between SCC and NIV has served to confuse a lot of people about the entire subject.

How is it a misconception? You just said that the NIV is built on a version that uses the SCC. If you are uncomfortable with that than why aren't you helping me to try to rectify this situation. If you aren't uncomfortable with it than what it the problem?

Do you want me to go around adding a disclaimer that Headrock and this or that guy weren't responsible or what? You already complained about me not clarifying the niv from scc even though they are components of the same project so I go out of my way to add extra words to every post where I talk about this bullshit and now what? Do you want me to pretend the scc is not a part of the 1.13?

Or what?

Headrock

Kriplo
ChrislL already solved most parts, and remaining are in right direction to became history.

Is it not possible to continue improving his soldiertype converter? Or is this part of what you've done to fix the editor?

Good question.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233437]

Thu, 17 September 2009 23:12

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

In coding nothing is impossible, ChirL do great job converting old to new, I use his method for creating operator back from new to old:
WORLDITEM to OLD_WORLDITEM_101
SOLDIERCREATE_STRUCT to OLD_SOLDIERCREATE_STRUCT_101
OBJECTTYPE to OLD_OBJECTTYPE_101

Already fix his oversight with OWNERSHIP item in OBJECTTYPE class, and one other copy/paste oversight, so maybe this could call some kind of improvement.
SOLDIERTYPE class seems not directly related to editor so although coded operator for backward conversion it will be only useful in converting new to old save game format but I don

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233440]

Thu, 17 September 2009 23:41

Headrock

Messages:1757
Registered:March 2006
Location: Jerusalem

Quote:

How is it a misconception? You just said that the NIV is built on a version that uses the SCC. If you are uncomfortable with that than why aren't you helping me to try to rectify this situation. If you aren't uncomfortable with it than what it the problem?

As stated many times before, I completely lack the expertise required to understand how SCC works, why it causes problems, let alone how to fix it. Otherwise I would've fixed it already, if for no other reason than to kill this silly discussion once and for all.

Quote:

Do you want me to go around adding a disclaimer that Headrock and this or that guy weren't responsible or what? You already complained about me not clarifying the niv from scc even though they are components of the same project so I go out of my way to add extra words to every post where I talk about this bullshit and now what? Do you want me to pretend the scc is not a part of the 1.13?

It's not a question of responsibility. My qualm is about you taking a general issue and making it very specific - too specific. And in many ways, your choice has possibly made it more difficult to get what you wanted (I.E. SCC fixed). You insist on drawing parallels between SCC and NIV, and thusly implying that NIV is at fault (heck, look at the name of this thread vs. the discussion we're having), and in doing so you are causing confusion between two completely separate subjects. As you know from my work, I strive to make JA2 transparent and better understood. Having two unrelated concepts being constantly strung together is making things harder to understand for people who do not know the background. You yourself are making no effort to undo the confusion between them, so naturally I have to.

Quote:

Already fix his oversight with OWNERSHIP item in OBJECTTYPE class, and one other copy/paste oversight, so maybe this could call some kind of improvement.

Interesting. Can you tell us what the oversight was?

Quote:

I have feeling all moders community is pissed off because someone add new stuff but
Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233451]

Fri, 18 September 2009 02:36

Kriplo

Messages:256
Registered:February 2008
Location: Zagreb - Croatia

OWNERSHIP is specific item and this part was missing from conversion operator:

OBJECTTYPE& OBJECTTYPE::operator=(const OLD_OBJECTTYPE_101& src)
{
.
.
.
if(src.usItem == OWNERSHIP)//dnl ch29 120909
{
(*this)[0]->data.owner.ubOwnerProfile = src.ugYucky.ubOwnerProfile;
(*this)[0]->data.owner.ubOwnerCivGroup = src.ugYucky.ubOwnerCivGroup;
}
.
.
.
}
so ownership's ugYucky union get undefined values because are not copied from old objecttype

Yes backward compatibilty is most important and that major reason why I delay sending changes to Rowa, must be sure to not add some crap.

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233461]

Fri, 18 September 2009 10:39

Starwalker

Messages:758
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany

Khor1255

I also didn't say that the niv needed the scc only that it was built on top of it.

Which is also not true, NIV was well on its way and already working when the SCC was made.

EDIT: If you insist on using the phrase "was built on", then SCC was built on NIV, because NIV was in (but not released) when SCC was added.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 September 2009 10:56] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

First Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233468]

Fri, 18 September 2009 13:22

herb

Messages:381
Registered:September 2007
Location: Slovenija

Logisteric

marko
i dont like NIV because is not flexible. I have my own system of sorting items and NIV doesn't allow it

could you be a little mor precise?

Well you are limited where to put an item. So guns are their own slot, mashine guns own, knife the same etc

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233482]

Fri, 18 September 2009 19:34

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

Starwalker

Khor1255
I also didn't say that the niv needed the scc only that it was built on top of it.

Which is also not true, NIV was well on its way and already working when the SCC was made.

EDIT: If you insist on using the phrase "was built on", then SCC was built on NIV, because NIV was in (but not released) when SCC was added.

Well, la de dah. No, I'll just stick to using terminology which is commonly understood. Built on top of means something that is built along with something else. I'm not going to write a paragraph disclaimer that only really amounts to semantic literary masturbation to appease the folks who ruined the 1.13 for modding.
But please, keep insisting on this stupid bullshit. You aren't going to cloud the point for me at least.

EDIT

Oh, besides you already said that certain things in the niv would be impeded or different were it not also using the scc so - in this case at least - I'd say built on top of is not only acceptable terminology but THE ONLY accurate way to describe what is going on here. You already used this point as justification for why you have to leave shitty code in the 1.13 and now....what?

Man, this would be funny if it wasn't the decline of a once great project.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 September 2009 19:40] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233483]

Fri, 18 September 2009 20:02

Marlboro Man

Messages:1153
Registered:October 2005
Location: USA

Alright. Thread will be locked down soon. Tired of the same old song and dance. And Khor you could at least try Kriplo's latest map editor before saying "everything is still fucked up beyond repair". Which it isn't. If you don't try it, then how do you know things have not been fixed? From what I read above, Kriplo had no problems with your maps.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233486]

Fri, 18 September 2009 20:37

Khor1255

Messages:1815
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ

I already said I was going to try it. A little opened communication would have gone a long way last year. Today we have over a thousand new builds on top of bullshit code. Of course it is possible to straighten it out, but from a mod makers standpoint this situation should never have been allowed to go on for so long. Early on when we warned that this stuff should not be merged with the main build would have been the best time to straighten this out.

What is wrong with having an alternate version like HAM or whatever to use until modders can give it the thorough test needed to make sure it is not only going to have regular gameplay problems but is not going to break mods built on top of it? I'm sure with as popular and interesting as the niv is everyone (including me) would have made a separate install and merged our work with it. So what possible problem would there have been with keeping a reliable version on hand until enough time had elapsed for EVERYONE working on the project to give it at least the once over?

But that is not the worst of it. Almost immediately after the 2085 a virtual flood of posts came from various modders complaining about new and gamebreaking glitches we never experienced before. Instead of considering these concerns, the current team instead went on a pr campaign to smear any concerns we had while promoting a project that no longer was even as easy to mod as vanilla.

So as soon as the issue arises again - surprise - in comes a moderator to lock down the thread. Isn't there a gulag somewhere you should be moderating? I hope you understand the spirit of that last comment.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 September 2009 20:37] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Re: Vote Love hate new inventory.[message #233489]

Fri, 18 September 2009 21:59

Marlboro Man

Messages:1153
Registered:October 2005
Location: USA

deleted.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 September 2009 22:19] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major

Pages (2): [ « ‹ 1 2]

Previous Topic:	Accuracy factors?
Next Topic:	Vote Love hate new inventory

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Sat Jun 13 02:22:32 GMT+3 2026

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03004 seconds