Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Busterguy

When will the space safe zone be removed?

Recommended Posts

Just now, JohnnyTazer said:

Maybe the phrasing is wrong, but more valued because there is open world pvp.  And this may be anecdotal, but I've known lots of highsec carebears who run 4+ accounts. But sub with plex. Where does that plex come from? Me and people like me. From 10 years playing eve, generally speaking, I've noticed the person that is more into pvp buys more plex packs. Which = more money.

So are you saying pirating is less lucrative than trading? now that is an admission, might get you thrown out of the pirates guild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

Then this game isnt for you.

Said no game company in history.  The game will be designed around those who buy a monthly subscription.  If it turns out to be people who avoid PVP like the plague, expect a lot more safe zones.  If the majority of players play solo or with a small group of friends, expect the game to develop around that.  Even if it cost others a bit of fun in the process.  This isn't an avant garde art project, this is a business.

 

Gankers and Griefers can make things interesting and add danger to a game that is mostly without active chaotic content (other than bugs).  But they are a extreme minority of the purchasing players.  Give them too much leeway and this game will be deader than Rubies of Eventide.

 

There is NO PVE other than fighting the laws of physics to get from planet to planet.  Period.  I doubt they could add a PVE element to the game even if they had any interest to.  So this game has to have a PVP aspect, there is no way around that or we will simply run out of content, quickly.  But it is a balancing act, and not an easy one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BaconofWar said:

Uhm.. you just keep a scrap in your inventory, repair said ship's core, "collect" your ship and stick it in your pocket, and fly back to your base in your new ship....

I don't see any "challenge" you speak of by ganking cargo ships and calling it "PvP". Might as well add NPCs since the challenge level will be the same or higher. PvP isn't needed at all in open space unless folks are compensating for something. The only challenging PvP is between two PvP ships and I doubt folks hitting cargo ships have anything around that will get them to attack another purpose built PvP ship.

 

Ergo my suggestion is for NQ to establish a "war" system for orgs to claim and tax planet markets and only allow PvP for those flagged mutually.

I can tell by your response that you have never tried chasing down and killing a well designed cargo ship.  In general, blockading ships are sitting still outside the planetary safe zone, waiting for radar contacts.  It can be quite a challenge to fly an intercept course that brings the target ship under your guns for long enough to kill it, and to do so quickly and without overshooting the target.  This kind of flying burns quite a bit of fuel as well, and fuel is not found in large quantities on most things we kill.  This means we have to supply our own fuel, and supply a pretty sizable amount to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BaconofWar said:

Uhm.. you just keep a scrap in your inventory, repair said ship's core, "collect" your ship and stick it in your pocket, and fly back to your base in your new ship....

I don't see any "challenge" you speak of by ganking cargo ships and calling it "PvP". Might as well add NPCs since the challenge level will be the same or higher. PvP isn't needed at all in open space unless folks are compensating for something. The only challenging PvP is between two PvP ships and I doubt folks hitting cargo ships have anything around that will get them to attack another purpose built PvP ship.

 

Ergo my suggestion is for NQ to establish a "war" system for orgs to claim and tax planet markets and only allow PvP for those flagged mutually.

And here we have a fine example

- purchased an open world pvp game without actually wanting open world pvp CHECK
- solo / small player, takes 2/3 weeks to build ship CHECK

- now wants to completely remove pvp from the game apart from large org CHECK

 

IF they did your suggestion, my whole org quits..... as will most others I know who bought into this game from the start

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think solo has anything to do with it, just an attitude. Most solo players are doing just fine and know what to expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Haunty said:

I don't think solo has anything to do with it, just an attitude. Most solo players are doing just fine and know what to expect.

Agreed, the people who are the most vocal here are the types who spent 4 weeks building an intricate ship out of aluminum, with fancy greebling, forgot to blueprint it, and then flew off to Ion, or Jago, or some other remote planet, and got themselves blown up.  The old Eve adage of "Don't fly anything you can't afford to lose" still rings true in DU.  The other alternative is to join a Nation type org and pay taxes to ensure your safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

Then this game isnt for you. Same people cry over and over about being ganked in eve. I dont give a fucking shit what their reasons are, because they are wrong. Point blank. Because the DEVELOPERS of eve said high sec isnt safe. The DEVELOPERS of NQ said the majority of the universe will be open pvp. I don't go to carebear games and whine and complain why I can gank someone, instead I just go to a game that let's me (eve).  People will argue about money, saying a developer should do whatever brings in the most money but that is just absurd. They are trying to make a game, their game, and a somewhat unique one. 

 

Here is another thing, I'm more valued customer than the solo carebear. There is no denying it. A lot of my pvper friends in eve sub lots of alts with our credit cards, and purchase lots of Plex. Same will happen in DU. Some months me and a buddy would spend over 1k a month on eve. He subs 12 accounts with his CC, I do 6. And we buy plex packs. NQ already knows they if they go back on their promise of freedom and open world and player driven they will lose massive money, because at that point they are backing off on the original vision they sold us on, the reason we even backed the game.

1. I urge you to stay calm. You're unjustifiably animating.

2. Honestly, I understand nothing of your opposition. I didn't say I don't want pvp.

3. Whether you have 1, 10 or 100 accounts to whom and what should change?
Let me understand: do you have a particular privilege more than those with fewer accounts than you? You already have an advantage because you have more. What should you still be entitled to?

4. I take your opinion into account.
But as for whether the game is for me or not, I invite you to stop expressing yourself about it: it is a judgment that is not up to you and declaring it is totally worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Moosegun said:

Great post but you have slightly missed my point, I am not interested in my opinion, I am interested in the DEVS sticking to THEIR opinion, which has been very open and honest from the start, that there will be limited safe spaces (sanc moon) and the rest will be self governed open pvp. 

I am interested in large player made governance, I am interesting in building a civilisation and civilisation comes with unified defence.  I have no issue with solo hermit players at all, I have an issue when they want to divert the game from the devs stated path.  If people do not want open pvp, why did they buy a game which open publicised it would be the case, I will tell you why, because they knew if they complained enough it would change....... and I can see it coming.  Solo hermit do nothing to contribute to civilisation, nothing to make the world bigger or better, they just offer soft targets when the fighting does start.

Please note that all of my opinion are solely based on NQ giving us all the tools we need to properly implement player made security / defence.  I STRONGLY believe that this includes some sort of robust offline protection, and generally strong defence.  NQ have also gone on record that they will strongly favour the defender AND that offence pvp will have to be planned to be successful.  Still interested to see who they are going to achieve this.

Did like the shitting in my hand comment lol

Naah. I absolutely do not think that soloists come aware that they can then change the game.
I was personally drawn to the creative abilities of the game and that is what attracted a considerable amount of players.
The fact that many are also interested in PvP is because the game's target range is very large. It's a sandbox for that too.

The point is, if you let me do indiscriminate PvP everywhere, apart from a small safe zone, it's no longer a sanbox game with PvP elements, but a PvP game with sandbox elements.
And that's what's wrong.

People who want PvP will have it. But forcing those who don't want to do it isn't "PvP". It is a "stretch". And whether it is realistic or not is certainly not a problem: the sun is a cartoon in the sky and the planets are stationary! LOL

 

About poop: it is an Italian saying that means "it causes me a strong performance anxiety". More or less :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Leogradance said:

1. I urge you to stay calm. You're unjustifiably animating.

2. Honestly, I understand nothing of your opposition. I didn't say I don't want pvp.

3. Whether you have 1, 10 or 100 accounts to whom and what should change?
Let me understand: do you have a particular privilege more than those with fewer accounts than you? You already have an advantage because you have more. What should you still be entitled to?

4. I take your opinion into account.
But as for whether the game is for me or not, I invite you to stop expressing yourself about it: it is a judgment that is not up to you and declaring it is totally worthless.

The point of the alts is, when you stick to your vision you pitched as a game company, you are rewarded with loyal customers that spends money on your product.  And yes new players are needed too, but NQ shouldn't cater or listen to her fly by night people who pop in, lose a ship, and complain then unsub. Chances are they weren't gonna stick around long term anyway.  I'm very passionate about stuff like this, because of the many things that happened to eve online. A vocal minority whined about being ganked, and while eve didn't remove it, they just nerfed it and mechanics over and over. They went with quick fixes to appease people thinking it would generate more subs and it didnt happen. The opposition happened. Instead they could have looked st balance options or new game play mechanics. General sweeping nerfs are often very bad, especially when it goes against Core mechanics. Eve highsec use to be a place where you could pvp beyond ganking, but it was nerf after nerf. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Leogradance said:

Naah. I absolutely do not think that soloists come aware that they can then change the game.
I was personally drawn to the creative abilities of the game and that is what attracted a considerable amount of players.
The fact that many are also interested in PvP is because the game's target range is very large. It's a sandbox for that too.

The point is, if you let me do indiscriminate PvP everywhere, apart from a small safe zone, it's no longer a sanbox game with PvP elements, but a PvP game with sandbox elements.
And that's what's wrong.

People who want PvP will have it. But forcing those who don't want to do it isn't "PvP". It is a "stretch". And whether it is realistic or not is certainly not a problem: the sun is a cartoon in the sky and the planets are stationary! LOL

 

About poop: it is an Italian saying that means "it causes me a strong performance anxiety". More or less :D

 

I dont WANT pvp, I avoid it like the plague, but I 100% want it in the game, I want the RISK of it.  My point about 'hermit' solos, people who completely refuse to engage in the community element of the game, is that they ruin it for everyone else.  Societies solution to antisocial behaviour is community and law and order. That only works if the community that needs protecting engages in it.  We can protect areas of this game space, if the people group together to protect it.  But every time I fly over Alioth and see all these tiny 'Rust in Space' outposts miles away from civilisation I just see massive targets.  We need to group together to build a stronger world, THAT is the solution to pvp in my opinion, not false safe zones.

I am going out of my way to build bridges and defences to ensure my org are safe when pvp comes....... most of these people havent spoken to a single person since they joined the game, might as well be playing a single player game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

The point of the alts is, when you stick to your vision you pitched as a game company, you are rewarded with loyal customers that spends money on your product.  And yes new players are needed too, but NQ shouldn't cater or listen to her fly by night people who pop in, lose a ship, and complain then unsub. Chances are they weren't gonna stick around long term anyway.  I'm very passionate about stuff like this, because of the many things that happened to eve online. A vocal minority whined about being ganked, and while eve didn't remove it, they just nerfed it and mechanics over and over. They went with quick fixes to appease people thinking it would generate more subs and it didnt happen. The opposition happened. Instead they could have looked st balance options or new game play mechanics. General sweeping nerfs are often very bad, especially when it goes against Core mechanics. Eve highsec use to be a place where you could pvp beyond ganking, but it was nerf after nerf. 

 

Ok. Now I understand your point of view, and while I disagree with indiscriminate PvP in DU, I have played other PvP games in a hardcore way and have seen them ruined by reckless developer choices.

But the point is, it's not the people who complain about the problem. They will always be there, everywhere, in any situation.
Even if you have the perfect game, there will be complaints.
Complaints are not the problem.
It is to evaluate them and find appropriate solutions. If the game goes well or badly, it will not be the fault of the community, but of those who have managed it.

So far I have seen NQ find a series of technical innovations that despite the undeniable other mistakes still make me trust in their work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Leogradance said:

Naah. I absolutely do not think that soloists come aware that they can then change the game.
I was personally drawn to the creative abilities of the game and that is what attracted a considerable amount of players.
The fact that many are also interested in PvP is because the game's target range is very large. It's a sandbox for that too.

The point is, if you let me do indiscriminate PvP everywhere, apart from a small safe zone, it's no longer a sanbox game with PvP elements, but a PvP game with sandbox elements.
And that's what's wrong.

People who want PvP will have it. But forcing those who don't want to do it isn't "PvP". It is a "stretch". And whether it is realistic or not is certainly not a problem: the sun is a cartoon in the sky and the planets are stationary! LOL

 

About poop: it is an Italian saying that means "it causes me a strong performance anxiety". More or less :D

 

Right now, PVP is limited to shooting at people who want a fight (there are very few of those) and shooting at people who are either idiots or clueless.  I have personally killed 12 ships, and the blockades I've been a part of have killed over 30 in the last week alone.  In that time, I was absolutely flabbergasted by the incredibly poor designs people were flying.  PVP is entirely avoidable in DU right now, if you get killed, it is 100% because you chose to fly a poorly built ship in a dangerous area.  Enjoy the thrill and the fear of getting caught, it makes what you're doing exciting and when you get away, you will experience an amazing rush that very few games can give you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Leogradance said:

Ok. Now I understand your point of view, and while I disagree with indiscriminate PvP in DU, I have played other PvP games in a hardcore way and have seen them ruined by reckless developer choices.

But the point is, it's not the people who complain about the problem. They will always be there, everywhere, in any situation.
Even if you have the perfect game, there will be complaints.
Complaints are not the problem.
It is to evaluate them and find appropriate solutions. If the game goes well or badly, it will not be the fault of the community, but of those who have managed it.

So far I have seen NQ find a series of technical innovations that despite the undeniable other mistakes still make me trust in their work

For the most part they have my trust and I'm definitely willingly to wait around for a good bit to see how things progress.   But they sold me on emergant gameplay and player choices. What choices do I have when I cant even use my guns? Now that's not me saying there shouldn't be safe zones, just they should be small, and void of high tier, end game content.  The freedom to choose is what I care about. Do I wanna shoot this guy? That's the question I want to be faced with.  Does that mean sometimes people will get "ganked"? Of course, but the fun lies in the freedom. They take that away and reduce to a breaking point, I'll unsub.  Now the details about how to balance pvp, and ways to have people get skills to avoid it, I'm all for that. The hunter can't get his prey 100% of the time. And often times like in eve, even the hunter gets baited and takes a big loss. I see it all the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also for those who know nothing about SWG, watch a few videos about it to see how "chasing extra money or WoW" can kill your game by abandoning your core loyal fanbase by radically changing fundamentals of how the game works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PVP needs a lot more work before it can be "released" in full force. Right now, PVP is pretty much "having guns". We need to get countermeasures into the game for one and the damage output of weapons needs at least one major overhaul before IMO it can be considered to be ready for "prime time".

 

I also agree with those wondering why some seem so eager o get access to more defenseless targets instead of seeking out likeminded players, if only to make sure NQ gets the data and examples of what is goodm and what not, about PVP..

I can't escape the feeling NQ will in fact keep the current safezones intact for at least another 6 months, or until v2 of PVP is ready (which I do expect will include countermeasures for space combat like radar lock breaker/jammer tech and possible shields). As it is now, if the pewpew hungry are let loose, they will kill the game in no time by chasing those not interested away because there is no counter mechanics at all and resists are way to generic to really make choices.  The result right now would be flying cubes which no one would want.

 

Lets keep in mind this game is not centered around PVP, it is not the premier game mechanic around which everything else is built (as NQ has stated quite clearly several times).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

PVP needs a lot more work before it can be "released" in full force. Right now, PVP is pretty much "having guns". We need to get countermeasures into the game for one and the damage output of weapons needs at least one major overhaul before IMO it can be considered to be ready for "prime time".

 

I also agree with those wondering why some seem so eager o get access to more defenseless targets instead of seeking out likeminded players, if only to make sure NQ gets the data and examples of what is goodm and what not, about PVP..

I can't escape the feeling NQ will in fact keep the current safezones intact for at least another 6 months, or until v2 of PVP is ready (which I do expect will include countermeasures for space combat like radar lock breaker/jammer tech and possible shields). As it is now, if the pewpew hungry are let loose, they will kill the game in no time by chasing those not interested away because there is no counter mechanics at all and resists are way to generic to really make choices.  The result right now would be flying cubes which no one would want.

 

Lets keep in mind this game is not centered around PVP, it is not the premier game mechanic around which everything else is built (as NQ has stated quite clearly several times).

Some pvpers do want to hunt players that have a low or 0 chance of killing them. That's their choice and its still pvp. But I do agree there needs to be counter measures for people to escape, mechanics and stuff like that.  I'm pretty sure JC said only 5% of pvp is implemented right now.  And I wouldn't care tbh if the current safe zone stays forever,  but all t3+ ore removed from there, and no safe zones at all in future systems. They can just add Sanc moons as needed around alioth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

PVP needs a lot more work before it can be "released" in full force. Right now, PVP is pretty much "having guns". We need to get countermeasures into the game for one and the damage output of weapons needs at least one major overhaul before IMO it can be considered to be ready for "prime time".

 

I also agree with those wondering why some seem so eager o get access to more defenseless targets instead of seeking out likeminded players, if only to make sure NQ gets the data and examples of what is goodm and what not, about PVP..

I can't escape the feeling NQ will in fact keep the current safezones intact for at least another 6 months, or until v2 of PVP is ready (which I do expect will include countermeasures for space combat like radar lock breaker/jammer tech and possible shields). As it is now, if the pewpew hungry are let loose, they will kill the game in no time by chasing those not interested away because there is no counter mechanics at all and resists are way to generic to really make choices.  The result right now would be flying cubes which no one would want.

 

Lets keep in mind this game is not centered around PVP, it is not the premier game mechanic around which everything else is built (as NQ has stated quite clearly several times).

Totally agree with Blaze here, whilst I am all for open pvp for the reason stated, I am in no hurry for it, nor do I think any safe zone removal should be done now.  NQ have made it pretty clear they are not rushing pvp into the game, you can see that from the fact they went with beta with pvp in the state it is in.  I also agree we are looking at 3/6 months before there will be many if any changes, look at the roadmap, it is not scheduled until second phase.  NQ clearly want us to build a civilisation first, before they really add any conflict.  I encourage EVERYONE who values security to group up and ensure it happens.  Ironic that I am in agreement with the pirates, whilst trying to rally the 'carebears' (hate the term sorry).

Also another reason why these knicker-wetting threads are all a bit premature........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People liking different things isn't a crime. Space is supposed to be huge. This game is supposed to be huge. There's plenty of room for people that gain enjoyment from different styles of gameplay, especially since that's how the game was actually advertised. Not as a piracy sim, as a civilization sandbox. That implies some level of civilization. 

 

These two concepts aren't mutually exclusive at all. Who cares if some people prefer to build instead of fight? Why should that bother anyone? 

 

Similarly, I like the idea of a dangerous frontier where anything can happen. There's no reason why the game can't have both. It's called space for a reason. 

 

It's 2020. If I want to be completely isolated in an underground moon lair I spend years carving out with a spoon, I think we can all understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnnyTazer said:

NQ already knows they if they go back on their promise of freedom and open world and player driven they will lose massive money, because at that point they are backing off on the original vision they sold us on, the reason we even backed the game.

Sorry, but they already went back on their promise, there would be no restrictions on builds and then they added that industry was on static alone to do something something with PvP, remember? They also said bases and structures would be as big as we could imagine, apparently we are all limited imaginative to a Large core, or maybe abit larger but not like what they sold in the beginning. You could be part of infinite organizations, that is reduced to what is it, 5? there would Not be auto mining, now look at the starting screen.
So what garantees exactly free and open world player driven PvP? Hope not anything already described in my other lines :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Moosegun said:

Totally agree with Blaze here, whilst I am all for open pvp for the reason stated, I am in no hurry for it, nor do I think any safe zone removal should be done now.  NQ have made it pretty clear they are not rushing pvp into the game, you can see that from the fact they went with beta with pvp in the state it is in.  I also agree we are looking at 3/6 months before there will be many if any changes, look at the roadmap, it is not scheduled until second phase.  NQ clearly want us to build a civilisation first, before they really add any conflict.  I encourage EVERYONE who values security to group up and ensure it happens.  Ironic that I am in agreement with the pirates, whilst trying to rally the 'carebears' (hate the term sorry).

Also another reason why these knicker-wetting threads are all a bit premature........

Have to agree with you here, and building civilization isnt done overnight. If we all manage that in 6 months i think we should be proud people.

And indeed Security Is everything, nobody leaves their doors open at night, so why would you in an open world. And it is relative easy to actually get organized but unless the need is seen it wont happen in large numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Aaron Cain said:

Sorry, but they already went back on their promise, there would be no restrictions on builds and then they added that industry was on static alone to do something something with PvP, remember? They also said bases and structures would be as big as we could imagine, apparently we are all limited imaginative to a Large core, or maybe abit larger but not like what they sold in the beginning. You could be part of infinite organizations, that is reduced to what is it, 5? there would Not be auto mining, now look at the starting screen.
So what garantees exactly free and open world player driven PvP? Hope not anything already described in my other lines :D

None of those things you described I've heard them make promises on or use to pitch their game.  Industry wasn't even in the game til alpha 2. As for L cores they clearly explained technical reasons why it's not larger at least at this point. You do realize the difference between them wanting to do something, but are unable to because of technical reasons?  Why would I want to be part of infinite organizations that doesnr even make sense.  They just pitch "organization" in general which I'm very satisfied with atmo, but also expect some QoL down the road. What was pitched was the world would be shaped by players, and run by players, and the actions of players. Increasing safe zones and making large portions of the map opt in only pvp if you want to, go against that very nature. Not sure what point exactly your trying to make, but doesnt seem like a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

;) Thats the whole point of this topic....It isnt a good one and it brings in drama that is unneeded. the previous PvP discussions always ended in popcorn and big drama, people fighting and changing nothing. This is no different

about the points i named, yeah they were. But That discussion is run before, not feeling like doing it again. NQ owns the game and they can do whatever they want with it, they are not obliged to listen to anyone and any discussion that is not structural and friendly will lead to nothing but drama. Even when they redraw any aspects of the game, it is their call. we can follow , or leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am doing pvp for 25 years since UO/AC/DAOC. Ive only played FFA (Free for all servers) during those days. Ive played almost all mmos possible, almost all survivals and i know a thing or two or more about games/healthy population/survability/offline raiding, etc.

I hope the core aspect of the game wont be FFA pvp otherwise people will destroy more than what the others can construct back that means (you guessed) ppl will leave, ppl will unsub and guess what, population will drop.

Last example: Last Oasis. Launched with a healthy pop peak at 35k and after 4 months of FFA pvp that game has 500-600 players daily. The rest are details.

Humans have emotional attachement to things and pixels. Make them lose their assets 2-3 times and they are gone and wont ever return. The psychological "trauma" will bring them back memories whenever they will see the game. Its science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eleete said:

I am doing pvp for 25 years since UO/AC/DAOC. Ive only played FFA (Free for all servers) during those days. Ive played almost all mmos possible, almost all survivals and i know a thing or two or more about games/healthy population/survability/offline raiding, etc.

I hope the core aspect of the game wont be FFA pvp otherwise people will destroy more than what the others can construct back that means (you guess) ppl will leave, ppl will unsub and guess what, population will drop.

Last example: Last Oasis. Launched with a healthy pop peak at 35k and after 4 months of FFA pvp that game has 500-600 players daily. The rest are details.

I could care less if DU dies if the change FFA as I wont play it so its literally the same thing to me. I dont give 2 fucks about NQ in that sense or any other game and developer.  With that being said I dont wish anything bad on NQ or other games.  I personally think WoW is trash but I'm totally ok with them succeeding as a game and company.  But if I dont get what they  pitched, I vote with my wallet and leave. And we already have some safe zones that's the point. Safe zones were announced from the beginning,  we were just told the majority of game world would be open world FFA, that's the point we are making. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...