Jump to content

Is A Command Console Worth It?


48 replies to this topic

#21 Goombah

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 57 posts

Posted 20 August 2015 - 11:49 PM

View Postjss78, on 05 July 2015 - 03:23 AM, said:

(As a general point, how do they make what's essentially a targeting computer weigh 3 tons using 31st century tech? Has anything beyond vacuum tubes become lostech?)


Well you see, the circuit boards are made of obsidian, the wires are shielded twisted pair cables, gold wires sheethed in gold. The case is solid Davion lead, resistant to bullets! And the host controlled is actually 3 human brains wired to a small black hole. All the empty space in between the wires is filled with water, in order to cut down on cable cross-talk.

Instead of using bolts, mech' techs lock command computers in place very solidly by filling the gaps around the outside of the system with concrete and rebar.

So yeah, 6,000 lb or so.

Edited by Goombah, 20 August 2015 - 11:51 PM.


#22 TheLuc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 746 posts

Posted 21 August 2015 - 12:34 AM

hahaha Goombah, very funny one.

The command console is worth it only for certain builds, especially those sniper builds for the zoom boost.

in the situation a mech has 1 slot loose, 3tons free and the engine is not worth getting bigger then id say why not put the CC in

#23 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,557 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 21 August 2015 - 12:49 AM

View PostNightshade24, on 05 July 2015 - 03:18 AM, said:

highlander that has a gauss rifle, 3 medium lasers, SRM 6, and LRM 20.


... holy bracket builds, Batman.

#24 Nightshade24

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,972 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII

Posted 21 August 2015 - 12:55 AM

View PostTarogato, on 21 August 2015 - 12:49 AM, said:

... holy bracket builds, Batman.

bracket?

#25 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,557 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 21 August 2015 - 01:02 AM

@OP:

Basically... no. Command Console is never worth it in its current state. In fact, even clan Targeting Computers aren't really as good as just adding another heatsink instead.

View PostNightshade24, on 21 August 2015 - 12:55 AM, said:

bracket?


Building mechs so that they have a weapon for every engagement range. Which is really inefficient, because you can't reliably fight at a range where you can use all the weapons you have equipped at once.

Gauss - best at or beyond mid-long range, requires slight leading. Inefficient at close range.
SRM - really only works at in-yo-face range. Requires substantial lead beyond that and spreads.
Medium Lasers - kinda works with gauss, kinda works with SRMs, but now you have three weapon systems that all behave differently and should be treated differently.
LRM20 - lolwtfbbq let's add a fourth weapon that behaves completely differently and let's make sure it's a terrible weapon that spreads its damage substantially and only works at ranges where you can't use your SRMs.

It's just a terrible way to build mechs in this game.

Edited by Tarogato, 21 August 2015 - 01:11 AM.


#26 Nightshade24

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,972 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII

Posted 21 August 2015 - 01:42 AM

View PostTarogato, on 21 August 2015 - 01:02 AM, said:

@OP:

Basically... no. Command Console is never worth it in its current state. In fact, even clan Targeting Computers aren't really as good as just adding another heatsink instead.



Building mechs so that they have a weapon for every engagement range. Which is really inefficient, because you can't reliably fight at a range where you can use all the weapons you have equipped at once.

Gauss - best at or beyond mid-long range, requires slight leading. Inefficient at close range.
SRM - really only works at in-yo-face range. Requires substantial lead beyond that and spreads.
Medium Lasers - kinda works with gauss, kinda works with SRMs, but now you have three weapon systems that all behave differently and should be treated differently.
LRM20 - lolwtfbbq let's add a fourth weapon that behaves completely differently and let's make sure it's a terrible weapon that spreads its damage substantially and only works at ranges where you can't use your SRMs.

It's just a terrible way to build mechs in this game.

ah, so you mean skirmisher.

And it is efficient, as it means you may send more tons on weapons then heat sinks as you won't be firing all your weapons all the time. So even though general smurfy may say your mech has a 12% heat effeciency, it may be a 40% because you are not alpha striking those 2 ppc's with your medium pulse lasers and SRM's or you are not firing that Large pulse laser into a wall when you fire your twin LRM 15 + A's or what ever.



Let's see here, what happens if we take this highlander ( gauss + 3 med las + srm 6+ LRM 20) up against the standard brawler highlander (Ac 20 + 2 med las + 3 SRM 4).

First of all, 'my' highlander takes the advantage, focuses on the E torso and is already letting it rip with the LRM 20 and gauss rifle. Brawlander is already taking damage without the ability to deal damage, by the time it gets within reasonable range to bother using med lasers or AC 20 to do damage, it may be already cored or red in the Side torso and damaged the arm and centre torso, as it gets into a cross-range where all weapons can be used (200 to 270 meters) it will get heavy damage and lose that side torso.

now you got a Highlander that will have a gauss rifle, 3 med lasers, lrm 20, srm 6, firing on a highlander with only 4 SRM 4's assuming it wasn't an Xl highlander. even if you cut yourself back a bit and only use your medium lasers nad SRM's for range effeciencies you still fairly out weigh your near crippled opponent.

Even a situation where the engagement started at 400 meters, the Highlander skirmisher still out weighs the brawler in a normal situation and even at close quarters you got a guass rifle (15 damage), 3 medium lasers (15 damage), and 1 SRM 6 (12 damage rounded down) for a total of 42 damage per shot (excluding LRM 20) while the brawlander has an AC 20 (20 damage), 2 Medium lasers (10 damage), and 3 SRM 4, (24) with a total 54 damage, greater damage by 12, but also at the cost of more heat and spread. On a hotter map the Skirmisher highlander would win ie terra therma, caustic valley, etc. On a colder map statistically speaking the Brawlander may win granted it uses cover to get within 200 meters.


Oh right, the LRM 20, When using LRM's as a back up weapon, you do not care for precision that much or for having 40+ damage per salvo. all you want is to break through ams and deal the damage, this can be usefull when you are on your way to the next target or battlefield, it gets you engaged in combat reguardless of you being a skirmisher, brawler, juggernaut, etc.
You being an atlas who is going barely 50 kph in canyon network 500 meters away from team in combat and 700 from enemy? don't you worry and dont' try to ac 20 snipe, or randomly flail with your srms and medium lasers, because your LRM 20 / 15 / 3+ LRM 5's / 2+ LRM 10's will come to the rescue! This solves the problem of getting alpine peaks or (half) of being left behind or to slow or having to many close ranged weapons.
duel AC 20 crab with a large pulse or so? LRM 20.
Centurion with AC 10 and medium lasers? 3 LRM 5's/ a LRM 15.

works for all weight classes besides lights. with the LRM 20 on an assault that isn't LRM focused, it isn't for trying to 360 head shot enemy mechs, but to simply break there ams for the other chaps, and to get the damage done before your in optimal range or before you ingage, much like the playstyle of a mad dog prime... fire your LRM's at target until you can beat it with your pulse lasers.




I went with highlander skirmsher vs brawler debate... but what about skirmisher vs sniper/ LRM boat?
this time simular but the tables have turned. this time your dishing out damage while getting into range and then get there where the enemy can't do much due to heat/ min range/ poor heat to damage effeciency at up close.



Sure, it takes skill to use a mech with more then 1 weapon system. (ahem thunderbolt, timberwolf, stalker, hunchback, dragon, cicada, fire starter, players)

but I got that skill... I do run the ebon jaguar stock (literally each weapon is different) as well as many other mechs, 1 of my banshees got 6 different weapon groups for eg.

#27 Kamikaze Viking

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 383 posts
  • LocationStay on Topic... STAY ON TOPIC!!!

Posted 21 August 2015 - 04:05 AM

As to OP. Command console is not worth it.

As to bracket builds:

Bring that variety across your team not all on one mech.
While your highlander is exposing to fire your gauss and Lrm20. You get hit in return by a long range focused build eg STK-Misery with gauss 3erll, who then hides again while your missiles are in flight. You hit with Gauss, he hit with Gauss and 50%+ of the 3erll beams. Trade lost.

And while this is happening our pure brawler is moving up behind cover and closing ground to hit you while you are busy with losing trades to the Misery.

Specialise and work as a team. or stay Jack of all trades MASTER OF NONE.

#28 Escef

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 8,529 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNew England

Posted 21 August 2015 - 04:17 AM

View PostTarogato, on 21 August 2015 - 01:02 AM, said:

Building mechs so that they have a weapon for every engagement range. Which is really inefficient, because you can't reliably fight at a range where you can use all the weapons you have equipped at once.


Not really. I've never heard anyone call a mech on MWO a "bracket build", but in table top there are mechs with distinct firing brackets. The Catapult is a good example. It has weapons that are designed to be fired together at certain ranges, but you are almost never going to alpha because it is way too much heat. On the Catapult the long range bracket weapons are your LRM15s, which you just won't fire at 6 hexes or closer, because at that point your 4 medium lasers are in medium range and you are starting to suffer minimum range penalties on the missiles. Anything with multiple PPCs and miscellaneous short range guns (like the Warhammer) but not nearly enough heat sinks to fire the long range and short range guns together works as well.

Some mechs would be bracket fire jobs if not for how heat efficient they are. Like the Gunslinger, which packs 2 Gauss rifles and 4 medium pulse lasers, you have to go out of your way to overheat that thing (jump jets and abusing the rear mounted weapons comes to mind).

#29 Tiamat of the Sea

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 1,326 posts

Posted 21 August 2015 - 07:40 AM

I work what could be considered bracket builds pretty regularly, myself, and there's nothing really wrong with them if you know how to use them. Yes, they aren't going to consistently melt a whole face every time they expose to fire in order to shoot back, but that doesn't make them worthless by a long shot- it just means you have to take a different mentality with them.

As much as you can say that a single focused long range build will beat a multi-range build at long range fire, the moment you start saying 'and the brawler', you're tossing in a second 'mech, and then your scenario goes out the window. If you've got two 'mechs on one side, you've got two 'mechs on the other side, and then you've got two multi-range builds. This means less for the purported facemelt Stalker (who can see both of them at once and pick the same target when they both lean out to shoot at it), but a hell of a lot of trouble for this sneaky brawler, who tries to jump one 'mech and takes significant fire from both sides the moment they engage, and will likely suffer a rear torso blowout. It gets even better for the mixed-range 'mech side if the two are coordinated and use their targeting systems, and then focus on the same location of the brawler- they can then close on the Stalker and wreck it face-to-face as well (though likely at the cost of one of the two of them). It gets better for the mixed-range 'mechs if one of them spots the brawler coming, because it gives them a chance to engage a dedicated short-range 'mech from a longer range.

Of course, that depends on the pilots of the multi-range 'mechs having the right mentality for piloting something with, essentially, bracketed weapons, which a lot of players don't seem to have, so there is that to take into consideration.




That said, I'd strongly advise against Streaks on a Stalker. Stalkers have a low engine cap for their weight, generally poor torso twist, and not enough angle to look down at a nearby Light 'mech. This can make it absolutely impossible to use Streaks against a Light that's close because the Stalker can't track consistently enough to keep the crosshairs in the box. Meanwhile a set of standard SRMs could, with practice, be lead so that they hit the Light in question (or rotate the other direction from the way the Light appears to be going and drop them in its path)- at least until it gets too close and you can't angle to it at all.


Edit: Oh, and about that CC. I haven't gotten much benefit from them yet, but that's not to say that they can't do anything worthwhile. They seem to be more about sensors than combat, really, so if you're working with people who are very tactical and want to act as a target caller, this seems very useful to me.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 August 2015 - 07:43 AM.


#30 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,578 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 21 August 2015 - 07:54 AM

View Postjss78, on 05 July 2015 - 03:23 AM, said:

(As a general point, how do they make what's essentially a targeting computer weigh 3 tons using 31st century tech? Has anything beyond vacuum tubes become lostech?)


A command console is actually a second cockpit... Just an FYI.

#31 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,578 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 21 August 2015 - 08:12 AM

View PostNightshade24, on 21 August 2015 - 01:42 AM, said:

Stuff about balanced builds, using LRMs as a support weapon, and other things I've been talking about for a while now myself...



Oh. You mean like what I've mentioned in this thread?

I agree with you completely. In their place, playing to other mech's weaknesses, a balanced "bracketed" build can be very brutal. It's a matter of never being helpless/useless, and positioning yourself to your opponent's weaknesses rather than your single strength.

However, despite my agreeance, it's not worth arguing with people about it. Either they will get it, or they will never understand and continue to spout fighting a focused builds strength vs a balanced build, inside that said focused build's strength. (Where... I'd be telling you that you're using the balanced build wrong at that point.)

I do love my balanced builds. They come in very handy. Not saying there isn't a strength to boating, just that there are strengths to not boating as well.

Edited by Tesunie, 21 August 2015 - 08:13 AM.


#32 Nightshade24

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,972 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII

Posted 21 August 2015 - 04:12 PM

View PostTesunie, on 21 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:



Oh. You mean like what I've mentioned in this thread?

I agree with you completely. In their place, playing to other mech's weaknesses, a balanced "bracketed" build can be very brutal. It's a matter of never being helpless/useless, and positioning yourself to your opponent's weaknesses rather than your single strength.

However, despite my agreeance, it's not worth arguing with people about it. Either they will get it, or they will never understand and continue to spout fighting a focused builds strength vs a balanced build, inside that said focused build's strength. (Where... I'd be telling you that you're using the balanced build wrong at that point.)

I do love my balanced builds. They come in very handy. Not saying there isn't a strength to boating, just that there are strengths to not boating as well.

personally for your LRM raven I would preffer to drop the artemis for another ton of ammo (this is coming from another LRM raven lunatic ^^) but yea, good to see someone use an LRM raven for once that isn't me or play less then 2 hours of the game.

Anyway, I still have faith that people can learn and to have a debate instead of pretend everything is black and white hence why I bother- and even if it doesn't work for him others reading can learn something

#33 Fire for Effect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 5
  • Mercenary Rank 5
  • 583 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 02 September 2015 - 05:03 AM

in short:

no, some more HS or a bigger engine is always better

#34 Zordicron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 2,547 posts

Posted 07 September 2015 - 11:32 AM

I know this thread is a little older, but I want to add 2 c-bills here....

CC, if you had asked this in general discussion all the tryhards would have trolled you into the ground as a n00b cadet.

They are wrong, and short sighted of course.


Look, the CC should be used IF:

You already have a BAP
You don't have the 2 slots for BAP and head slot is available AND you have the tonnage

OR

You have a loadout where super fast detailed target info is a force multiplier.


I will explain the BAP vs CC first-
BAP does more, for less tonnage. You get more sensor range, you can see/target shut down mechs, it counters ECM. It's a little jewel that for some reason sees much less use then you would think.

You get LESS target info speed, by roughly near half. If you are in a longer range type loadout, this might not really matter much, especially if you aren't supahawesome at aim, or have sucky ping, or are shooting at a moving target. I don;t know if OP is a crackshot with LL or not, but IMO target info isn't prolly ultra important at Stalker hill peek LL range. A BAP to increase sensors and counter ECM would be more benficial IMO if he wanted to use a piece of tech on his loadout vs upping engine or MOAR firepower.


Now, for the target info gather part-

Certain loadouts can utilize info gather speed much, much more then others. Think shorter range pinpoint type weapons, like LPL. If you can see the weak spot on an enemy mech much, much faster then they can see yours, you have a huge advantage in the "brawl" as you will be able to shoot first and twist.

Here is somthing to pnder on: when you pug, and are in the middle of a match of common players, odds are good people will just shoot you on sight, and target info is the last thing on their mind. They are happy to get a hit, dmg is dmg they think, mob mentality deathball is the key to win anyway right?

As you end up fighting better and better pilots, you will find they are increasingly better at shooting the same spot to disable a mech more quickly. Eventually, you find the toughest enemy will manage to hit "right where it counts". They will hold fire jsut a tad and wait to see where the enemy is weakest. This is the type you will see in well practiced solid performing units in CW for example.

here is where target info will actually matter. In a PUG, well, you can precisely aim your shots, the enemy prolly won't, and while your shot will land home, it is dumb luck if the manage to hit your exposed ST or not. in many cases it can be more benficial to actually twist and let them take the first shot(they will shoot anyway) into a shield arm then risk them getting a lucky hit on your exposed mech. In "better" play, the enemy is going to wait till they see your paper doll so they can take you out faster, to conserve heat/ammo/ whatever.

If you take a CC, and add a target info module on top of it, (and a BAP if you want to get really cray cray) you have now made it where you will get the enemy info in less then half the time they do.

YOU WILL KNOW THEIR WEAK SPOT FAST ENOUGH TO SHOOT IT BEFORE THEY EVEN GET YOUR PAPER DOLL.

I made a CTF 1X loadout a while ago with this in mind. triple LPL, ML to compliment, radar derp, infor gather modules, and I think LPL range and cooldown. Being able to see where the enemy mech is opened up when you have weapons to do a 30+ point alpha in .67 seconds was major. I could deliver the dmg while they were still glancing at my paper doll waiting for the info to show. by the time they had mine, I already had an advantage, and was already in defensive position waiting for the return fire as my LPL recharged. I lost track of how many laser barf storm crows I wrecked. The info time reduction increased the potency of my LPL build in a way traditional things like DHS couldn't do.

now that particular loadout, that was before the last HSR pass etc, and CTF was my first chassis, ever, when it was just fresh released in beta so I know the chassis well to say the least. In short, that particular example maybe won;t work so well for anyone else(the CTF I mean)


Basically, use a CC if you:

Have a loadout that can use the info time reduction, like a mid/short range "pinpoint alpha" type
Can/will use the benefit, and go all in(put a module on too!)

if you don;t "think" about it, don;t prepare for a playstyle adjustment etc, it is worthless. CC and info gather time are one of those things that work outside of spreadsheets and actually falls squarely on the pilot for utilization. You will see the benefits immensely if you prepare to actually use them.

questions? ask away

#35 B L O O D W I T C H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 07 September 2015 - 11:45 AM

i'll just leave this here

Battlemaster sniper build

#36 Kin3ticX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 2,926 posts
  • LocationSalt Mines of Puglandia

Posted 07 September 2015 - 10:28 PM

no

3 tons is too heavy, even if it was = to a targeting computer 3 it would still be worthless. Always better off with 3 heatsinks or something else like engine, armor, weapons

#37 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,578 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 07 September 2015 - 10:32 PM

View PostKin3ticX, on 07 September 2015 - 10:28 PM, said:

... Always...


I probably wouldn't say "always", but "usually" or "almost always" would be appropriate... It's effects are very minimal, to say the lease. ;)


Personally, I think if someone is asking, inform them what it does and advise them to, if they can, test it out for themselves. It typically doesn't do enough to make a difference. (But some people may like/use it anyway, and it may make a difference to them, however minor.) Then again, I'm from the school of "give everything a try yourself, and see what it does". Experimentation is one of the best ways to learn.

#38 Kin3ticX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 2,926 posts
  • LocationSalt Mines of Puglandia

Posted 07 September 2015 - 10:33 PM

View PostTesunie, on 21 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:



Oh. You mean like what I've mentioned in this thread?

I agree with you completely. In their place, playing to other mech's weaknesses, a balanced "bracketed" build can be very brutal. It's a matter of never being helpless/useless, and positioning yourself to your opponent's weaknesses rather than your single strength.

However, despite my agreeance, it's not worth arguing with people about it. Either they will get it, or they will never understand and continue to spout fighting a focused builds strength vs a balanced build, inside that said focused build's strength. (Where... I'd be telling you that you're using the balanced build wrong at that point.)

I do love my balanced builds. They come in very handy. Not saying there isn't a strength to boating, just that there are strengths to not boating as well.


the main flaw with bracket builds is they do nothing well. So against specialists in their element you are vulnerable to being range tanked or face hugged which makes large parts of the bracketed payload perhaps useless.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 07 September 2015 - 10:33 PM.


#39 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,578 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 07 September 2015 - 10:54 PM

View PostKin3ticX, on 07 September 2015 - 10:33 PM, said:


the main flaw with bracket builds is they do nothing well. So against specialists in their element you are vulnerable to being range tanked or face hugged which makes large parts of the bracketed payload perhaps useless.


If you play a balanced/bracketed build to your opponent's strengths, you probably shouldn't be using a bracketed/balanced build then.

I tend to be able to use my build to play on someone's weakness. I also have a knack for keeping people within certain ranges, as the case for my Stalker 3F build. So many times I've had players sit in my 180-270m kill zone, or they duck in to attack, find out I have close range weapons, tries to run away, and runs away into my other weapon ranges (which often times have killed them as they tried to flee).

There are strengths and weaknesses to any style of build. Be it balanced or focused. I wont deny the strengths afforded to a focused build, and concentrating on just playing to your own strengths. There is an under appreciated strength to being able to play to an opponent's weakness too though, but it isn't as easy as playing to a set strength.

To be honest, I prefer a bit of balance, but with a leaning in a focus within the balance. I tend to choose two roles for a mech, and focus in one role and have some elements of the other role. Be it support LRM/close combat, or ERPPC (hot sniper)/cool closer ranged weapons, etc. If I know my build has a strong weakness, I'll try to cover that weakness with something to bolster it. Example: If I have a mech with two PPCs (not ER), to cover the minimum ranges I might add in med lasers or some SRMs. If I have an ERPPC, I might pair it up with an (U)AC5 and some med lasers for some cooler alternatives when I run hot.


I feel this leans to more of a preference of play, than anything else. As I've said, I wont deny that there is a strength in boating/focusing a build for a specific role. But, I feel there are also strengths to more balanced concepts too, depending upon how it is used.

#40 Escef

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 8,529 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNew England

Posted 08 September 2015 - 12:29 AM

View PostKin3ticX, on 07 September 2015 - 10:28 PM, said:

no

3 tons is too heavy, even if it was = to a targeting computer 3 it would still be worthless. Always better off with 3 heatsinks or something else like engine, armor, weapons


CC is 1 crit, 3 heat sinks is 9. And most folks go for max practical armor before anything else. Would a bigger engine be better than a CC? Possibly, though for many high-end assaults it's only buying you 2 to 3 kph. If you don't have room for sinks, than more/bigger guns is also questionable. I'm sure there are a few niche builds where it is the best (or least bad) option for filling in those last few tons. Casual builds, sure; but not being top tier builds does not make them un-fun or useless.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users