Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Should 4.x Get a Level Cap Increase?Follow

#1 May 02 2016 at 11:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Figure we could use a fresh topic of conversation.

A new expansion is coming, and I'm sure there will be a level cap increase. But in a perfect world, is that really such a good idea?

I can think of reasons for and against raising the level cap. But before I go into detail, I'll just put this out there for folks to discuss.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#2 May 02 2016 at 11:43 AM Rating: Good
****
5,729 posts
The way the game is set up they pretty much have to increase the level cap.

Getting the inevitable FFXI comparison out of the way, keeping the level cap at 75 for all those years worked because XI was built almost entirely around horizontal progression. New content and gear was in addition to, not a replacement for the existing stuff.

That's not how it works in XIV though. With ilevels and tiered content you pretty much have to do a complete reset every so often or things will eventually spiral totally out of control.
____________________________
75 Rabbit/75 Sheep/75 Coeurl/75 Eft/75 Raptor/75 Hippogryph/75 Puk
75 Scorpion/75 Wamoura/75 Pixie/75 Peiste/64 Sabotender
51 Bird/41 Mandragora/40 Bee/37 Crawler/37 Bat

Items no one cares about: O
Missions no one cares about: O
Crafts no one cares about: O
#3 May 02 2016 at 11:50 AM Rating: Good
***
3,737 posts
I think yes, they probably should raise the level cap if for no other reason than it's a good way to shepard a base story along without it feeling like it's all being shoveled into your face in one go.

What I think they probably should consider though is not adding as many active (button) abilities as they did with Heavensward. The ability bloat is already ridiculous in FFXIV, adding 5 more abilities to every job is probably not a great idea. I think adding maybe 1 or 2 abilities is fine and fill the rest of the leveling rewards in with passive traits that adjust existing abilities.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#4 May 02 2016 at 11:59 AM Rating: Excellent
My initial thoughts:

Storyline progression, as noted above, is an easy reason to up the level cap. Requiring level progression is a great way to gate storyline content and add a feeling of growth to the game.

However...

If SE didn't increase the level cap, then current savage-level content and extreme-mode primals would be made easier at more incremental rates as the iLevel increases. There also wouldn't be a feeling of the current gear tiers being so incredibly worthless so quickly. And rather than make throwaway leveling dungeons that ultimately only serve to fill a dungeon roulette, SE could instead invest more resources into alternative forms of progression.

And to be totally honest, raising the level cap didn't seem to hold anyone back from accomplishing the storyline at a rapid pace.

One more point... a common complaint on the OFs these days is ability bloat. By holding the level cap at 60, perhaps rewards of progression could include replacing or enhancing abilities rather than adding new ones.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#5 May 02 2016 at 12:35 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,820 posts
Nope, but the game's core system, unless it's changing, requires a level cap and drastic ilvl jump in order to "progress" us with new abilities. Since there's literally nothing as of now that prevents them from adding new abilities and the like, they just want to do it when "everyone" will get new abilities and level cap + 60 ilvl jump is the only way they seem to do it.

Ability bloat I didn't mind in games like XI because as you level you slowly stop using your "beginner" skills unless in extremely situational times like Voidwatch/Abyssea Triggering, The biggest problem is making every job essentially the same, especially Tanks and Healers above all. SCH may have a pet but that just means it's balanced around the fact the pet carries a few of your additional skills you normally would have.

What they should do, is replace your combos with the new skills so that way you have, dare I say, options; Rather than continually compounding on it. This way they CAN actually introduce jobs like Geomancer/Blue Mage, because there's no way for them to work in this game's current framework without maiming the hell out of it.
____________________________

#6 May 02 2016 at 1:03 PM Rating: Good
**
863 posts
I think this is a first, but I basically agree with everyone in this thread at the same time lol.
#7 May 02 2016 at 2:26 PM Rating: Good
****
5,729 posts
I definitely agree about ability bloat though. They're going to have to address it somehow or the game may become unplayable.
____________________________
75 Rabbit/75 Sheep/75 Coeurl/75 Eft/75 Raptor/75 Hippogryph/75 Puk
75 Scorpion/75 Wamoura/75 Pixie/75 Peiste/64 Sabotender
51 Bird/41 Mandragora/40 Bee/37 Crawler/37 Bat

Items no one cares about: O
Missions no one cares about: O
Crafts no one cares about: O
#8 May 02 2016 at 3:57 PM Rating: Good
Ya, I think we're all on the same page. The game's already ridiculous enough as it is constantly mashing buttons, trying to communicate mid battle is non existent. If they're going to go up, then change out some skills to keep the same or heck, even lower the abilities you can use mid battle. MNK (since it's what I'm used to) could just get a new more efficient combo, making the old one utterly useless.
____________________________

#9 May 02 2016 at 4:27 PM Rating: Excellent
I like the idea of implementing new abilities that might start replacing our current main combos. But if that happens, then I'd want it to be about more than simply putting up bigger DPS numbers.

Of course, that would mean de-emphasizing DPS checks and enrage timers in future endgame content, but I'd be fine with that.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#10 May 02 2016 at 6:42 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,820 posts
Which is what was supposed to happen with Midas Savage, but alas..Yoshi lied.

"No more Faust DPS checks...BUT I DIDN'T SAY THERE WOULDN'T BE THREE FAUSTS! HAHAHA!"

Anyway, for example as DRG I should not be using Full thrust combo..at all at this point in the game. I mean, sure it's your "main combo", but you use that the second you get it..through 50..up till 60...and just add in more ontop of it, rather than replacing it.

It's like if in FFXI you used Fast Blade despite getting Chant'Du'Cygne/Requiscqat etc for your main SC.
____________________________

#11 May 02 2016 at 8:08 PM Rating: Excellent
What about the ability to "merit" your weapon skills for additional bonuses?

Each weaponskill could branch to either give a bonus to survivability, support or DPS. Hardcore raiders would likely go the DPS route to assist with beating the hardest content before it's nerfed, while survive/support abilities might be more desirable for casual/midcore players who tend to challenge content after iLevels have gone up or echo has been added.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#12 May 02 2016 at 8:34 PM Rating: Good
***
3,737 posts
Thayos wrote:
What about the ability to "merit" your weapon skills for additional bonuses?

Each weaponskill could branch to either give a bonus to survivability, support or DPS. Hardcore raiders would likely go the DPS route to assist with beating the hardest content before it's nerfed, while survive/support abilities might be more desirable for casual/midcore players who tend to challenge content after iLevels have gone up or echo has been added.


Has the same trap that skill trees have. There will always be a "right" way to spec and if you aren't doing that you're wrong. Essentially inviting people to spec into being less effective.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#13 May 02 2016 at 8:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Has the same trap that skill trees have. There will always be a "right" way to spec and if you aren't doing that you're wrong. Essentially inviting people to spec into being less effective.


Well if you're a raider, the "right" way would be to spec DPS. But if you're casual or midcore -- and if you won't be going up against the newest, savage-level DPS checks -- then perhaps the support or survival branches might actually be more helpful in mitigating damage or mechanics.

Essentially, this could give general players and hardcore players different paths for progression. Might even allow for players to create actual strategies for beating these fights.

Edited, May 2nd 2016 7:44pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#14 May 02 2016 at 9:09 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,820 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Thayos wrote:
What about the ability to "merit" your weapon skills for additional bonuses?

Each weaponskill could branch to either give a bonus to survivability, support or DPS. Hardcore raiders would likely go the DPS route to assist with beating the hardest content before it's nerfed, while survive/support abilities might be more desirable for casual/midcore players who tend to challenge content after iLevels have gone up or echo has been added.


Has the same trap that skill trees have. There will always be a "right" way to spec and if you aren't doing that you're wrong. Essentially inviting people to spec into being less effective.


Even with the mundane stats we have now there's a right and wrong way, so no matter what there will be a "right/wrong" simply because that's maximizing the systems given to you.

Which is why having stats that directly enhance abilities would go a long way. It worked beautifully in 1.23 (since we're talking specifically 14 here) so it could work in this version too. Since we have relic then the raid weapon (or tome weapon given the artificial barrier of 7 weeks of midas 8 normal) having the deep dungeon weapon being "on par" but actually enhancing traits/abilities directly or even offering new ones would make it worth while.

Since no matter what, we will fall into a particular "trap", so it may as well be an elegant trap.
____________________________

#15 May 02 2016 at 9:40 PM Rating: Good
***
3,737 posts
Quote:
Even with the mundane stats we have now there's a right and wrong way, so no matter what there will be a "right/wrong" simply because that's maximizing the systems given to you.


The bonus stat system should go away for that exact reason. Only tanks even sort of get anything out of it and even then it's minor AND could be corrected with tank balancing.

Quote:
Well if you're a raider, the "right" way would be to spec DPS. But if you're casual or midcore -- and if you won't be going up against the newest, savage-level DPS checks -- then perhaps the support or survival branches might actually be more helpful in mitigating damage or mechanics.


Maybe... it doesn't tend to work out that way in practice. In order for there to be real choice all the options have to be VERY close to each other in terms of performance gain, then and only then can you make a playstyle choice and have it be a real choice and not just wrong.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#16 May 03 2016 at 2:43 AM Rating: Good
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,159 posts
I'm personally tired of games throwing false choices at us, in part because there's usually one best choice. Rather, if we're going to start augmenting abilities, just let us max everything with the appropriate effort. As is, XIV has the problem of EXP being "useless" at cap. Something like this could at least give it a purpose, even if a dedicated player (not the hardcore no-lifer) would eventually max a job.

Ability augmentation was originally something I'd wanted out of materia, which could've led to the same jobs being specialized differently for larger group scenarios, but that's just as vulnerable to the cookie cutter effect if the options aren't done well.

As for cap increases, I'm kind of indifferent. I mean, they're typically expected of expansions, but people aren't wrong when it comes to ability bloat or lack of antiquation. Ability icons "morphing" as part of combos is also something XIV should've done, if only to minimize the stuff you need to set. Ergo, a 1-2-3 combo could be 1-1-1. Or if a combo branches, you can select a preferred follow up to maintain that. Same would apply to conditional effects like with fire spells being able to insta-cast with a proc. Otherwise, it might be worth considering changing some effects to passive or long-lasting (de)buffs to cut down on rotation length.

Or hell, just got full on gambit system and let us program rotations that'll run indefinitely once in combat with the ability to pause them or outright restart them for whatever reason. Manual entry can still happen during the process, like if you need to stun/silence something, but it'd take some focus off stressing the left hand with excess button presses while making reactionary movements more feasible.
____________________________
Violence good. Sexy bad. Yay America.
#17 May 03 2016 at 4:49 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
20 posts
The level cap increase was tough for me to accept in HW.

When I got to 60 and began the endgame grind, I started missing having all my alt jobs to make things more interesting. But to level from 50 to 60 it was such a huge grind, that I almost gave up on the game.

Also, I coudn't see the point of increasing the level cap. Content is unlocked behind a linear MSQ. Spells were unlocked only via quests. The only thing that the level cap increase did was kill all the level 50 content that they spent almost 2 years building. I'm sure no one was happy about going back to running 2 dungeons over and over.

Considering the dev team constantly mentions their "lack of staff", cannibalizing your own content is the last thing you want to do.
#18 May 03 2016 at 5:26 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,430 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Thayos wrote:
What about the ability to "merit" your weapon skills for additional bonuses?

Each weaponskill could branch to either give a bonus to survivability, support or DPS. Hardcore raiders would likely go the DPS route to assist with beating the hardest content before it's nerfed, while survive/support abilities might be more desirable for casual/midcore players who tend to challenge content after iLevels have gone up or echo has been added.


Has the same trap that skill trees have. There will always be a "right" way to spec and if you aren't doing that you're wrong. Essentially inviting people to spec into being less effective.


I'm getting so tired of seeing this canned response to any innovative ( not even innovative, just...things other games do just fine) gameplay ideas. First, its not even necessarily true, if choices are balanced enough. There are proven ways to provide meaningful options for customization without destroying the almighty barance-u. Simplest way is provide different upgrades for different playstyles. You can never truly balance things perfectly, but that isn't really a bad thing because:

There's nothing inherently wrong with having a 'best' way to spec, and here is why: People who number crunch or follow the number crunchers will always pick the best option for their situation. Many, many people enjoy this. They get to feel smart because they know that their choice is 0.01% more dps than what the filthy casuals chose ( i know, i know, that is not what min maxing is about).

The people who just pick whatever they want also get to feel good. They might not care about min maxing, they might want to pick something for its solo utility or its aesthetic. Regardless, they get to make a choice. And so what if some random yells at them in a pug for picking the 'wrong thing'. Chances are that guy would find something to complain about regardless. I mean, this **** already happens now, so whats the difference?

My point is that there's a way to implement features like this in a way that results in (almost)everyone winning.

Archmage Callinon wrote:

Quote:
Maybe... it doesn't tend to work out that way in practice. In order for there to be real choice all the options have to be VERY close to each other in terms of performance gain, then and only then can you make a playstyle choice and have it be a real choice and not just wrong.



it totally works out that way when its done with care. At the worst what happens is you get a few different builds that are all about equally balanced and then you can choose from them and tweak the core builds to your playstyle. Its not rocket science either. It works just fine in many games.

The XIV team just doesn't have the resources/time to do it well imo, or else they wouldn't have stuck with a system so basic for all this time. Its purely for efficient/fast workflow from what i can tell. Its part of how they pump out (despite what people say to the contrary) quite a bit of content on the reg.
____________________________

Edited, May 3rd 2016 7:38pm by Llester

Edited, May 3rd 2016 7:39pm by Llester
____________________________
monk
dragoon
[ffxivsig]477065[/ffxivsig]
#19 May 03 2016 at 5:30 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,430 posts
oops double

Edited, May 3rd 2016 7:33pm by Llester
____________________________
monk
dragoon
[ffxivsig]477065[/ffxivsig]
#20 May 03 2016 at 6:08 PM Rating: Good
***
3,737 posts
Quote:
I'm getting so tired of seeing this canned response to any innovative ( not even innovative, just...things other games do just fine) gameplay ideas.


Well you're right that it's not innovative. But it's a canned response because it's a canned problem. Skill trees have this problem. It's a design flaw inherent in the system.

I'm all for giving people alternate ways to build their character as long as the alternatives are all equally valid. Unfortunately I don't really see a way to make that a reality while still making each choice distinct and meaningful. If you've got an example or two of how this has already been done I'd love to see it. I'm not even being sarcastic there, I really would love to see it.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#21 May 03 2016 at 6:59 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,430 posts
Apologies if i came off a bit aggressive, i think this topic is a trigger for me lol. I may also have made light of how challenging this can be from a balance perspective too much.

Anyway, there are plenty of examples. SWTOR did it quite well before they decided to 'streamline' their class system and make it more like XIV. There were many choices in builds, and of course some of those builds rose to the top, but players (especially in PvP) were constantly tweaking and testing them. Quite a few players enjoy this process.

And when you're comparing builds, its not the same as comparing individual skills, because ofc the whole picture has to be considered. The process by which the playerbase explores the synergies of such builds is, imo engaging gameplay. And given a complex enough system of builds, the idea of what is 'best' becomes murky. Often the best is only negligibly better than the second best, and the choice comes down to 'whats better for your playstyle?' X build may be slightly better on paper than
Y, but maybe Y suits my playstyle better and allows me to do more dps than I would if I played X.

Another, different kind of example. In XI Monks have a meritable skill called Formless Strikes. It was something you avoided for the most part, unless you regularly participated in certain events where it was pretty useful. But if you didn't do those events, maybe you'd put the points into, say, the regen effect on Chakra. So sure, if you did X event as a monk, it was Formless Strikes or gtfo. In that sense you could say that there wasn't all that much choice, or that the choice was defined by the monk's ingame 'lifestyle'. But my point is, there were valid options for merits for many jobs, and generally you'd pick what suited your activities.

The interesting bit with the formless strikes thing, is that for awhile iirc, there was very little content to justify slotting it. But since this is a dynamic genre, content came along that pushed it ahead in the meta. This is not a bad thing imo, and another reason why having a 'best' choice is perfectly fine. Whats best today may not be tomorrow, and again i consider this to be A-OK (provided there are relatively painless respeccing mechanics)
____________________________
monk
dragoon
[ffxivsig]477065[/ffxivsig]
#22 May 03 2016 at 7:09 PM Rating: Decent
**
972 posts
There are two very clear problems with skill trees or meriting skills.

First, the trinity defines what specs works best depending on the major role your job is best for. If you want to be a pseudo tank but your most popular known role is tank on that job then anything you get besides tanking builds is going to either lead you to being a worse tank or if you are building towards a DPS or Support role, you can never be as good as the originals or other primary roles will cry nerf.

Second, there has to be content suited to put those wider builds to work. That includes enemies that respond differently from another. What is the point of a hundred different builds if one set of moves is going to overpower any monster regardless of what zone or content they reside in.

I feel even if there is ability bloat(FFXIV) or one to 10 skills(ESO), there will always be a problem with both either feeling like to many different buttons or pushing a few buttons hundreds of times. And it all boils down to one underlying theme...

The goal of using skills is usually relegated to what you do in your skill set, but it should have an asterisk at the end of being relegated to "when you do it as well in response to what is unfolding moment by moment".

Weapon swaps, materia swaps, morphs, hotbars, they all offer ways to swaps out sets of skills.

Balance will never be 100% met in a game, I could give a rat's *** about perfect balance, perfect balance is boring. Now that doesn't mean a developer shouldn't at least give enough balance so that people don't get shunned from content, but yes some jobs should be better or worse at certain contents than others. That is what dynamic means, it's not for a static everyone must be exact equals game.
#23 May 03 2016 at 8:23 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,430 posts
sandpark wrote:
There are two very clear problems with skill trees or meriting skills.

First, the trinity defines what specs works best depending on the major role your job is best for. If you want to be a pseudo tank but your most popular known role is tank on that job then anything you get besides tanking builds is going to either lead you to being a worse tank or if you are building towards a DPS or Support role, you can never be as good as the originals or other primary roles will cry nerf.

Second, there has to be content suited to put those wider builds to work. That includes enemies that respond differently from another. What is the point of a hundred different builds if one set of moves is going to overpower any monster regardless of what zone or content they reside in.


Balance will never be 100% met in a game, I could give a rat's *** about perfect balance, perfect balance is boring. Now that doesn't mean a developer shouldn't at least give enough balance so that people don't get shunned from content, but yes some jobs should be better or worse at certain contents than others. That is what dynamic means, it's not for a static everyone must be exact equals game.


really good points. I will concede that part of why my SWTOR example above is maybe not as good as it might be is because i was mostly PvPing in that game, so roles are much less defined. Maybe i should have cited GW2 instead.

Second point is very important, and people forget it all the time. A game that has many different types of content will be a better candidate for character customization than something like XIV.

Last point i couldn't agree with more.

____________________________
monk
dragoon
[ffxivsig]477065[/ffxivsig]
#24 May 03 2016 at 9:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Second, there has to be content suited to put those wider builds to work. That includes enemies that respond differently from another. What is the point of a hundred different builds if one set of moves is going to overpower any monster regardless of what zone or content they reside in.


I didn't want to go into this earlier, because I didn't want to distract from how skill trees could effectively be used... but yeah, this is kind of the elephant in the room.

Battles in XIV are pretty dang scripted. Mitigating mechanics isn't really about using job abilities as much as it is dodging/tagging/running through tethers, etc. So enhancements of job abilities, combos, etc. might be hamstrung by the extremely limited scope of battles. Other than DPS output, winning these battles is purely a matter of movement.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#25 May 04 2016 at 12:11 AM Rating: Good
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,159 posts
If you really want to get around the balance thing, then some people have to accept that Rock will beat Scissors. The MMO endgame some aspire to seems to be the eternal struggle of Paper instead beating Scissors. The concept of the trinity probably needs to be abandoned, at least out of dev enforcement, with people instead picking and choosing their skills as they go from a classless start with vanity choices further asserting a look to their character.

So, let's say someone likes the image of a White Mage. They start off picking a staff, club, or hammer with stats well suited to healing. Perhaps they like the aesthetic of the white robes with red trim, or they could adopt more the D&D model of an armored cleric, including holy offensive magic. In time, you'd simply continue to foster skills related to your desired play style like cures, regens, status removals, and so on. But then again, someone could do exactly the same, but instead preferring swords and heavier armor, making them more the Paladin archetype. The game would never officially call you these things, but in time, what cookie cutters do arise would pick up such monikers.

Getting the introductory skills for any sort of "tree" shouldn't be too difficult, but it's the combination of what you do with them after that could lead to both individuality and ingenuity. When you also eliminate things like harsh DPS checks or allow environment to play a role in your encounters, battles will vary based on who all is present, presuming it's meant to be more of an epic encounter. It's also kinda why "attack who has the highest enmity" is sorta dumb when you attempt to think of it from a realistic perspective. Mobs are going to have different instincts or levels of intelligence. Wasting attention on the armored dude doing little damage just wouldn't seem smart when you have that squishy guy in robes lobbing meteors from afar. What you'll wind up with is a true variation of tactics when people begin to consider how to keep the mob away from that perceived threat or simply keeping the target alive if there isn't a way. And that could further go into dynamics as a mob realizes the healer should possibly be the first target. This would would be where the player would be wise to have invested in defensive skills, either to soften blows or to keep them from coming in the first place.

In the end, you could be a glass cannon, sure, but you might not get far if you play alone. The more successful players will likely be some degree of hybrid, and I don't mean that in the damning sense we tend to get in MMOs with things toned down because specialists would whine. I look to it more as actions having consequences. You might be the rock to scissors in one fight, but somewhere along the way, it'll be more like you're the rock against paper assuming any attempt at mob variety is made. The above hypothetical White Mage is going to want to have some means to deal out hurt, unless they're quite okay with grouping exclusively with people who could do it for them.
____________________________
Violence good. Sexy bad. Yay America.
#26 May 04 2016 at 10:41 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,820 posts
Honestly, I think the trinity system is fine, but it's just the XIV system that's too strict in order to be "balanced". XI for example was built around the trinity system BUT it also had additional roles like pure support in the sense you're not inviting a BRD to tank or deal damage or heal (usually) but to buff the party or hybrids like Blue Mage, Geomancer and Puppet Master/Summoner in terms of pet jobs which fit neither role completely. It wasn't as balanced but it wasn't terribly balanced to the point you could steamroll everything simply because you chose to be x job, even subbing NIN didn't make you completely immune outside of an attack or two. Only Abyssea allowed you to be "god" no matter your job because you had insane buffs that wasn't available outside, which is why when Legion hit it was the biggest wake up slap to people they forgot how to play the game lol.

This is why I like the design of Midas fights (Savage) but hate the checks, because it proves the possibility for dynamic encounters and designs is there, even in current level cap and design, but they just don't wanna do it because of the biggest problem:

The Playerbase.

So even if they implemented a skill tree or something, in the long run SE is designing the game around the LCD largely with select content being designed to actually take...well, gameplay into consideration. Every update introduces 4 man dungeons, story mode 4 man dungeon, alliance based content and/or raid content. Only the raid content is ever designed around what a job can do, because when Saints M and Pharos Hard were being tested Yoshi said it was too hard and "raid level" because it required more work than the usual 4 man dungeon. So even if they got the perfect skill tree and spec system instead of a cap raise, they're still designing the game like people aren't expected to learn how to play their jobs beyond 1-2-3.



____________________________

« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 292 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (292)