Jump to content
  • Sign Up

WvW Alliances will kill almost EVERY social interactions and friendships crafted over the past 9 years outside of your "main" WvW/Raid Guild and all Solo Players and small Guilds


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

moreover, you have to be blind not to notice that the new system effectively removes a social tool, the server.

It removes servers and replaces them with alliances. These alliances should be able to provide a similar social enviroment as servers (maybe even better?). Keep in mind that there are no alliances yet, so those beta weeks being more messy and not providing any feel of community outside of guilds is to be expected, but not neccessarily indicative of how alliances will be.

1 hour ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

 

it has already been said that your server is there, always and in any case, that you win or lose ..... it is there even when some tags or guilds leave and others arrive.

Not true. Maybe for some servers, but definitely not all. I played on the same server for about 7 years, and while initially it did provide some sense of "home" and community, that has changed long ago. The vast majority of players from back then quit the game or went to other servers and all that is left are server hopping guilds and players that belong to the linked server. I could play for weeks without recognizing anyone, nor could i tell, to which of the linked servers someone belongs.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is the worst Anet could do to WvW since it - will kill almost EVERY social interactions and friendships crafted over the past 9 years outside of your "main" WvW/Raid Guild and all Solo Playe

This is what Alliances, the function, is meant to address when it comes. Alliances will be the option to create a mini-server out of multiple guilds. Guilds that can be solo guilds and small guilds bu

This IMHO is actually good.  It "keeps it fresh", as a guildmate last night put it.  We won't have players avoiding EBG at all costs when they get matched against Maguuma, for example.  We have to tes

true is that we still do not know how they will work, but alliance I do not think you can compare it to the server, for what I said before.

in your server in your team today no one has to or can judge you to be able to feel a part of it.

with this I do not want to create problems that do not exist, alliances arrive, we accept them and we adapt, if anet comes some good advice better ...... forums exist for that too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shacka Hacka.7068 said:

Why can't they just join Europe with the American servers?  Instead of this restructuring/ alliance mess that the majority of people don't want, If they can do it in GW 1 surely they can in GW2?

Europe and NA are two separate databases.

It probably has something to do with the amount and size of database transactions between game servers and database servers compared to GW1 that would become a major bottleneck of lag given network latency across the globe.  Physical laws are sometimes inconvenient...

Edited by Chaba.5410
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

These threads lmao.

Some players: we don't like alliances because these reasons.

Fanboys: tHis iSn'T hoW It wILL wOrk, ThatS a bUG, JuSt sTarT a NEw gUild foR AlLiAnces

Can yall kitten and admit you would eat literal kitten out of arenanets kitten if it was handed to you. This is a feature that has been "worked on" for like 4 years now, and we're getting the most kitten, lazy, janky, and buggy implementation of it and you're still here to play GW2 salesman.

Edited by BeepBoopBop.5403
  • Like 2
  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BeepBoopBop.5403 said:

These threads lmao.

Some players: we don't like alliances because these reasons.

Fanboys: tHis iSn'T hoW It wILL wOrk, ThatS a bUG, JuSt sTarT a NEw gUild foR AlLiAnces

Can yall kitten and admit you would eat literal kitten out of arenanets kitten if it was handed to you. This is a feature that has been "worked on" for like 4 years now, and we're getting the most kitten, lazy, janky, and buggy implementation of it and you're still here to play GW2 salesman.

Going by the 1h ago posting, calling it fanboying and the way you write despite not quoting anything, that emote response you did to my simple comment that no, people getting randomized every MU (a week) isnt how world restructuring works because... well... it isnt... is quite adorable.

  • Haha 4
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BeepBoopBop.5403 said:

These threads lmao.

Some players: we don't like alliances because these reasons.

Fanboys: tHis iSn'T hoW It wILL wOrk, ThatS a bUG, JuSt sTarT a NEw gUild foR AlLiAnces

Can yall kitten and admit you would eat literal kitten out of arenanets kitten if it was handed to you. This is a feature that has been "worked on" for like 4 years now, and we're getting the most kitten, lazy, janky, and buggy implementation of it and you're still here to play GW2 salesman.

Sorry, I can't realistically be constructive when a post has too much cynicism.

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alliances are too controversial to be of any use to WvW in the long run. The Alliance rework grossly misunderstands the fundamental building blocks of WvW. The fundamental building blocks are neither guilds, nor servers, but the everyday casual pug. The vast majority of the people you see in WvW do not belong to a dedicated WvW guild, and many of them probably never will or ever have been in one. That is the reason why many people are not receptive to Alliances; because they never had a strong guild identity in the first place, and dislike like that they are being forced to identify with an apparent foreign quasi-guild like structure anyway. Now the pro-alliance people will constantly say, "but you don't have to join an alliance if you don't want to", or "if you don't like the experience, you should have joined an alliance", but this is where they make a grave misunderstanding.

 

People seem to implicitly assume that if you don't join an alliance, then you don't care who you are matched with or who you play alongside at all. This may be true in some cases, but the vast majority of people actually do care on some level about seeing that familiar face, even if its someone whom you may only randomly see once a month, if at all. People do find value in being able to take several months off from the game and return to same community with familiar players, tags and guilds, and some extra new ones. The current system assumes that players who don't identify in some arbitrary way that Anet has proposed, are like droids that can be happily stuffed into any random server. Clearly this is an erroneous assumption. 

 

So why don't these casual pugs just fall in line and join/create an alliance that best matches their identity? Nobody really knows the answer, because human social interactions are complex, unstable and often non-transitive. People can find value in being associated with other people, while simultaneously not finding value at all when choosing to associate with them. There is a whole discipline and deep theory about this that you can read in some academic journal, but the point is that you can't force these types of players into an alliance system. Instead of complying they will most likely drop the game instead, which is negative for the WvW community.

 

 

Edited by jul.7602
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, jul.7602 said:

Alliances are too controversial to be of any use to WvW in the long run. The Alliance rework grossly misunderstands the fundamental building blocks of WvW. The fundamental building blocks are neither guilds, nor servers, but the everyday casual pug. The vast majority of the people you see in WvW do not belong to a dedicated WvW guild

I'm in total disagreement with your base assumption here. The fundamental building blocks of wvw are the players that play often and identify with their guilds/communities, be it large or small. They make out the vast amount of contributing playtime in WvW, keeping the game mode alive.

I don't want to be mean and deny the casual pug players of their fun in wvw, but I have to say they are not as important as you make them out to be.

What I get from my surrounding people in WvW is that the alliance system is eagerly awaited, to finally get rid of this heavily flawed server/link system. Never have I heard somebody being against alliances as much I see a few people here in the forums, but I've explained in an earlier post on why I think that is.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jul.7602 said:

The vast majority of the people you see in WvW do not belong to a dedicated WvW guild, and many of them probably never will or ever have been in one.

I assume this varies server to server but in my experience this is very far from the truth.

 

1 hour ago, jul.7602 said:

The Alliance rework grossly misunderstands the fundamental building blocks of WvW. The fundamental building blocks are neither guilds, nor servers, but the everyday casual pug.

I completely disagree with this. I'm not 100% sure what I would consider to be the fundamental building blocks of WvW but it would include commanders, guilds, scouts and roamers, more so the ones who play frequently.

I'm not sure what arguments are to be made for the everyday casual pug other than needing them in order for them to replace players who quit the game.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2022 at 9:52 PM, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

I just worry about balance due to popularity.  Basically if your guild isn't good at interacting with other guilds you might be stuck in a random alliance that is not favorable (the 'unlikables').  Which would mean your chat may be super toxic by no fault of your own.

Let me summarize:

Players might get paired with other similar minded players.

 

Yes, if you can't socialize or no one wants to socialize with you (or your guild), you might end up with a ton of other players in a similar situation. You reap what you sow. How is this bad?

On 1/16/2022 at 9:52 PM, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

Guess that can be solved by doing better socialization work, but it really does seem dog eat dog compared to the overall 'worlds' we have now.  

 

Yes, right now other players are forced to endure certain individuals with no control over being paired with them or not. In the future, there will at least be a chance that one is rid of these type of players once reshuffling comes around. Unfortunate for anyone who is paired with these players, lucky for those who are rid of them.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2022 at 3:08 PM, BloodRavenz.6084 said:

 

They used to have a cap on how much siege you could place on a map years ago. (i know this for fact because my guild actually capped the map once by trying to put down a line of Flame Rams from north camp to south camp, capped the map somewhere before Garrison if i recall.) 

(before you ask, it was a boring matchup, we were bored and there was a lot of drinking involved)

 

I don't have much of an issue with siege inside a keep, is it annoying, yeah, but that is what it's there for, Arrow carts are defensive siege....they should be required to be more spread out though.   

 

Strategy comes in on how you deal with it....do you just force your way through....or do you pull back and put down your own siege (like trebs or Balista's) to clear the top of the walls first. 

jeez, i know there is a cap. but there needs to be a different kind of siege cap. currently this is even abused, as u even mention.  by spamming useless siege either to block your maps siege, or by stacking a billion of odd vietnam roleplay siege.

 

therefore, siege amount per sector per color has to be limited. so like 3-4 sectors share siege caps. amount of siege within 3-4 sectors has to be lowered decisively imo.

 

that would finally block turtlemode and not hinder active sieging further away. (then, but only if that works, we can talk about buffing siege)

 

@jul.7602 i personally believe than nobody who endured 7~ years of the toxic link system, the warclaw and the forgottenness of Wvw will quit by this.

 

___

also, i too think alliances will be more social even. as it is way less random where u go.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jul.7602 said:

The fundamental building blocks are neither guilds, nor servers, but the everyday casual pug.

Then writes against using the fundamental building blocks for team formation.  Huh?

On one of my teams, I see a large number of Qi players together.  They both play when Xunlai is rallying and also as roamers and "filler" all through the day.  Qi is a roughly 600+ member CASUAL PUG guild.  They seemed to do well enough committing to a guild.  They normally play on FA but aren't really participatory in the FA discord, choosing to do their own thing and no one has any problem with it.  They're just as much a subset of the "FA server community" as any other group.  I'm sure they aren't the only casual pug guild either.

Edited by Chaba.5410
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2022 at 2:36 PM, Dawdler.8521 said:

Going by the 1h ago posting, calling it fanboying and the way you write despite not quoting anything, that emote response you did to my simple comment that no, people getting randomized every MU (a week) isnt how world restructuring works because... well... it isnt... is quite adorable.

Holy word salad run-on sentence. For someone that lives in these forums 24/7 you sure have a hard time with English.

We get it bro you always go around saying you tough out all the bad decisions this game has made because you're above the rest. What do we call that? A kittening fan boy.

Edited by BeepBoopBop.5403
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, BeepBoopBop.5403 said:

Holy word salad run-on sentence. For someone that lives in these forums 24/7 you sure have a hard time with English.

We get it bro you always go around saying you tough out all the bad decisions this game has made because you're above the rest. What do we call that? A kittening fan boy.

So is this kittening fanboy correct or not?

You cant admit that, can you... Because you used a whole lot of words and said absolutely nothing.

Even the OP stated he was wrong.

Or you can just go ahead and say I'm wrong. That Anet has said world restructuring will randomize players every matchup, instead of the 7+1 week seasons just like how the links work.

What's it going to be?

Edited by Dawdler.8521
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Then writes against using the fundamental building blocks for team formation.  Huh?

On one of my teams, I see a large number of Qi players together.  They both play when Xunlai is rallying and also as roamers and "filler" all through the day.  Qi is a roughly 600+ member CASUAL PUG guild.  They seemed to do well enough committing to a guild.  They normally play on FA but aren't really participatory in the FA discord, choosing to do their own thing and no one has any problem with it.  They're just as much a subset of the "FA server community" as any other group.  I'm sure they aren't the only casual pug guild either.

Qi always on the front lines like heros. 

 

I didn't get placed with the beta guild I selected but had plenty of fun in second place with the FTL guild.  Think they were a beta formation as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear GW2 Community peeps :3

Thank you soo much for giving your opinions and thoughts on this topic. I may missunderstood some things past BETA brought us, still i'm am very concerned about what we've to expect.

I did understood now that the Alliance system wasn't implemented yet, so there is hope it won't be that bad to us small but still dedicated guilds.

The most concern i have is that all those gamers who wanna play together can play together. This is ez by just joining a server with the peeps you like, its ez for a small guild to hop over to help out a raid guild that's somewhat bigger, like you don't belong to that guild but you like them and like playing with/for them at times.
I am concerned about that this "you can choose system" will blow up our crafted social friendships that just were built on the side without much intention in the first place but started to remain stable and healthy.
 

How can this be replaced with alliances where everyone has to choose, i just see soo much little problems with big impact on your "friendlist" kinda thing.
I guess we'll have to wait until we rly get alliance BETA to be going and have a talk then.
Again Thank you very much for contributing in this topic and even making some things clear.

Have a nice day Everyone!

Tenga

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading a lot of these negative comments on how Alliances will rip apart servers and communities, it almost feels as though many of you were on some magical server where everything was perfect and everyone got along and worked together.  I can only assume that those same players must be relatively newer players to the WvW game mode and simply have not been around long enough to see their server implode as half or more of the guilds transferred off to join yet another bandwagon server...or simply because they thought the "grass was greener" elsewhere.

 

With the exception of maybe 1-2 servers in EU and 1-2 servers in NA, EVERY SINGLE WVW COMMUNITY has been beaten down, destroyed, and in some cases, already rebuilt, over the years.  I've been playing on Stormbluff Isle server (NA) since the first day this game went live.  And after being 1st place in Tier 1 for several month, the massive War Machine guild that "ran" the server decided they wanted a new challenge and transferred off the server, and 99% of the WvW guilds on SBI followed.  Thanks to the glicko system, SBI remained in T1 despite being a "dead" server.  After that, over the past 8-9 years, SBI has seen guilds transfer on and off, has seen its community rise and fall and rise again, until it's finally reached its current state as a mostly dead link server that offers a few medium-sized guilds, a handful of roamers and LOADS of pip farmers who sit in spawn and rarely if ever advance past spawn camp.

 

Point is, while your community/server may be thriving, for a LOT of us, it's been dead or dying for years now.  And now that we finally have a plausible (albeit not perfect) solution to make it so that EVERYONE has the possibility to join an active community/server/shard/guild whatever, a lot of you want to whine and cry because you're simply too lazy to make the effort to work through these changes.  Can't play with your friends? Create a guild that allows you to play together. BUT I DON'T WANNA! I have to assume almost every player here was at some point new to the game and didn't have many if any friends.  But somehow you managed to make some new friends while you were playing.  Outside of this game, did you restrict yourself to the friends you made when you were 5 years old, and as you grew older, never made any more friends or developed any other relationships in your life???  I think not.  And so you'll do the same thing here.  A lot of us will.  You'll form new friendships, new communities, new guilds, new alliances.  The difference between you and I is I'll manage to do it without all the whining and crying and complaining.

Edited by Ronin.4501
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gilderin.4763 said:

its ez for a small guild to hop over to help out a raid guild that's somewhat bigger, like you don't belong to that guild but you like them and like playing with/for them at times.
I am concerned about that this "you can choose system" will blow up our crafted social friendships that just were built on the side without much intention in the first place but started to remain stable and healthy.

 

When the "alliance" part of these betas is finally available, the small guild and the bigger raid guild will be able to join the same alliance and end up on the same team together.  It's a discussion and decision that has to occur between the two guilds.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ronin.4501 said:

Reading a lot of these negative comments on how Alliances will rip apart servers and communities, it almost feels as though many of you were on some magical server where everything was perfect and everyone got along and worked together.  I can only assume that those same players must be relatively newer players to the WvW game mode and simply have not been around long enough to see their server implode as half or more of the guilds transferred off to join yet another bandwagon server...or simply because they thought the "grass was greener" elsewhere.

 

With the exception of maybe 1-2 servers in EU and 1-2 servers in NA, EVERY SINGLE WVW COMMUNITY has been beaten down, destroyed, and in some cases, already rebuilt, over the years.  I've been playing on Stormbluff Isle server (NA) since the first day this game went live.  And after being 1st place in Tier 1 for several month, the massive War Machine guild that "ran" the server decided they wanted a new challenge and transferred off the server, and 99% of the WvW guilds on SBI followed.  Thanks to the glicko system, SBI remained in T1 despite being a "dead" server.  After that, over the past 8-9 years, SBI has seen guilds transfer on and off, has seen its community rise and fall and rise again, until it's finally reached its current state as a mostly dead link server that offers a few medium-sized guilds, a handful of roamers and LOADS of pip farmers who sit in spawn and rarely if ever advance past spawn camp.

 

Point is, while your community/server may be thriving, for a LOT of us, it's been dead or dying for years now.  And now that we finally have a plausible (albeit not perfect) solution to make it so that EVERYONE has the possibility to join an active community/server/shard/guild whatever, a lot of you want to whine and cry because you're simply too lazy to make the effort to work through these changes.  Can't play with your friends? Create a guild that allows you to play together. BUT I DON'T WANNA! I have to assume almost every player here was at some point new to the game and didn't have many if any friends.  But somehow you managed to make some new friends while you were playing.  Outside of this game, did you restrict yourself to the friends you made when you were 5 years old, and as you grew older, never made any more friends or developed any other relationships in your life???  I think not.  And so you'll do the same thing here.  A lot of us will.  You'll form new friendships, new communities, new guilds, new alliances.  The difference between you and I is I'll manage to do it without all the whining and crying and complaining.

Players are managing this alliance as best they can,  while you think forming a new guild is what it takes to carry on with the Alliance system, you and many others preventing people from giving  feedback that you think are whining/negative(when they are not) have failed to see that a new guild is not the entire server community that was build up for the pass 9 years. We are trying to tell Anet what we do not like so it can be done better.  That is what the beta are for as described by Anet themself,  they fix things along the way until it is finally perfected. If no one shout out the stuffs they do not like, how will Anet fix it.  Sure you can forge new "friends" and community, but what WvW lack is time zone balance, not forging new community.  Heck I would even keep the players I do not like on my server just to preserve that community, the familiarity the team chat argument, all the familiar name tags.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SweetPotato.7456 said:

Players are managing this alliance as best they can,  while you think forming a new guild is what it takes to carry on with the Alliance system, you and many others preventing people from giving  feedback that you think are whining/negative(when they are not) have failed to see that a new guild is not the entire server community that was build up for the pass 9 years. We are trying to tell Anet what we do not like so it can be done better.  That is what the beta are for as described by Anet themself,  they fix things along the way until it is finally perfected. If no one shout out the stuffs they do not like, how will Anet fix it.  Sure you can forge new "friends" and community, but what WvW lack is time zone balance, not forging new community.  Heck I would even keep the players I do not like on my server just to preserve that community, the familiarity the team chat argument, all the familiar name tags.

 

First of all, I suggested making a new guild to play with friends as ONE possible solution; I do not "think forming a new guild is what it takes to carry on with the Alliance system". If you're going to misquote me, please don't quote me at all.

 

Second, players shouting out what they do not like is probably 90% of what we read on the WvW forums every single day.  But if you don't actually offer any realistic solutions behind your complaints, then yes, you are just complaining (or whining or bitching or whatever you want to call it).

 

Third, why should we want to maintain the 1-2 servers that still have communities when the other 21-22 servers have already seen their communities die off?  Your suggestion is that because 10% of the population is happy, the other 90% should just carry on and deal with it.  Again, not a realistic solution.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ronin.4501 said:

 

First of all, I suggested making a new guild to play with friends as ONE possible solution; I do not "think forming a new guild is what it takes to carry on with the Alliance system". If you're going to misquote me, please don't quote me at all.

 

Second, players shouting out what they do not like is probably 90% of what we read on the WvW forums every single day.  But if you don't actually offer any realistic solutions behind your complaints, then yes, you are just complaining (or whining or bitching or whatever you want to call it).

 

Third, why should we want to maintain the 1-2 servers that still have communities when the other 21-22 servers have already seen their communities die off?  Your suggestion is that because 10% of the population is happy, the other 90% should just carry on and deal with it.  Again, not a realistic solution.

 

1) Who are the "we" you are talking about?  
2) Where is your proof that only 1-2 servers still have communities. My servers linked with so many other servers over the years , servers with their own unique communities and identities. I can tell which link does what the best, and adapt to their playstyles, spy on them when they are link elsewhere, heheheheheh 😛
3) Where is your proof that only ***10% of population is happy? 


Everyone and you who are blocking people from telling Anet what they don't like are SUGGESTING* the same lame solution (for the thousandth (figure of speech) times .) of creating a new guild to play together with friends, if creating a new guild is a good way to head on into this new Alliance system, then why "90% (according to you)**"  of  the forum post still unsatisfied with the crappy alliance. 

*putting all the word suggestion in caps so you can't say I am misquoting you. 
**90% is from your post (not mine, so don't ask me for data proof)
***10% also from your post 

Edited by SweetPotato.7456
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SweetPotato.7456 said:

1) Who are the "we" you are talking about?  
2) Where is your proof that only 1-2 servers still have communities. My servers linked with so many other servers over the years , servers with their own unique communities and identities. I can tell which link does what the best, and adapt to their playstyles, spy on them when they are link elsewhere, heheheheheh 😛
3) Where is your proof that only ***10% of population is happy? 


Everyone and you who are blocking people from telling Anet what they don't like are SUGGESTING* the same lame solution (for the thousandth (figure of speech) times .) of creating a new guild to play together with friends, if creating a new guild is a good way to head on into this new Alliance system, then why "90% (according to you)**"  of  the forum post still unsatisfied with the crappy alliance. 

*putting all the word suggestion in caps so you can't say I am misquoting you. 
**90% is from your post (not mine, so don't ask me for data proof)
***10% also from your post 

The proof? The fact that the developers are undertaking the massive effort and risk to implement alliances in the first place.

Every single step taken over the years to maintain WvW like server linkings and reduction to tiers (as happened on EU right before COVID).

The idea for alliances came up years ago not out of a whim, but a necessity and the developers realizing that the server system does not manage player population in a way which is sustainable for the mode. During a time when multiple matchups had active WvW on resets until long into the night, and not just for 1-2 hours. During a time when WvW was more than 1-2 stacked servers. Now, years later, WvW is in a far worse shape with far less players and if hadn't been for COVID, likely in a far worse shape yet.

Most players don't post on the forums in wild support or against the alliance system because those disinterested simply quit WvW and those interested don't care for the arguments by now. Alliances are coming out of necessity and there is no reason to believe otherwise or "convince" anyone of this being a good or bad idea.

Long-term players have seen the decline of the player-base over the years. Most complaints come from players with similarities: not very active with their (or any)servers WvW community, not part of active WvW guilds, a far more casual approach to WvW or simply venting because they got a bad matchup with the beta. In short: the bulk of the player base which at most follows, but does not actively shape the game mode and from that perspective alliances might very well seem like a bad idea (and they might be). Alliances also might be a great way to invigorate more active players which actually create content and shape the mode, which in turn would mean more content even for less active players.

TL;DR:

There is no need to convince a majority of players who are complaining about alliances and as such, why bother?

Edited by Cyninja.2954
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
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
×
×
  • Create New...