Jump to content

Post-War Mechanics ideas.


Recommended Posts

From conversations and threads created during the last couple weeks/months I've compiled some ideas regarding tweaks to the war system/spy system based on feedback. These changes (besides spies) are much smaller and fewer than usual, I hope that's a good sign.

 

Planes doing Bombing runs

  • When performing a bombing run damage dealt to defending planes is reduced by 33% (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE DOGFIGHTING)
    • The idea is that the target is blowing things up that are not planes. If you're sending 300 planes at 100 planes to bomb tanks, you may get an Immense Triumph but you're not going to kill as many of the 100 planes, and you'll lose more of your planes than if your goal was dogfighting.
  • Reduce ships killed by bombing runs against navy by 10%

Ship vs Ship

  • Increase ships killed by naval attacks by 10%

Changes that have not been introduced yet but are on the way

  • The February update thread found HERE shows some changes to missiles/nukes/Iron Dome/VDS. These changes are still coming, along with spies being able to hit an additional missile chance.

Spies

  • Reduce Spy vs Spy casualties by 20%
  • Create a method where spies can be rebuilt without losing spies without those spies contributing to espionage defense/offense (reserve/active system)
  • Should nations be able to have units spied away while in beige?

 

NOTE: Except for "Changes that have not been introduced yet", these are not confirmed changes to be made. This is a discussion based on feedback from the war to see if these changes (or others) should be made. Thank you

Edited by Prefontaine
  • Upvote 3

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

Planes doing Bombing runs

  • When performing a bombing run damage dealt to defending planes is reduced by 33% (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE DOGFIGHTING)
    • The idea is that the target is blowing things up that are not planes. If you're sending 300 planes at 100 planes to bomb tanks, you may get an Immense Triumph but you're not going to kill as many of the 100 planes, and you'll lose more of your planes than if your goal was dogfighting.
  • Reduce ships killed by bombing runs against navy by 10%

Can you show a calculation of how this would look like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Majima Goro said:

Can you show a calculation of how this would look like?

In the 3/1 scenario provided the attacker loses about 3.1% of their attacking force and the defender loses about 18.5% of their defending force. This change would reduce that to about 12.3%. In real number terms, it helps to expand the unit counts to better see, so 3000 vs 1000 attacker loses about 93 Planes per attack, defender loses 185. This would reduce the defender loses for planes to 123.

  • Upvote 1

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, dtc justice said:

Why do you insist on changes every global war though?

They're the times which provide the greatest community feedback on changes which may improve the war related aspects to the game. I listen to that feedback and work on possible changes where applicable. 

  • Upvote 1

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do planes vs ships need to be nerfed? My 2250 planes already magically find themselves incapable of killing more than 40 ships once their total drops below 100, and incapable of killing more than 25-30 once they're low enough that one more airstrike should clear them all. Because reasons I guess.

 

If you wanna buff ships fine, but I think a more potent solution is making ships more useful than just a blockade. Into something more than a nuisance.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

Why do planes vs ships need to be nerfed? My 2250 planes already magically find themselves incapable of killing more than 40 ships once their total drops below 100, and incapable of killing more than 25-30 once they're low enough that one more airstrike should clear them all. Because reasons I guess.

 

If you wanna buff ships fine, but I think a more potent solution is making ships more useful than just a blockade. Into something more than a nuisance.

One of the complaints was air killing more ships than ships killing ships. A small tweak for both seems appropriate. Regarding ships doing more than blockade, that's being discussed in the dev channel at this very moment. Also ships will be getting a new attack option soon, found in the thread linked in the OP for coming mechanics. 

  • Upvote 1

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there plans on a beige rework yet? As far as I know, beige and sitting have been one of the biggest problems in globals since a long time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Majima Goro said:

Are there plans on a beige rework yet? As far as I know, beige and sitting have been one of the biggest problems in globals since a long time

Yes, but when those come out they will be their own threads. This thread is more for smaller adjustments. 

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2021 at 6:54 AM, Prefontaine said:

and you'll lose more of your planes than if your goal was dogfighting.

Why increase casualties to your planes, and not just decrease the casualties to theirs?

Viva La Cruzada

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Vader said:

Why increase casualties to your planes, and not just decrease the casualties to theirs?

This change isn't increasing casualties to your planes, it is decreasing the casualties to theirs. Already existing in the mechanics is that if you perform bombing runs against a nation with defending planes, you will lose more planes than if you were dogfighting. 

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2021 at 8:54 AM, Prefontaine said:

Planes doing Bombing runs

  • When performing a bombing run damage dealt to defending planes is reduced by 33% (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE DOGFIGHTING)
    • The idea is that the target is blowing things up that are not planes. If you're sending 300 planes at 100 planes to bomb tanks, you may get an Immense Triumph but you're not going to kill as many of the 100 planes, and you'll lose more of your planes than if your goal was dogfighting.
  • Reduce ships killed by bombing runs against navy by 10%

I think both of these changes would be bad changes.

Air is losing / has lost its place in the meta and doesn't need to be further weakened in this way.

On 6/23/2021 at 8:54 AM, Prefontaine said:

Ship vs Ship

  • Increase ships killed by naval attacks by 10%

Good stuff, feel free to go crazy

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Bojack Horseman said:

Air is losing / has lost its place in the meta

I don't think that's true. Only-Air has lost its place as the dominant strategy, but that doesn't mean air isn't still really useful. 

 

On 6/23/2021 at 8:54 AM, Prefontaine said:

Should nations be able to have units spied away while in beige?

This seems to have gotten ignored so far, but it could be pretty impactful. I personally think killing spies, missiles, and nukes, and getting intel should be allowed but disable other mil destruction. Beige is there for you to build up, and being able to be spied while beiged mitigates that a bit. 

Do you guys know how to edit the signature field? I can't figure out where it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2021 at 6:24 PM, Prefontaine said:

Should nations be able to have units spied away while in beige

Yes.

 

On 6/23/2021 at 6:24 PM, Prefontaine said:

Increase ships killed by naval attacks by 10%

I support

 

On 6/23/2021 at 6:24 PM, Prefontaine said:

Reduce Spy vs Spy casualties by 20%

No.

 

On 6/23/2021 at 6:24 PM, Prefontaine said:
  • When performing a bombing run damage dealt to defending planes is reduced by 33% (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE DOGFIGHTING)
    • The idea is that the target is blowing things up that are not planes. If you're sending 300 planes at 100 planes to bomb tanks, you may get an Immense Triumph but you're not going to kill as many of the 100 planes, and you'll lose more of your planes than if your goal was dogfighting.
  • Reduce ships killed by bombing runs against navy by 10%

No.

indgertkr2.png

Legal Disclaimer:

My opinions do not necessarily reflect of the opinions of my alliance, allies, enemies or neutrals.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bojack Horseman said:

I think both of these changes would be bad changes.

Air is losing / has lost its place in the meta and doesn't need to be further weakened in this way.

Not at all
Air is extremely powerful even now, especially because Air Superiority on opponent cripples Tanks, the current strongest units in the game.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, zigbigadorlou said:

I don't think that's true. Only-Air has lost its place as the dominant strategy, but that doesn't mean air isn't still really useful. 

 

This seems to have gotten ignored so far, but it could be pretty impactful. I personally think killing spies, missiles, and nukes, and getting intel should be allowed but disable other mil destruction. Beige is there for you to build up, and being able to be spied while beiged mitigates that a bit. 

 

2 hours ago, Majima Goro said:

Not at all
Air is extremely powerful even now, especially because Air Superiority on opponent cripples Tanks, the current strongest units in the game.

 

 

Both of these are not incorrect per se, but specifically regarding the proposed changes I think (merely based on my experience in this last war) that harming planes ability to kill other planes while choosing an alternative attack (other than dogfight) is going to harm planes ability to remain a unit of use.

Already there are problems with the casualty rates of planes v. tanks and planes v. ships being impractical or subpar in terms of resource/MAP usage.

 

If planes are bad at killing tanks and bad at killing planes (again not including dogfights) and bad at killing ships... Why am I using my planes? I'd rather do a dogfight or two and establish air control and then only use ground while keeping my plane count maxed out for defensive air control purposes.

Some people I've talked to, including heads of milcom in top 15 alliances, are saying this is basically already the optimal strategy.

 

The idea behind wanting all units to be strong is that it's extremely easy to overwhelm people in one arena of warfare. Ground, Air, Naval, Spies. So if all units are relegated to supporting the ground units, we're basically back to where planes were in NPOLT but with tanks now. I'd rather see a more interesting rock-paper-scissors style of warfare where people have options and choices, limited as they  may be in PnW.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Bojack Horseman said:

The idea behind wanting all units to be strong is that it's extremely easy to overwhelm people in one arena of warfare. Ground, Air, Naval, Spies. So if all units are relegated to supporting the ground units, we're basically back to where planes were in NPOLT but with tanks now.

We have been there for since NPOLT.

18 hours ago, Bojack Horseman said:

Both of these are not incorrect per se, but specifically regarding the proposed changes I think (merely based on my experience in this last war) that harming planes ability to kill other planes while choosing an alternative attack (other than dogfight) is going to harm planes ability to remain a unit of use.

Planes are still extremely useful. From a raider POV, a person having air superiority and having tanks will make you think twice before buying a load of tanks to beige the target. From a war POV, getting opponent's planes to 0 would make him unable to do ground attacks/get ground control easily even if you have less half his grounds. Again, using planes to airstrike units is usually done when they have low air(which is why Pre uses the 3k planes vs 1k planes example). In a real war situation, I don't think this change will have any significance at all.

18 hours ago, Bojack Horseman said:

planes are bad at killing tanks

Currently, 1 air kills around 1.25 tanks per airstrike(~94 tanks/city(~38% of daily buy)(Rebuy rate @250/city)
Compare it to tanks where 1 tank kills around 0.005 aircrafts(~6 air/city(~40% of daily buy)(Rebuy rate @75/city)

Both are almost equally bad at killing each other. 
The point you are trying to make probably is that 3 airstrikes kills around 114% of daily rebuy tanks while 4 ground attacks kills around 160% of daily rebuy planes, in which case, yes, you do have a point there and this is definitely a problem.

As for killing ships, planes were wayyyy better at killing ships than ships themselves so I don't see a problem with this. 



Personally, the way I'd want to fix the war mechanics is to increase resistance loss/attack. 
This would fix:
1) Length of wars-Down from 2 days minimum(10 grounds) to around 1.5 days minimum.
2) Less overall units lost - Less attacks per war is possible.
3) Sitting - Attacks made take big chunks of resistance making sitting on someone comparatively difficult if they try to rebuild and fight back.
Along with that, ending all wars in beige on expiry if One Party has 50% or less than that resistance than his opponent will also help end sitting on wars.

Eg:
Party 1 has 100 resistance and party 2 has 50 resistance, the war ends in beige for party 2.
If party 1 has 99 resistance and party 2 has 50 resistance, none are beiged

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like all of these changes.

I'm a little leery of having beige change how spies work, I kind of like the fact that the two arenas (spies vs conventional fighting) are somewhat separate.

On that note, a quality of life change would be to warn/prevent someone from doing a spy attack against a unit they aren't eligible to attack. This could also be done for spying a nuke someone has bought that day.

GnWq7CW.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2021 at 8:54 AM, Prefontaine said:

Planes doing Bombing runs

  • When performing a bombing run damage dealt to defending planes is reduced by 33% (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE DOGFIGHTING)
    • The idea is that the target is blowing things up that are not planes. If you're sending 300 planes at 100 planes to bomb tanks, you may get an Immense Triumph but you're not going to kill as many of the 100 planes, and you'll lose more of your planes than if your goal was dogfighting.
  • Reduce ships killed by bombing runs against navy by 10%

Ship vs Ship

  • Increase ships killed by naval attacks by 10%

Changes that have not been introduced yet but are on the way

  • The February update thread found HERE shows some changes to missiles/nukes/Iron Dome/VDS. These changes are still coming, along with spies being able to hit an additional missile chance.

Spies

  • Reduce Spy vs Spy casualties by 20%
  • Create a method where spies can be rebuilt without losing spies without those spies contributing to espionage defense/offense (reserve/active system)
  • Should nations be able to have units spied away while in beige?

Honestly airstrikes on ground/naval units are already rather weak and I really think we should be buffing them instead of nerfing them. Not only do the airstrikes on ground units kill less than a ground attack (without stealing money and while costing more MAPs, resistance, gas, and muni), but the airstrikes on ships aren't very effective at neutralizing an opponent's entire navy either, with navy not even being a significant threat that needs neutralizing in the first place. All of this coupled with the fact that, currently, these airstrikes will lose you a lot of precious planes unless your opponent has a huge plane disadvantage (like 1:3). Precious planes which need to be heavily conserved and not overextended because they are the bastion that protects your tanks from being cut in half by air superiourity, as well as protecting all other units from being airstriked.

And so, with the above in mind, airstrikes on ships should not be nerfed either. Already at times the amount of ships killed by an airstrike is insignificant, zeroing them via airstrikes for the sake of breaking blockade (only necessitated in rare instances anyway) is hardly viable yet is frankly the best option. Alternatively you have to buy your own (otherwise) useless ships to break the blockade, only to decommission them later or they get destroyed by someone else's massive navy before then, all the while inflating your score like a balloon. None of that is an appealing second option and I think until there is, airstriking ships should be left alone or even buffed.

Ship vs ship, small change and probably won't impact much, but good regardless~

Spy changes look okay, though with the reserve/active idea I see one of two things happening:

1. The kill rates are still too high and so one side wins the spy war and holds it for a few weeks while the enemy side rebuilds their spies, and then the enemy side activates their spies and either wipe the opponent's spies and take the spy war from them, or lose all their spies before they get a chance to utilize and rinse and repeat throughout the course of the war.

Or

2. The kill rate is too low and the K/D is pretty much equalized to a point that the spy war becomes a grueling battle only to be repeated every time the opponent reactivates their reserved spies.

I'm not really sure how I feel about either option at the moment, but maybe there are others that I missed, feel free to point them out to me :)

Also I personally think that units (including nukes/missiles) should not be able to be spied away during beige because that defeats the spirit of the mechanic. I would only make exception to assassinations and intel gathering; Assassinations so that the person in beige cannot build up spies and conduct spy operations unopposed during said beige and gather intel because it does no actual harm to the target.

Sorry for the text wall, I didn't feel like enough people were voicing their opinions on these and I certainly don't want them to get pushed through (as is) based on a lack of outspoken critique.

 

Edited by Aiya
  • Upvote 3

Denison-1.png

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Aiya said:

Honestly airstrikes on ground/naval units are already rather weak and I really think we should be buffing them instead of nerfing them. Not only do the airstrikes on ground units kill less than a ground attack (without stealing money and while costing more MAPs, resistance, gas, and muni), but the airstrikes on ships aren't very effective at neutralizing an opponent's entire navy either, with navy not even being a significant threat that needs neutralizing in the first place. All of this coupled with the fact that, currently, these airstrikes will lose you a lot of precious planes unless your opponent has a huge plane disadvantage (like 1:3). Precious planes which need to be heavily conserved and not overextended because they are the bastion that protects your tanks from being cut in half by air superiourity, as well as protecting all other units from being airstriked.

And so, with the above in mind, airstrikes on ships should not be nerfed either. Already at times the amount of ships killed by an airstrike is insignificant, zeroing them via airstrikes for the sake of breaking blockade (only necessitated in rare instances anyway) is hardly viable yet is frankly the best option. Alternatively you have to buy your own (otherwise) useless ships to break the blockade, only to decommission them later or they get destroyed by someone else's massive navy before then, all the while inflating your score like a balloon. None of that is an appealing second option and I think until there is, airstriking ships should be left alone or even buffed.

Ship vs ship, small change and probably won't impact much, but good regardless~

Spy changes look okay, though with the reserve/active idea I see one of two things happening:

1. The kill rates are still too high and so one side wins the spy war and holds it for a few weeks while the enemy side rebuilds their spies, and then the enemy side activates their spies and either wipe the opponent's spies and take the spy war from them, or lose all their spies before they get a chance to utilize and rinse and repeat throughout the course of the war.

Or

2. The kill rate is too low and the K/D is pretty much equalized to a point that the spy war becomes a grueling battle only to be repeated every time the opponent reactivates their reserved spies.

I'm not really sure how I feel about either option at the moment, but maybe there are others that I missed, feel free to point them out to me :)

Also I personally think that units (including nukes/missiles) should not be able to be spied away during beige because that defeats the spirit of the mechanic. I would only make exception to assassinations and intel gathering; Assassinations so that the person in beige cannot build up spies and conduct spy operations unopposed during said beige and gather intel because it does no actual harm to the target.

Sorry for the text wall, I didn't feel like enough people were voicing their opinions on these and I certainly don't want them to get pushed through (as is) based on a lack of outspoken critique.

 

- Airstrikes vs ships: The reasoning behind this stems from the fact that ships death rates were too close in navals and airstrikes. There was a want for navals to kill ships more than bombings thus the slight increase in one and decrease in another. Your argument that the ship vs ship change is "small change and probably won't impact much", is odd considering airstrikes are being reduced by the same percentage. If it won't change much then the small tweak is fine by the same logic. 

-Buffing airstrikes: I've not seem much support of this idea in general, and planes used to be OP, we're in a spot where they are good but not the only unit you need.

 

The spy change is geared towards giving one side a chance to coordinate a turn the spy war. Currently if you get zeroed out and don't have backup waiting you'll be basically unable to ever get to max spies as long as the people you're fighting don't want to let you rebuild. This method allows for a safe rebuild.

Regarding spying in beige, there have been mixed input on the topic. Still not sure where we're going with that one just yet. 

Always keep your foes confused. If they are never sure who you are or what you want, they cannot know what you are like to do next.
Sometimes the best way to baffle them is to make moves that have no purpose, or even seem to work against you.

scSqPGJ.gif

It's like I'm reading a book and it's a book I deeply love. I'm reading it slowly now so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel the words of the story, but it's in this endless space between the words I find myself now It's a place that's not of the physical. It's where everything else is. This is where I am now, and who I am.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

- Airstrikes vs ships: The reasoning behind this stems from the fact that ships death rates were too close in navals and airstrikes. There was a want for navals to kill ships more than bombings thus the slight increase in one and decrease in another. Your argument that the ship vs ship change is "small change and probably won't impact much", is odd considering airstrikes are being reduced by the same percentage. If it won't change much then the small tweak is fine by the same logic. 

-Buffing airstrikes: I've not seem much support of this idea in general, and planes used to be OP, we're in a spot where they are good but not the only unit you need.

 

The spy change is geared towards giving one side a chance to coordinate a turn the spy war. Currently if you get zeroed out and don't have backup waiting you'll be basically unable to ever get to max spies as long as the people you're fighting don't want to let you rebuild. This method allows for a safe rebuild.

Regarding spying in beige, there have been mixed input on the topic. Still not sure where we're going with that one just yet. 

You can separate the death rates without touching airstrikes on ships at all, another complaint for the longest time has been that ships are too weak, so why not simply buff the naval kill rate against other navy by more than just 10% and then leave ship airstrikes alone?

Also I did say it was a small change, but I also said it was a good change, conversely the small change to airstrikes on ships is still a bad change (in my opinion). You also need to consider that the impact is more nuanced than the face value. Ships aren't viable but planes are, and they play a big part in how war currently works, so changing ships doesn't affect much because they barely play a role as is, but changing planes can affect their versatility (and thus viability) and the important role they play in wars currently, hopefully that makes sense~

I don't know if buffing airstrikes is a popular idea or not. It's my opinion that they should be because in the current meta planes' primary use is securing air superiourity (almost exclusively at a war's onset) and protecting your own tanks from being cut in half by air superiourity. In some cases they are used to dogfight planes or airstrike ships. Essentially, we do need to have planes but we barely have to actively use them in wars because their primary function is to protect our own tanks while those tanks do most of the shredding.

So the issue at the moment is that planes barely get used to airstrike ships, there's no reason to nerf it, especially if the goal is to not just make units viable to have, but viable to actively use. Simply buffing the ship kill rate instead is a great alternative solution because people have been saying for ages now that ships are practically useless and they need some love.

I've read the threads about the spy reserve mechanic so I know what the idea and basis is for it and I personally liked it. However, I wanted to express the two ways I thought it would pan out when coupled with the spy casualty reductions for you and others to consider. I think this is important if you're going to make changes to spies without having implemented this new mechanic yet because changes that seem good right now, could instantly become excessive or inadequate under the new system if/when the mechanic drops.

Edited by Aiya
  • Upvote 1

Denison-1.png

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.