Hockey/Football Zone Forums (Subspace | Continuum)

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Group Moderation: To edit access to a group you control, go to the Membergroups interface from the Moderate button. If you don't have that option, contact Kilo Dylie with the names of the moderators who should be on your group.

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Settings Day Test 1: Results  (Read 2435 times)

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Settings Day Test 1: Results
« on: September 08, 2013, 06:40:26 PM »

The first test day happened!  Got a few "vet" games in with 0 delay on slapshots.

Thanks to those of you who showed up and helped.

Hopefully this thread can serve as a location to discuss the results of the change.
Logged

Lawn Dwarf

  • RSHL Captain
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2013, 06:47:09 PM »

Initial thoughts

Pros
-Felt like there was more flow in the game, it did not take more than 2 passes blue line to blue line
-You could score further out from the crease, kept the goalies honest
-Generally did not feel over powered considering it was not a league style game play
-Was fun to use

Cons
-Phasing (not sure if it was more or less)
-2v0s got a major bump, almost 100% success rate (which i think it should be)



Other Factors

-It was used for the sake of using it
-People did not really play positions
-Pilot was in the game
-Did not really have real goalies playing, or defense for that matter

Overall it was a fun test to be a part of, I would like to see it in a team based setting where chemistry is already built and it would be taken more serious.

Would also like to see the current lanc in these settings, the shark was the only goalie ship really used.
Logged

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2013, 08:04:08 PM »

At a minimum, I think the test showed that HZ could definitely work with 2 legitimate shot types.

I liked the way the game could be opened up when passes of that length were possible.  I also liked that since a player a decent distance from the crease could score, the only way to shut him down was to close on him.

I don't know specifics regarding energy cost but I think it would be a great mechanic if taking a shot(or two) off the puck stopped a players ability to take the slapshot.  A ship that shrugs off a bullet(dud) with the puck also wouldn't be able to get a slapshot off.

While I don't necessarily think it is the case, I can see there being a legitimate argument that the current slapshot speeds are balanced based on the delay/shutdown, leaving it unbalanced without the delay.  Shaving some speed off of the slapshots could bring things back into balance to alleviate concerns.

I would really like to see some RSHL teams play without slapshot delay.  One possible way of making this happen that occurred to me would be to ask if any teams would be up for playing a period or two after their RSHL game(likely the late game on any given night). 
Logged

Cwolf

  • BEND THE KNEE
  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 606
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2013, 12:57:22 AM »

it definitely increased the scoring range and passing range. so i liked it.

it may have been too powerful. could weaken it by reducing the slap speeds or by putting back in a small delay. or could buff the goalie a bit too. on the other hand, maybe against real defense it wont be too powerful? hard to say based on the casual test scrim

so yea a more serious rshl style scrim would be great! would participate
Logged

Kula

  • HZ Media
  • Registered Posting Bot
  • *
  • Posts: 13321
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2013, 06:04:01 PM »

I played Levi d and o and shark goalie and I enjoyed the change.

Some ideas to build off this:

Allow goalie the same slapshot ability maybe not as hard and have it drain half the energy.

viiop pointed out that in real hockey you can see a guy wind up for a slap shot but that said in hockey you can pass and shoot quite rapidly without having to slapper.

Thus I propose two different slapshot options:

Keep our current loaded slapshot and the new doobie slapshot that we can call a wristshot, can we do both? Can major slapshot be assigned to thors and wristshots be assigned to bombs?
Logged

Arnk Kilo Dylie

  • Balancing Act
  • Executor
  • Out of Control
  • *****
  • Posts: 9572
  • There's some intention behind the placement.
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2013, 07:04:36 PM »

I think the test proved that slap delay is the main difference between slapshot being situationally appropriate/good to being almost essential. It's kind of hard to say how this test would translate to RSHL teams with RSHL mentalities though because it was very loosey defense--breakaways were incredibly strong, probably too strong (keep in mind if goalies do not have a reasonable chance to react they might as well play a non-reactive ship like lancaster (not saying lancaster is a bad thing but I don't think it's something we're trying to encourage.))
Logged

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2013, 07:12:18 PM »

I think the test proved that slap delay is the main difference between slapshot being situationally appropriate/good to being almost essential. It's kind of hard to say how this test would translate to RSHL teams with RSHL mentalities though because it was very loosey defense--breakaways were incredibly strong, probably too strong (keep in mind if goalies do not have a reasonable chance to react they might as well play a non-reactive ship like lancaster (not saying lancaster is a bad thing but I don't think it's something we're trying to encourage.))

Is it bad that mastery of a second type of effective shot be "essential"?

1v0:
Now - The 1v0 conversion rate is way to low in my opinion.  HZ not even in the same ballpark as NHL breakaway conversions.  This rate is even more depressed when you look at conversion rates against the top tier goalies in HZ vs NHL(0.0001% vs 20%).
No Delay- It helps the offense.  To what degree... I certainly wouldn't call it too strong although I have not seen it against Linix/Superdan.

2v0:
Now - The 2v0 conversion rate is reasonable, the better goalies in the league stand more than a fighting chance.
No Delay - Properly executed a 2v0 is very effective but I would not say goalies to not have a "reasonable chance".

Slapshot is just a name for a second type of shot.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 07:30:44 PM by Doobie »
Logged

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2013, 07:34:23 PM »

Some ideas to build off this:

Allow goalie the same slapshot ability maybe not as hard and have it drain half the energy.

The more NHL savvy folks are more equipped to weigh in here but my general feel is that goalies do not make long distance passes very often.  Goalies pass using their glove or a dump off to a defender within a VERY short distance almost ALWAYS no?

This isn't to say I don't think goalies shouldn't also have two shot options, but anything close to our current "slapshot" velocities seems like too much.

Logged

Arnk Kilo Dylie

  • Balancing Act
  • Executor
  • Out of Control
  • *****
  • Posts: 9572
  • There's some intention behind the placement.
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2013, 08:16:43 PM »

It's neither good nor bad. When slapshot was introduced it was with the idea that it was not required to succeed (fundamentally changing HZ for something that was unproven even with the amount of testing we had.) Back then I don't think 0 slap delays would have been appealing at all. Now people are more used to it.
Logged

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2013, 08:38:40 PM »

Thus I propose two different slapshot options:

Keep our current loaded slapshot and the new doobie slapshot that we can call a wristshot, can we do both? Can major slapshot be assigned to thors and wristshots be assigned to bombs?

If the thinking is that the current speed of "slapshots" is too high for no delay I think we could have 3 options.

1: Current Shot
2: New "Wrist Shot": No delay, energy cost, no visual warning, speed somewhere in between 1 and 3
3: Slapshot: delay, visual warning, energy cost, automatic 1 timer

Where each ships "Wrist Shot" speed ends up somewhere between current shot and slapshot.  Distribution could either be linear, or customized to further assist in ship variety.

I like it :)
Logged

Kula

  • HZ Media
  • Registered Posting Bot
  • *
  • Posts: 13321
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2013, 09:56:18 PM »

Well put and I like it too! I hope it's possible to code?!

Back to the goalie question - most goalies of this era can and do pass the puck up the boards for breakouts - especially when they have open ice. When there is a swarm of opponents around them then they don't do this.

I think the massive energy drain a goalie would take from attempting this would be a deterrent from seeing goalies using a slapper to merely clear pucks (which I agree would be negative for gameplay) rather than start breakouts (which I think we both agree would speed up the game and is something positive).

Plus giving a buff like this to goalies could generate more interest in goaltending as they can be a bit more involved in the play. This is especially beneficial when you consider it's going to be more challenging for goalies to make saves if shooters have more options.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 10:00:20 PM by Kula »
Logged

Cwolf

  • BEND THE KNEE
  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 606
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #11 on: September 10, 2013, 12:04:22 AM »

1: Current Shot
2: New "Wrist Shot": No delay, energy cost, no visual warning, speed somewhere in between 1 and 3
3: Slapshot: delay, visual warning, energy cost, automatic 1 timer

nice.
Logged

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5479
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #12 on: September 10, 2013, 02:23:39 AM »

For goalies, a slapshot with delay wouldn't really work because they have such a short timer to begin with.
Right now, goalies who grab a loose puck can make a pretty hard pass by thrusting.  A slapshot sounds like it would just be panic button for goalies and I don't think that'd be a good thing.

Having a third shot gets complicated.  Thors don't cost energy.  We could use mines, but then you can't use it on top of tiles. 
I'm comfortable having each ship have a wrist OR slap. 
My thought is leaving 2/4/5 with slap shots and giving the rest wristers.  The idea behind it is that a quick release shot is generally more useful than a delayed shot for scoring and offensive zone passing, so it can really tailor the abilities of each ship  Some notes on the effect on each ship:
Warbird: Lets the warbird be more effective passing, and still contribute effectively to an offense without forcing into the clusters
Javelin: Retains a scary slapshot that requires plenty of energy, but lacks the finesse available from a wrister
Spider: A weak wrist shot (comparable to weasel current shot) allows it the potential to make more shots and passes without allowing it the scoring effectiveness of other ships.
Levi: Give this thing a huge scary slap shot?  Why not?
Terrier: Not having a wrist shot distinguishes the terr as more of a 'grinder' than a finesse scoring ship.  Still should be a relatively quick slap shot, maintaining the terr as a jack of all trades but master of none.
Weasel: Might lose a bit of opportunity for long range snipes, but it becomes much more effective at short / mid range, and more importantly, can take hard shots without momentum.



I think what this test boils down to is whether we like the concept and the general direction it moves the game.  As expected, I'm getting the sense we like it.  It will definitely need to be tweaked and balanced, but we've got other things to test first, so try not to worry too much just yet about how we should balance it.
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

Thrill HZ

  • Spaceship Commentator
  • RSHL Captain
  • Out of Control
  • *
  • Posts: 8743
  • All stat requests go through my agent, BlueGoku
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #13 on: September 10, 2013, 06:47:59 AM »

I find some of these ideas interesting but a couple of things I noticed right away from this thread:

-Goalie slapshot would be ridiculously OP. Any goalie with decent vision would be able to outlet huge passes that could result in odd man rushes or goals on a regular basis. This could be abused too easily to be very viable.
-Overall I think a very slight delay for a stronger shot as opposed to no delay at all would be more balanced.
-Levi Slapshot: I think giving defenders an option for some long snipes NHL style would be awesome and really brings new dimension to the defensive game that might encourage defenders to want to come up more instead of never leaving the crease. Im not sure there is any real way for this to be effective regardless of how fast the shot power is though just based on the 2d aspect of the game, but it could be fun to mess around with. The main problem I see with this concept is that people will just alter its use and find a way to convert it into an offensive ship and use it that way primarily.
-Weasel Slapshot- Right now, partly because of slapshots, i dont think weasels shot power is a big enough edge over levi and jav shot power to be balanced compared to those ships. It almost makes sense for the huge scary slapshot to maybe be on the weasel as an offensive sniper ship as opposed to a defender, since offensive players will probably just take the defense ship and use it that way any way. This would really alter the game of the weasel somewhat to try to sneak around and be smart in the open space to wheel in and take a huge power shot. Personally I think people would really enjoy this kind of game play and it might break the monotony of the current offensive style.
Logged
thrill is super awkward and likely rubs it out to himself in the mirror

Lawn Dwarf

  • RSHL Captain
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #14 on: September 10, 2013, 10:51:46 AM »

G
For goalies, a slapshot with delay wouldn't really work because they have such a short timer to begin with.
Right now, goalies who grab a loose puck can make a pretty hard pass by thrusting.  A slapshot sounds like it would just be panic button for goalies and I don't think that'd be a good thing.

Having a third shot gets complicated.  Thors don't cost energy.  We could use mines, but then you can't use it on top of tiles. 
I'm comfortable having each ship have a wrist OR slap. 
My thought is leaving 2/4/5 with slap shots and giving the rest wristers.  The idea behind it is that a quick release shot is generally more useful than a delayed shot for scoring and offensive zone passing, so it can really tailor the abilities of each ship  Some notes on the effect on each ship:
Warbird: Lets the warbird be more effective passing, and still contribute effectively to an offense without forcing into the clusters
Javelin: Retains a scary slapshot that requires plenty of energy, but lacks the finesse available from a wrister
Spider: A weak wrist shot (comparable to weasel current shot) allows it the potential to make more shots and passes without allowing it the scoring effectiveness of other ships.
Levi: Give this thing a huge scary slap shot?  Why not?
Terrier: Not having a wrist shot distinguishes the terr as more of a 'grinder' than a finesse scoring ship.  Still should be a relatively quick slap shot, maintaining the terr as a jack of all trades but master of none.
Weasel: Might lose a bit of opportunity for long range snipes, but it becomes much more effective at short / mid range, and more importantly, can take hard shots without momentum.



I think what this test boils down to is whether we like the concept and the general direction it moves the game.  As expected, I'm getting the sense we like it.  It will definitely need to be tweaked and balanced, but we've got other things to test first, so try not to worry too much just yet about how we should balance it.

Goldeye,

while i love the idea of having multiple shot types because this allows more options to score, do you think it would be hard to balance multiple ships with multiple shot power(s) as opposed to one slap shot across the board?

Another reason I ask is that in your explanation you have laid out how you want each role to be defined, which I do not think the settings dictate maybe as much as we want them to that's more on how the person determines to use the ship.

I'm going to reference your example with the weasel because it is the ship that I play, but when you make a statement that says

"Weasel: Might lose a bit of opportunity for long range snipes, but it becomes much more effective at short / mid range, and more importantly, can take hard shots without momentum."

- This worries me, I know that your head is where I am at around increasing the current scoring range from where it already is. And you also state that we are talking about the direction of the game and that there is a general feel that we all like it.

I just think you pegged it when you talked about the more elements you add the more complex it becomes.

Thoughts?


Logged

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5479
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #15 on: September 10, 2013, 03:16:03 PM »

while i love the idea of having multiple shot types because this allows more options to score, do you think it would be hard to balance multiple ships with multiple shot power(s) as opposed to one slap shot across the board?
I don't think so.  A delayed shot is inherently less useful than the instant shot unless the power difference is big. 

Quote
Another reason I ask is that in your explanation you have laid out how you want each role to be defined, which I do not think the settings dictate maybe as much as we want them to that's more on how the person determines to use the ship.
The settings dictate what's possible, and give an effectiveness range that players' own skills zoom in on.  Pretty much anyone is going to be a more effective offensive player in terr than spid.  In increasing scoring areas, we're going to be increasing the overall utility of each ship.  I believe it's good game design (makes the game more varied and interesting) to give different ships different specialties, to allow people to best exploit the aspects they're good at.  We already do that, I just want to make sure we continue to do so as we alter other things. 
For example, if everyone gets a better shot, the relative value of a weasel might be diminished.  If terr had a really good wrist shot, one might be less inclined to use weasel because terr's shot is good enough to justify the other benefits of a weasel.  I think we already make that choice between warbird and terr; terr is close enough that warbird is usually only worth it if you are outstanding in it.

Quote
I'm going to reference your example with the weasel because it is the ship that I play, but when you make a statement that says

"Weasel: Might lose a bit of opportunity for long range snipes, but it becomes much more effective at short / mid range, and more importantly, can take hard shots without momentum."

- This worries me, I know that your head is where I am at around increasing the current scoring range from where it already is. And you also state that we are talking about the direction of the game and that there is a general feel that we all like it.
You don't quite say why it worries you.  What I'm suggesting for the weasel is a small decrease in where it can score from in exchange for an increase in where it is deadly from.  It is just my expectation of how it'd play out, and we'd still have to test it.

Quote
I just think you pegged it when you talked about the more elements you add the more complex it becomes.
I was referring to the technical complexity of having 3 shots.  I don't think this approach would cause a dramatic increase in balancing complexity.  Each ship needs to be looked at individually one way or another.
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

Lawn Dwarf

  • RSHL Captain
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2013, 03:37:46 PM »

I don't think so.  A delayed shot is inherently less useful than the instant shot unless the power difference is big. 
The settings dictate what's possible, and give an effectiveness range that players' own skills zoom in on.  Pretty much anyone is going to be a more effective offensive player in terr than spid.  In increasing scoring areas, we're going to be increasing the overall utility of each ship.  I believe it's good game design (makes the game more varied and interesting) to give different ships different specialties, to allow people to best exploit the aspects they're good at.  We already do that, I just want to make sure we continue to do so as we alter other things. 

I think my question was more in regards to the meta balance that will go on which you answered in your second question...if you give me the ability to be as "deadly" in a javelin as you would a weasel but i get to tank L1s and still have similar high end shot power then what is the difference? 

There is a top end on speed where it becomes effective when passing and shooting.

For example, if everyone gets a better shot, the relative value of a weasel might be diminished.  If terr had a really good wrist shot, one might be less inclined to use weasel because terr's shot is good enough to justify the other benefits of a weasel.  I think we already make that choice between warbird and terr; terr is close enough that warbird is usually only worth it if you are outstanding in it.
 

Again, this is probably more of a concern for me, will you give up checking power for shot power?  Giving it to certain ships and not may or may not force your hand I would like to see this tested.

You don't quite say why it worries you.  What I'm suggesting for the weasel is a small decrease in where it can score from in exchange for an increase in where it is deadly from.  It is just my expectation of how it'd play out, and we'd still have to test it.

It concerns me because in the current settings the real scoring range on a weasel is STILL relatively close.  This ship is supposed to be the "sniper".  I really wish we could generate a heat map for where RSHL goals have been scored from.  I'd say less than 5% come from outside of the hash marks.

I suppose having an understanding of where we want that number to help determine what is OP and what is not.

I was referring to the technical complexity of having 3 shots.  I don't think this approach would cause a dramatic increase in balancing complexity.  Each ship needs to be looked at individually one way or another.

Well we can agree to disagree I suppose, as I stated there is a certain shot power that will be required to score goals from certain areas and if you give this ability to most ships then you alienate the specialty of the ones who are supposed to have it.

There is going to be a fine line between workable and broken.
Logged

Arnk Kilo Dylie

  • Balancing Act
  • Executor
  • Out of Control
  • *****
  • Posts: 9572
  • There's some intention behind the placement.
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #17 on: September 10, 2013, 04:43:30 PM »

Just to throw in some perspective.. that is part of HZ's elegant simplicity, that no ship is completely pigeonholed into one particular role except for goalies and each ship can do things other ships do just better or worse. This includes giving slapshots to all skater ships even ones that are historically and currently focused as defenders (I understand it'd make sense anyway, but the option was conceived as an offensive option for forwards in this game.) Even though some of the ship's slaps are presently pretty weak that's mostly because of the delay--the speed is significantly higher than the weasel's normal shot even in the worst case.

I don't think it's correct to say slapshot in particular has diminished weasel's role as an offensive ship, because slapshot goals are not very common. I think it'd be more correct to say the global shot power increase helped other ships more than it helped weasel.
Logged

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5479
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2013, 05:22:54 PM »

I want to articulate something I come back to a few times in this post.  There are two concepts to consider for what a ship can do: capabilities and effectiveness.  They're closely related, but they also deviate from eachother. 
It's easiest to understand by looking at different shooting scenarios.  I think it's fair to say that to score from a given range, you need a certain shot speed to even have a chance, or it's going to be an easy save.  That establishes capability.  Beyond that speed, your chances of scoring go up, depending on your accuracy and the goalie's play, until the speed reaches a point where the goalie doesn't even have a chance to react and it's all about their positioning and your accuracy. 
For example, both jav and weasel CAN snipe from a pretty far distance, but the weasel's mobility and slightly better shot give it considerably better effectiveness. 
To be fair, capability could just be defined as effectiveness greater than some subjective percentage, but that first percentage has a far more significant effect than what comes after because players have to start respecting that capability.  So from a design standpoint, it pays off to consider capability and effectiveness separately even though they are really the same variable.

It concerns me because in the current settings the real scoring range on a weasel is STILL relatively close.  This ship is supposed to be the "sniper".  I really wish we could generate a heat map for where RSHL goals have been scored from.  I'd say less than 5% come from outside of the hash marks.
Also consider the situations of those shots.  Goals that do come from at or behind the hash marks are almost always on a rush, from a jav or weasel.  I'd like to see other ships have the potential to make that shot on the rush (making numbers more important, and defense needs to worry about angles), and weasel/jav be able to make that shot in more static situations (and other ships coming in with speed, as well).  Both of those situations are already possible with slapshots, but it's too easy to defend, and the opportunity cost of going for slap shots is too severe.  (That's why I think giving weasel a wrister is key, even if it is weaker than current slaps).

I think that a combination of things needs to happen to open things up:
1. Increase effective shooting range vs goalie (between goalie tweaks and shot boosts, including bringing wrist shot)
2. Increase passing ranges (only jav and weasel can make decent long passes, and even with them passing you can't really finish at range)
3. Increase 1v0 effectiveness, so defenses can't just commit to the pass and know the goalie will shut it down.

I think that it IS possible to achieve this without overpowering offense, because more creative plays increase the difficulty of goaltending regardless of the capabilities of the ship.  This is why I'm pushing for the new shark concept.  It specializes the shark more, trying to maintain its overall effectiveness while reducing its capabilities.

Here's how it'll go ideally:
1. Shark change makes it easier to beat shark from good scoring locations
2. Shot speeds / wrist shot make it easier to make creative passing plays (which should hurt lanc more than shark)
3. Defenses have to be more assertive to prevent those opportunities. and we can improve raw defensive abilities somewhat to make it reasonable to be assertive, and counter the boosts to clusterfuck that will result from other changes.


Quote
Well we can agree to disagree I suppose, as I stated there is a certain shot power that will be required to score goals from certain areas and if you give this ability to most ships then you alienate the specialty of the ones who are supposed to have it.
I'd like to see it become more a question of how often a ship can score from a given range (effectiveness) than whether or not they have a chance at all (capability).  If weasel is the only ship that can score from range, then the game as a whole doesn't allow scoring from range.  However, giving most ships having the potential to snipe, but keeping weasel significantly better at it retains the specialty and avoids that 'alienation'.
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

Lawn Dwarf

  • RSHL Captain
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Settings Day Test 1: Results
« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2013, 06:11:52 PM »

agree with everything in your post

let's do it
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
 

Page created in 0.09 seconds with 24 queries.