Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PCS and no-go lines

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PCS and no-go lines

    Lo all,

    I'm writing to find out how you all feel about the "lines in the sand" we seem to use on many maps to enforce proper gameplay according to PCS. For example, on de_Aztec, the rule seems to be "CT's should never cross the bridge or go through the double doors".

    I'm not going to argue these are good rules of thumb - they are. I'm also not going to argue that when your team is mostly dead, or you're on a small team, they definitely ought to apply.

    What I will argue is that these "lines" are set in stone, and there are no circumstances in which they should be crossed. In general, I think that the size of the radius away from the objectives you ought to be willing to go as the defensive team is totally dependent on the number of teammates still alive. If we're playing italy, and there's only two people alive on the team at any time, they should both be camping the house with the hostages. On the other hand, at the start of the round on a full server, I think it's totally reasonable (and probably good strategy) for a couple of the terrorists to go take up forward defensive positions to try to get a feel for where the CTs will be coming from early. Think of them as scouts if you want. If we're still talking about Italy, that might mean sending one person to the balcony of the apartment on the right of T start, or down to the end of the long hallway. Those people should be willing to head back to the hosties quickly if they start seeing teammates die on the other side of the map, but I think it's fine for them to be out there at the start of the round. It's a little harder to argue these points on maps where the defensive team must guard two objectives (de maps), but I think it can be done just as validly.

    Today, we had another situation where I felt it was not only permissible to cross a line, but tactically the smart thing to do. We were playing Aztec, and there was only one T left alive, and a good one (Meat ftw). He was hanging around the end of the bridge/other side of the double doors area, and had methodically knocked off 3 of the remaining 5 CTs by being sneaky and skilled. I think the best play for the two remaining CTs here was to attack him together - it was just too easy for him to pick us off one at a time. In fact, I thought the best possible play was to come at him from two opposite sides. To achieve this, one CT went to the double doors, and the other (me) went across the bridge - the plan being for the double door guy to flash, and then for both of us to charge. Since we'd be coming from opposite directions, he might kill one of us, but it would be very unlikely he'd kill both. This worked and we got him. Meat himself wasn't bitter, but some of the other denizens of the server started grumbling about lines, and not crossing them, so I thought I'd post my own thoughts here so we could discuss them.

    I am by nature a somewhat more aggresive player than most of the other regs on the server. However, I think I do a good job of keeping the objectives in mind while being aggresive. I also think being aggresive allows me to take advantage of my strong skills (reactions) while mitigating my weaker ones (sniping). If you don't think so, and you'd like to educate me on why I should be staying back, this is your chance. Please keep it constructive!

    Cheers,
    Berzerker

  • #2
    Re: PCS and no-go lines

    I agree that we should definitively clarify the boundries. However I think they should be set 'in stone'.

    The first time I played with you was the other night on Italy and I watched you go to the end of the right (from the T spawn) and assume an ambush position on the balcony. A little further than any other TG member goes but within the semi-ambiguous boundries. I had a problem a bit later when you entered the apartment (again at the far end of the right side from the T spawn), continued through the entrance hall, into and through the first room, and killed two CTs in the far doorway of the second room. I'm not sure how far into the second room you may have gone but I came across their bodies and then killed you in the first room. Much too far in my opinion.

    Tonight's issue was one which I was again camming. You crossed the bridge and were hiding behind the crates on the T side. I suppose you could have heard footsteps and hid there, I'm not sure, but if you had gone any further that would have been much too far. Where you were is considered too far already... from what I understand from my time at TG so far.

    You said at one point the other night that you "pseudo-rush" and "piss people off". We could debate the intricacies of a so called "pseudo-rush" but to deliberately "piss people off" is obviously contrary to the TG style of gameplay.

    Perhaps a fluid boundry dependent upon player number etc is worth discussion. Most assuredly clarification of "undrawn" lines in the sand is in order. I for one would love to know the exact boundries so anyone crossing them is undoubtedly out of his or her range.
    Clearly, if you go further (and then even further than that) than any other TG member/player, you are out of bounds.

    The issue as to why you should be staying back is simple. It's a server rule that is enforced quite strictly. If a TG member is crossing the line, how are we supposed to require public players to stay on their side?

    This style of game isn't designed to be restrictive, it's designed to be fun, tactically oriented, and contrary to the dime-a-dozen deathmatch server where bombs and hostages are just window dressing.


    [tg-c1][conduct]

    Chuck Norris can believe it's not butter

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: PCS and no-go lines

      The reason we have strict guidelines is because many people don't grasp the concept behind our rules. I don't think anyone wants to have strict lines on the map. The idea is for people to understand what their objective is and to play that role.

      Your post brings up several reasons for why we don't want lines on the map. You're right, in certain situations it is smart and "PCS" to go beyond the traditional boundaries.

      What we don't want to see is the defensive team playing an offensive role. But as you've pointed out, if you're sure of where the bomb is (with the last remaining T), and you can coordinate with the rest of your team to corner it and neutralize it, then you're not abandoning your objective.

      I hate the fact that the offensive team can often traverse half the map without having to look in corners or over their shoulder. That's not realistic, but a limitation of the game we're playing (it's on the same few maps, over and over, and we know them like the back of our hand). When defending, I think that to stay within the spirit of our PCS rules, it's helpful to consider what would occur in real life. CTs defending two specific bombsites would not run around a city hoping to run into terrorists. They would set up a perimeter around the targets and try to protect it. Terrorists with hostages would not wander around trying to find the people sent to rescue the hostages. They would hole up near the hossies and try not to expose themselves...

      So, what does this mean in terms of playing on the server? It means that our "lines" are still good guidelines most of the time. Crossing those lines needs to be for a very good reason, but there are times when it is appropriate. I think most of the people that participate in these forums can understand this. It's difficult to explain it to a pubbie that has never before seen the PCS concept, though.
      Become a supporting member!
      Buy a Tactical Duck!
      Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
      TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: PCS and no-go lines

        Originally posted by Scooper
        The first time I played with you was the other night on Italy and I watched you go to the end of the right (from the T spawn) and assume an ambush position on the balcony. A little further than any other TG member goes but within the semi-ambiguous boundries. I had a problem a bit later when you entered the apartment (again at the far end of the right side from the T spawn), continued through the entrance hall, into and through the first room, and killed two CTs in the far doorway of the second room. I'm not sure how far into the second room you may have gone but I came across their bodies and then killed you in the first room. Much too far in my opinion.
        This, right here, is what bothers me. What you're saying is that I was "too far" - not that I was ignoring my objectives. The whole spirit of PCS, at least as I understand it, it to make the game objective-based, not to make it "Denfensive team takes up camping positions, and then the offensive team tries to overrun them". FWIW, I never went any further than the doorway of the first room. Also, the reason it was easy to kill me was because members of my team (no names mentioned, but they were wearing the TG/TGS/GS tag) had taken to wounding me because I was "going too far".

        Originally posted by Scooper
        Tonight's issue was one which I was again camming. You crossed the bridge and were hiding behind the crates on the T side. I suppose you could have heard footsteps and hid there
        The reason I stopped was because I was trying to coordinate with the other member of my team on a charge to take out the last T. I didn't want to rush in by myself and die.

        Originally posted by Scooper
        You said at one point the other night that you "pseudo-rush" and "piss people off". We could debate the intricacies of a so called "pseudo-rush" but to deliberately "piss people off" is obviously contrary to the TG style of gameplay.
        What I said was that I pseudo-rush, by which I mean "rush to take up a more advanced position than the offensive team may be expecting". This is particularly effective when the offensive team is moving out very slowly. I also said that what I do seems to annoy people, not that I'm *trying* to annoy people. I'm playing my game, and I'm trying to play intelligently. I can't help it if that pisses people off who then take to verbal abuse and intentional wounding. The right place to discuss it is here, which is what I've told people. Since nobody made a post about, I decided to.

        Originally posted by Scooper
        I for one would love to know the exact boundries so anyone crossing them is undoubtedly out of his or her range. Clearly, if you go further (and then even further than that) than any other TG member/player, you are out of bounds. The issue as to why you should be staying back is simple. It's a server rule that is enforced quite strictly.
        This, to me, is similar to the above. At least to me, this business about lines and boundaries is far more contrary to the spirit of PCS than pushing the aggresiveness of the defensive team too far. My plea to everyone reading this, and especially to you Scooper since you're an awesome player, is to go read the PCS rules if you haven't already, rather than assuming you understand them. To me, their spirit is about making sure that Counterstrike is about the objectives, not about deathmatch. Anytime a bomb is planted and not defused with CTs alive, or hostages rescued with terrorists not hot on their heels, PCS has probably been broken, at least in spirit.

        Originally posted by Scooper
        If a TG member is crossing the line, how are we supposed to require public players to stay on their side?
        This is a great point. I would be glad to remove my [TG] tag when playing on the CSS server if people feel that I'm setting a "bad" or "confusing" example for new pubbers, especially if this means it will make you more comfortable letting me play my way. Sound off on this please, I'd like to get a feel for the general opinion of our regs.

        Originally posted by Scooper
        This style of game isn't designed to be restrictive, it's designed to be fun, tactically oriented, and contrary to the dime-a-dozen deathmatch server where bombs and hostages are just window dressing.
        AWESOME! That's the spirit! There's nothing in there about lines! :)

        Now for Cing's post:

        Originally posted by CingularDuality
        I hate the fact that the offensive team can often traverse half the map without having to look in corners or over their shoulder.
        This, more than anything, is what motivates me to take up more advanced positions than seem to be traditionally used on this server. To me, there's nothing more satisfying than breaking a team's back by taking them from behind and mowing down 3 or 4 of them before they even know you're there. It doesn't take much skill, but man, does it ever work wonders for winning the round ;) I think when the offensive team is advancing, there should always be one person covering the rear, which just isn't necessary in our setup.

        Originally posted by CingularDuality
        CTs defending two specific bombsites would not run around a city hoping to run into terrorists. They would set up a perimeter around the targets and try to protect it.
        This is an interesting point. I've never really considered real life when playing games - I generally go by what is allowable and tactically sound given the particular way the world is modelled in that game. To me, if there's some place I can go to choke off the approaches to more than one bomb site (even though in real life they'd be totally separated), I'll go there.

        One thing I think would be interesting would be if we could somehow downgrade the importance of kills to the effect of score on the server. If there was some way points could be given for achieving objectives, that would be amazing. If all terrorists still alive got points when the bomb was planted, and the CTs in the region of the defusal got points, and all the Terrorists left alive while the hostages were rescued were penalized, I think that would naturally encourage playing 'properly'. I believe I've actually seen some of this behavior implemented on CSS servers I've played on.
        Last edited by Berzerker2; 01-21-2005, 01:12 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: PCS and no-go lines

          Berz wasn't trying to find players.

          There weren't players.

          There was one player. That player was completely located, and alone. That player was the only chance the opposition had at completing the objective. It makes good sense to engage him (not search for him) as a team, in my opinion. Berz had the coordinated and objectives-based support of his teammate and he acted on it. He's not running through a city hoping he runs into someone. He's closing in on the last of the located and cornered opposition.

          That having been said, I'm sure your other agressive decisions you've made have been less-easily justifiable. And if you really do go over the line enough times... if you do aggressive things that don't as well (or at all) fit within PCS as the majority sees it, then expect to be just as quickly judged when you happen to get aggression "right," as you described above (again, in my opinion). You see... you had to explain ALL THAT just to justify what you did. There's no way an admin who doesn't know you to trust you is going to be able to know if you were rushing or working with your team to complete your objective. If you get attention called to you, it only makes this WORSE if you come back with what could in any way seem like lip.

          The biggest (only?) flaw I see in the design of PCS is that determinations of what is right and what is wrong are too often based on opinion and not undebatable metrics. Without hard lines, there are no undebatable metrics. Life is complicated enough... games shouldn't be. But alas, I have no solution, so this is where admins come in. They and they alone ultimately decide what is appropriate and what is not.

          You've done well voicing your concern here. Just make sure you respect both the admins and their decisions (genuinely). If an admin announces you've gone too far, I don't care if you're six feet from a hostage you're guarding.. you either fall back or leave. Then, if you deem it necessary, come do exactly what you're doing here. Until (unless) we put hard lines on maps, SOMEONE has to decide what's fair play during games, and that someone is an admin. If you're aggressive, I would recommend you work very hard to make sure the admins trust your commitment to PCS (this thread is a good start).
          Steam Community? Add me. | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

          Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Zephyr: Apophis is clearly a highly sophisticated self-aware AI construct that runs on a highly modified toaster oven in Wyzcrak's basement.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: PCS and no-go lines

            OK, Berzerker, I was with you on your first post, but then more of your intentions are revealed in your second post.

            Constantly pushing the limits definitely goes against the spirit of our rules. If your teammates and admins are repeatedly telling you that you're going to far, then you probably are... (BTW, intentional team wounding will get you banned from this server. They were wrong to do that.) Remember that teamwork is the number one priority on any TG server. If your teammates are all telling you not to go too far, then you're obviously not working with them.

            See, it turns out that YOU are the reason why we have boundaries. Because if we don't, people will try to push further and further forward when they should be defending an objective. I'm exaggerating right now, if that's not clear. But my point is that occasionally crossing the "lines" is OK if it's for a tactical purpose and your team supports it, but constantly pushing the envelope is obviously a problem.

            You don't have to remove your |TG| tag... If you don't play PCS, you'll simply be banned from the server. Regardless of your tag. I'm not saying this to intimidate you or anything. I have no reason to believe that you will cause any problems on the server. I'm just stating that it doesn't matter what your name is or what tag you have, if anyone continually pushes the limits of PCS play, you'll not be able to set any example for pubbies! ;-)

            Man, this post sounds so negative. Sorry, it's not meant that way.

            I guess I just wanted to point out that although I agreed with your first post, violating the guidelines that we've established for PCS should be a rare thing. If you find yourself doing it often, the you're probably wrong.
            Become a supporting member!
            Buy a Tactical Duck!
            Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
            TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: PCS and no-go lines

              Cing's comments complement a point I was trying to make.

              If you constantly push the envelope, be it justified as aggression or anything else (and regardless of its intent), you'll become labeled. The scenario you described in your post must be the exception. That is what makes it acceptable to people playing PCS, I think.
              Steam Community? Add me. | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

              Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Zephyr: Apophis is clearly a highly sophisticated self-aware AI construct that runs on a highly modified toaster oven in Wyzcrak's basement.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: PCS and no-go lines

                That's basically my point.
                When I say 'too far', I'm saying it based on what I have to date seen as the unwritten limits enforced and heeded by the TG community at large. And what I mean by clear lines are those that ALL players on the servers tend to, or are required to, stay within.
                I'm totally cool with tracking someone down if he's the last guy on the opposition's team. What I don't like is being shot in the back before our team even advances to the first contact... I tend to agree with Cingular about working with your team. Going rougue isn't conducive to effective teamwork.

                I played DC hardcore for many moons and almost... almost... joined a clan because of the lack of teamwork on public servers. (I was heavily recruited by NSF during my time with DC-Central). But, as a leading member of a clan-neutral website I chose not to join. TG seems to be a similar group and the decication to teamwork is what got me hooked.

                I totally respect your bringing up the issues here in the forums and I can see your point. On the other hand is the opinion of the group at large. If most think it's over the line then the majority rules. Hence my desire to have a 'known' line.... "here's the line. Don't cross it." You're in good shape when you question that line but not so much when you cross it and argue later.

                You're a really good player and I appreciate your lies about me being good too. :p
                The point here is pretty simple; Teamwork is the ticket. It's the ticket to fun and to winning.
                Let's play as teams and have a freakin blast!
                I would love to see the point system to which you refer... one in which kills aren't even counted, just team wins and losses... but that's not how it is.
                We just want to have fun.

                I look forward to a peaceful resolution to this issue and to some great gaming.
                C-ya in the server (while I cam by dead body and watch you snag my gun... lol)


                [tg-c1][conduct]

                Chuck Norris can believe it's not butter

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: PCS and no-go lines

                  This is great - I appear to have fostered some good discussion, which was my aim. Unfortunately, it appears to have centered on me, and not on PCS. My natural instinct here is to defend myself, because I definitely feel like I'm being attacked, even though my intelligent brain is saying that is not part of your intent. So I'm not going to. Instead, I'm going to try to redirect this discussion to where it should be: PCS.

                  In your opinion, what is PCS trying to do? To me (and this is the voice of my admitedly limited understanding - I never played PCS under oldschool CS), it is trying to replace the fact that objectives are not in any real way encouraged by the way the game is scored. That means that to players who view being on the top of the scoreboard as important (and let's face it - winning is more fun than losing), ignoring the objectives is the "smart" thing to do. Paying attention to your objectives is what PCS is all about. All this other stuff - lines, rules, whatever, is cruft. At least, that's my view of the world.

                  Scooper said something interesting, and it's something I have to respond to (against my better judgement). "If most think it's over the line then the majority rules": I could abide by this, if that's the way the server is going to be run. If the majority of the players decide how we play, and I think almost unquestionably the idea of "lines" is how that majority thinks, then "lines" are how we must play. However, I know on the NS server, that's not how things work. The majority gets a voice, but then the admins rule on it. Up until now, I have never been chastised by console over my tactics. Never. For other things, yeah, but I'm not getting into that. ;) The majority tends to complain a lot though. Should I be listening to them? (that's an honest question)

                  Ok, it's late, and I have lots more bile to spew all over this issue, and probably people to inadvertently tick off, but it's bedtime for Berzerkers. Thank you all for your thoughts and patience - I know I'm not the easiest person to deal with at times.

                  FWIW: No lies about playing w/ you Scooper. There's some players on our server that I don't particularly respect - you're not one of them.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: PCS and no-go lines

                    Yeah, discussion about boundaries has been going on at TG for years...

                    What it comes down to is that we wish we didn't have to draw lines on maps, but for practical purposes they're almost required. For a while (when we were still www.xlii.com), we were so popular that people had to submit an application to get a password to our server. Apophis would only approve so many applications at a time and every time a new group of people was approved to play, we had to enforce strict boundaries. After we'd weeded out the non-PCS players, the boundaries became more relaxed and you'd see some good tactical ambushes set by the defensive team. You'd see teamwork that was coordinated specifically to accomplish the objective and you didn't have to worry about anyone mistaking it for anything else. Unfortunately, our CS:S server is new and we have quite a few new people here and we have to keep tight reins on the gameplay. I certainly hope that in the coming weeks and months that we'll see all our new players maturing PCS-wise and that we can again relax the boundaries as Berzerker suggested. I just don't think it's a good idea right now. I think we're still in a stage where we need to recruit a few more regulars and while we're recruiting from public players, I don't think we should confuse them before they understand exactly what PCS is...

                    And no, "majority rules" doesn't cut it with PCS, either. Like in NS, we can discuss things in the forums all we want, but it's ultimately the admins' decision on gameplay.


                    BTW, I had to look it up:
                    1 entry found for cruft.
                    cruft

                    /kruhft/ [very common; back-formation from crufty] 1. n.
                    An unpleasant substance. The dust that gathers under your bed is
                    cruft; the TMRC Dictionary correctly noted that attacking it with a
                    broom only produces more. 2. n. The results of shoddy construction.
                    3. vt. [from `hand cruft', pun on `hand craft'] To write assembler
                    code for something normally (and better) done by a compiler (see
                    hand-hacking). 4. n. Excess; superfluous junk; used esp. of
                    redundant or superseded code. 5. [University of Wisconsin] n. Cruft
                    is to hackers as gaggle is to geese; that is, at UW one properly
                    says "a cruft of hackers".
                    Become a supporting member!
                    Buy a Tactical Duck!
                    Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
                    TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: PCS and no-go lines

                      Berzerker,
                      You should watch some of the more advanced players on the server and see how they utilize this ruleset to their advantage. Being an aggressive player does not mean you can't still be aggressive. I am a very aggressive player but that can get you killed in a hurry. In a defensive position aggression has it's place. One thing i always do is roam around and keep tabs on both ends of the fronts. Keeping my team updated on what's going on (when i can use the mic heh) some of the smaller maps are just a real pain because you basically have about 50 feet of space to stick around in like Italy as a Terrorist. hope this helps :)

                      Originally posted by CingularDuality
                      I hate the fact that the offensive team can often traverse half the map without having to look in corners or over their shoulder. That's not realistic, but a limitation of the game we're playing (it's on the same few maps, over and over, and we know them like the back of our hand).

                      Cingular most of this is a problem with the maps, they are way to small, one dimensional (tactic wise) to have FUN and more realistic pcs ruled games.


                      - -

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: PCS and no-go lines

                        Good discussion here. Everyone should keep in mind that there are actually two different aspects of PCS being discussed. One is the theoretical aspect, which simply states that "the defensive team must play defense and the offensive team must play offense." The other is the practical implementation of the aspect, which involes drawing boundaries to ensure that it's possible for the admins to enforce the intent of the theoretical aspect.

                        In the case where Bezerker went across the bridge on de_aztec to bag the last remaining terrorist it could be argued that he was no longer playing as the defensive team, because ultimately the defensive team's objective on that map has nothing to do with eliminating the terrorists but rather to prevent the terrorists from planting the bomb. As long as the lone terrorist was staying on that side of the bridge the bomb sites were in no danger. The application of the rules should not change because there are (x-y) number of players rather than (x) number of players. Otherwise we are drawn into absurd scenario discussions such as, "If in a 1 on 1 situation the last CT is allowed to cross the bridge to eliminate the last T, can't 3 CTs do the same thing to eliminate the last 2 Ts? What if it were 7 on 3?"
                        Twisted Firestarter
                        a.k.a |TG| Harkonian
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: PCS and no-go lines

                          Well, 7 on 3, obviously not. Duh.
                          :P
                          [volun2]
                          NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
                          Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
                          <anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
                          <LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash

                          Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: PCS and no-go lines

                            Originally posted by Twisted_Firestarter
                            In the case where Bezerker went across the bridge on de_aztec to bag the last remaining terrorist it could be argued that he was no longer playing as the defensive team, because ultimately the defensive team's objective on that map has nothing to do with eliminating the terrorists but rather to prevent the terrorists from planting the bomb.
                            Spot on, Twisted.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: PCS and no-go lines

                              Originally posted by Twisted_Firestarter
                              In the case where Bezerker went across the bridge on de_aztec to bag the last remaining terrorist it could be argued that he was no longer playing as the defensive team, because ultimately the defensive team's objective on that map has nothing to do with eliminating the terrorists but rather to prevent the terrorists from planting the bomb.
                              But, but... OMG, LIKE KILLING THE TERRORISTS GUARANTEES THAT THEY CAN'T PLANT THE BOMB!!!1 ARE YOU STOOPID? YOU N00B!

                              /acting like a typical pubbie

                              Very well said. :icon14:

                              3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X