|
Sulecrist posted:How much did it slow things down? What size games were you playing? As far as game size, back then a "normal" game was 1500 points. From what I've seen of people throwing lists around in 8th, it's the equivalent of 1750-2000 nowadays. Lords of War and superheavies weren't really a thing back then, but honestly super-expensive units would probably benefit from alternating activation.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
Lords of War and Superheavies shouldn't be a thing -now- outside of specific scenarios for them or Apocalypse games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 08:43
|
|
|
Artum posted:
First name Hugh?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 10:29
|
|
|
Artum posted:Can confirm. This guy looks really good. Nice work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 10:55
|
|
|
Ilor posted:Handling assault/close combat is way easier than you guys are making it out to be in an alternating activation system. All you need to do is fight the close combat phase as it is now (with both sides involved rolling their CC attacks) any time either unit activates. The only time it gets even remotely complicated is when you have one unit from Army A in close combat with two (or more) units from Army B, and even then it's a pretty simple matter of only letting models in CC with an activated unit fight when that unit activates. I don't think it's anywhere near as simple as you make it sound, given how common 3+ unit combats are in 8th (every time you have character + squad, you have a 3-unit combat. It's also just as clunky when it comes to keeping track of who's fighting/has fought. The reason I suggest doing a double assault phase (e.g. just do the assault phase twice, but only do charges once) isn't because I think that's a great solution, but because it's one that can just sit on top of the current rules system with no real changes. Also I think you'd want to do morale checks twice, once after each assault phase, rather than once after everything is done (which reduces the changes of a blowout after having everything fight twice). Sulecrist posted:How much did it slow things down? What size games were you playing? When we've playtested, it didn't slow anything down. You're consolidating turns into a single shared turn, and they're more involved--there's much less waiting around for your opponent to do stuff, so the turns are a bit more engaging. Big games are going to be slow no matter which system you play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 11:48
|
|
|
ineptmule posted:This guy looks really good. Nice work. I had misgivings about intercessors not having poseable torsos but they give you a enough variety in the kit to do what you want anyway. Problem is now I've found a more convenient bits store I'm getting dangerously close to making a gravis version of my fist captain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 12:50
|
|
|
Isn't alternating activation already how the fight phase works, though? You could even add equivalents to the Slaanesh melee priority for movement priority and shooting priority.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 13:49
|
|
|
Ilor posted:It didn't slow things down at all. If anything, it sped them up, because once you got into the turn, some things became really obvious, like, "Huh, if I want to be able to get any shots at all off with these Flash Gits, I'd better do it now before they all get wiped out." Or, "poo poo, if I don't back these guardsmen up right now, they're going to get a face full of Death Company as soon as my opponent gets another activation." A lot of people like 2000. I still kinda prefer 1500 though. You need to make more choices in listbuilding and games tend to go faster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:29
|
|
|
R0ckfish posted:so I have one flyrent with HVC, should I be boring and make the other I have the same? I don't really want the swarmlord at the moment, but at the same time I feel like a walkrent is missing out on a lot other then fitting in cases. I've heard people find success with 2 pairs of devourers on a flying tyrant, I still only have the one though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
It's funny how when j was starting out, having troops intimidated me. The movement on large units of small models was nerve-wracking, and I just wanted big monsters. Now that I'm more comfortable with the game, I want more troops. I want as many Genestealers as possible!R0ckfish posted:so I have one flyrent with HVC, should I be boring and make the other I have the same? I don't really want the swarmlord at the moment, but at the same time I feel like a walkrent is missing out on a lot other then fitting in cases. I have one with a HVC that is going to be the Miasma Cannon, leading a Kronos detachment. I think the other is going to go all-out melee, with two pairs of talons, adrenal glands, and maybe Maw Claws of Thyrax.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:I've heard people find success with 2 pairs of devourers on a flying tyrant, I still only have the one though. That’s good if you never intend to see combat, but against armored opponents the lack of AP is really noticeable. My preferred build is one Devourer and one pair of Monstrous Rending Claws. They’re free, have good AP/damage (and the potential for the best AP in the game), and give your Tyrant a more versatile set of options. Especially with Fly you can still leave and shoot (and with Kraken assault  ), but sometimes it’s best to punch tanks or heavy weapon teams to at least force them to move and lose shooting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
Pendent posted:I've never seen somebody come up with a solution for doing alternating activation in 40k that doesn't sound clunky. Tokens seem like the most likely way to go about things but I think that would seem sort of weird. ok now bear with me here. what if.... what if.... when you were done with a unit... what if you took one of your mans, and... turned him around?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
The Bee posted:Isn't alternating activation already how the fight phase works, though? You could even add equivalents to the Slaanesh melee priority for movement priority and shooting priority. It is, but the problem is that currently, units fight twice per battle round--once in their turn and again in the following turn if they are still engaged. If you just do alternating activations in movement shooting and keep one combat phase as-is, you reduce the effectiveness of close combat units by almost 50%. You theoretically wouldn't have units that give movement/shooting priority in a full-on alternating activation system for a couple of reasons, the first being that moving first is actually bad (but an ability that lets you move *last* always would be cool), and the second being that shooting doesn't work quite the same as close combat, so having a unit that has to shoot first just takes away a choice instead of being a cool thing. e: The thing about going full alternating activations is that it solves a lot of problems, but requires a *lot* of framework cleanup. In full testing, I'd want to also look at having units who fail a charge still move the rolled distance (but having to finish closer to the enemy), so you could have them get counter-charged by other units. That's why overall, I'd suggest a strategem-based solution since that scales well for larger games and can be added to the existing game with almost no change to the core game or unit costs/balance. TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 15:29
|
|
|
Pendent posted:Tokens seem like the most likely way to go about things but I think that would seem sort of weird. How do you track remaining wounds?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 15:36
|
|
|
SRM posted:P3 Thamar Black is what I use for everything. It's a great paint, just like the old GW Chaos Black, and is readily available from hobby shops and game stores. As for primer, go with Krylon spray primer. Thanks for this! The internet suggests Krylon Fusion for plastic models, should I get that or is regular Krylon fine?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Not 100% sure on this, but I think the name fusion got phased out and the "regular" krylon is what used to be called fusion. Basically just look to see if it says it bonds to plastic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
My game club is putting together a 500pt evening, and it's not a point range I've ever really played at. Any advice on how much I should focus on killing their models vs securing objectives, or how much I should focus on list versatility vs going all-in on the best models? I'm kinda tempted to run a 3xCommander Supreme Command detachment, but that feels cheesy and gimmicky compared to a simple battalion: ++ Battalion Detachment +3CP (T'au Empire) [31 PL, 501pts] ++ + HQ + Commander [6 PL, 160pts]: 4x Fusion blaster Darkstrider [3 PL, 45pts] + Elites + XV25 Stealth Battlesuits [6 PL, 114pts] . 2x Stealth Shas'ui w/ Advanced targeting system: 2x Advanced targeting system, 2x Burst cannon . Stealth Shas'vre: Advanced targeting system, Burst cannon + Troops + Breacher Team [6 PL, 80pts]: MV36 Guardian Drone, MV4 Shield Drone . 7x Fire Warrior . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Pulse pistol Strike Team [5 PL, 51pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse pistol, Pulse rifle . 5x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [5 PL, 51pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse pistol, Pulse rifle . 5x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle ++ Total: [31 PL, 501pts] ++
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
New Custodes article up, this time on strategems: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/01/19/adeptus-custodes-preview-part-4-stratagemsgw-homepage-post-2/ Some fun stuff in there- an Alpha Legion style ability to deny your opponent Slay the Warlord by moving it to another character, an ability to reduce the movement on a single enemy unit by D6 if they're within 12" of a Custodes unit, and 1 CP ability to give a full unit +1 attacks in the fight phase all seem like the more interesting options.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
I'm liking the fact that you can effectively deny enemy deep strikers the charge with the Tanglefoot Grenade or pretty much make it impossible for units from falling back out of range from combat with Allarus Terminators. Concussion Grenades also makes charging with them much safer. Shoulder the Mantle is also great because unlike I Am Alpharius, you can actually choose your Warlord Trait instead of randomly generating it. So far I'm liking these strategems a lot and considering most Custodes armies are going to typically be 4 CP or 6 CP at most, they're gonna be burning through them pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
Mr. Funktastic posted:I'm liking the fact that you can effectively deny enemy deep strikers the charge with the Tanglefoot Grenade or pretty much make it impossible for units from falling back out of range from combat with Allarus Terminators. Concussion Grenades also makes charging with them much safer. Shoulder the Mantle is also great because unlike I Am Alpharius, you can actually choose your Warlord Trait instead of randomly generating it. So far I'm liking these strategems a lot and considering most Custodes armies are going to typically be 4 CP or 6 CP at most, they're gonna be burning through them pretty quickly. I'm guessing a lot of Custodes players will be running a second batallion with Guard or something to act as a CP battery. That has a side effect of nicely taking care of the long range AT issue pure Custodes will have.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:10
|
|
|
Vypers seem to be out of stock, so my 2000 pt Saim Hann army looks like this now: ++ Supreme Command Detachment +1CP (Aeldari - Craftworlds) [47 PL, 924pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + Craftworld Attribute: Saim-Hann: Wild Host Gametype: Matched + Lord of War + Wraithknight [27 PL, 532pts]: Starcannon, Starcannon, Two Heavy Wraithcannons + HQ + Autarch Skyrunner [6 PL, 112pts]: Banshee Mask, Laser Lance, Power sword, Twin Shuriken Catapult Farseer Skyrunner [7 PL, 140pts]: 1. Guide, 4. Executioner, Shuriken Pistol, Singing Spear, Twin Shuriken Catapult Farseer Skyrunner [7 PL, 140pts]: 2. Doom, 6. Mind War, Shuriken Pistol, Singing Spear, Twin Shuriken Catapult ++ Outrider Detachment +1CP (Aeldari - Craftworlds) [51 PL, 1068pts] ++ + Flyer + Hemlock Wraithfighter [10 PL, 210pts]: 2. Embolden/Horrify, Spirit Stones + No Force Org Slot + Craftworld Attribute: Saim-Hann: Wild Host + Heavy Support + Fire Prism [9 PL, 200pts]: Crystal Targeting Matrix, Shuriken Cannon, Spirit Stones, Star Engines, Vectored Engines + HQ + Autarch Skyrunner [6 PL, 108pts]: 5: Mark of the Incomparable Hunter, Laser Lance, Mandiblasters, Shimmerplume of Achillrial, Twin Shuriken Catapult, Warlord + Fast Attack + Swooping Hawks [6 PL, 134pts] . 9x Swooping Hawk: 9x Lasblaster . Swooping Hawk Exarch: Sunrifle (INDEX) Vypers [4 PL, 80pts] . Vyper: Bright Lance, Shuriken Cannon Windriders [4 PL, 84pts] . 3x Windrider - Shuriken Cannon: 3x Shuriken Cannon Windriders [4 PL, 84pts] . 3x Windrider - Shuriken Cannon: 3x Shuriken Cannon Windriders [4 PL, 84pts] . 3x Windrider - Shuriken Cannon: 3x Shuriken Cannon Windriders [4 PL, 84pts] . 3x Windrider - Shuriken Cannon: 3x Shuriken Cannon ++ Total: [98 PL, 1992pts] ++ Created with BattleScribe Some questions regarding rules, though - since my Jetbikes are fast attack and I have no troop options for this army, would I be able to hold objectives? At some point i'm going to get some Guardians and Wave Serpents, but I like the idea of this list as it is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Anything can hold objectives, but in most mono faction detachments, troops have priority when determining who has control.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
Exception is flyers. Boots on the Ground means flyers cant hold objectives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:51
|
|
|
Why does your non-warlord autarch have both a power sword and laser lance? I like running mine with the index loadout of fusion gun, laser lance and banshee mask to deny overwatch,
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:It is, but the problem is that currently, units fight twice per battle round--once in their turn and again in the following turn if they are still engaged. If you just do alternating activations in movement shooting and keep one combat phase as-is, you reduce the effectiveness of close combat units by almost 50%. Your point about leaders is a good one, and one of the first changes I'd make for alternating activation would be to bring back the "Independent Character" rule, which allows leaders to be attached to a particular unit. If a leader is attached to a unit, he does not get a separate activation slot, instead activating when the unit activates. If he's not attached (and thus providing an activation slot to the army), then he's a valid individual target for any attack. So yeah, you can hang your Marine Captain out there by himself to give you an extra activation slot, increasing the chances that one of your chits will be drawn - but doing so has consequences for that leader's survivability. That is a useful and interesting choice to make in play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Ilor posted:What I'm trying to explain is that you don't do what you're saying. You alternate activation by unit. Once activated, that unit does everything it would normally do in a turn (move, shoot, assault, psychic poo poo, whatever). If charges into close combat, that close combat is run just like it is now - both sides fight. Then, when the unit that got charged next activates, it is already in close combat and thus melee is fought again. This preserves the "double effectiveness" of close combat troops. I see what you're getting at a bit more clearly now, but your system requires much larger, more drastic changes to the game's rules, units, and points costs than keeping the phased approach, which is the major reason I suggested that over full single unit activations. You also haven't accounted for morale yet--if you wait until all double-combats are done to get a single morale check for the turn, you're going to end up with much larger blowouts. Generally, while I like the idea of attaching characters to squads in theory, the resulting Death Star practice is something I'd really want to avoid, and I think that auras are a better way to handle that and work better for stuff like Apothecaries and Warpsmiths. I don't think more vs. fewer activation slots isn't as interesting a choice as you think it is, particularly when targetable solo captains are so non-survivable you'd never see them in a game of moderate size. e: I think we're pushing for different goals. I'm suggesting a framework you could drop onto the existing game, and you're talking about redesigning the game from the ground-up. Which is fine, but not something I think will actually happen. TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
I'd like to return to terrain discussion. Looking to get terrain in my new game room ASAP, and I had originally ordered from GAMEMAT.EU, but in my haste didn't realize it was going to take over 2 months to receive the order. Now I am basically looking to cancel my order, and searching somewhere else for terrain. Originally I was willing to pay money to get my hands on pre-painted terrain, but waiting in excess of 2 months to receive is something I'm not willing to do, and would rather have unpainted terrain quickly and paint it in my own time than wait months with nothing in hand. Any recommendations? The easy build MDF terrain seems like a good choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
Why would you wait for morale? You don't wait for morale now do you? So why would you with alternating activation? After the end of the close combat, handle morale just like you would now. There's no difference between an alternating activation scheme where my charging unit is the last unit in the turn to activate and the current IGOUGO scheme where you go next. Similarly, there's no difference between my charging unit being the first unit in the turn to activate and the current IGOUGO scheme where I happen to be going before you. What alternating activation buys you is that a) alpha strikes aren't a thing anymore, and b) both players are more consistently engaged in the game (i.e. it's not, "Oh, it's your Ork/Tyranid movement phase? I'm gonna go get something to eat. Call me in an hour when you're ready to start shooting."). It also lets you play some interesting games with target priority, and mobility becomes more important (because you can't be guaranteed that your opponent's fast units will stand there like dopes while your entire army shoots them). Finally, I think your comments about points costs are probably overblown. Points costs in 40K are wild-assed guesses under the best of circumstances, but as it stands right now, units have to be costed under the Schroedinger's state of either they will or will not get the first turn. Yeah, a glass-cannon unit with a really high damage output might be very valuable if it goes first. But if it doesn't it's worthless. But that's already built into the game, because there's no way to guarantee the first turn. EDIT: No, I'm not talking about redesigning the game. What I'm saying is that you could do a per-unit alternating activation for 40K right now with almost no effort and it would produce a more engaging - and probably more balanced - gaming experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Uroboros posted:I'd like to return to terrain discussion. Looking to get terrain in my new game room ASAP, and I had originally ordered from GAMEMAT.EU, but in my haste didn't realize it was going to take over 2 months to receive the order. Now I am basically looking to cancel my order, and searching somewhere else for terrain. Originally I was willing to pay money to get my hands on pre-painted terrain, but waiting in excess of 2 months to receive is something I'm not willing to do, and would rather have unpainted terrain quickly and paint it in my own time than wait months with nothing in hand. I can send some extra stuff your way. Lemme see what I have sitting around that I'm not using. Have a couple of big Shrine of the Aquila painted wall sections I'm not using for anything that can be cobbled into some ruins
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
TWSS posted:Why does your non-warlord autarch have both a power sword and laser lance? I like running mine with the index loadout of fusion gun, laser lance and banshee mask to deny overwatch, I dunno, it's probably just an overlook from Battlescribe. He's not supposed to have the power sword. *Edit - I fixed it. Dropped the power sword & Laser Lance to give the 2nd, non warlord autarch a Fusion Gun. Zuul the Cat fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
Ilor posted:stuff Right now, Morale checks happen after 1 round of psychic powers, shooting, and combat. In your system, it'd happen after an additional round of combat, which means that, on average, units would have taken more casualties before making a morale check (and as a result, suffer more casualties). That's fine if it was intentional, but it doesn't seem like you've considered it. I'm well aware of what alternating activations buys, which is why I proposed a system that has alternating activations, but within the game's existing phases. Again, this is mostly to fit within the game's existing framework, which includes things like phase-based abilities and rules ("Use X during the shooting phase" or "Until your next psychic phase, Y happens"). You can tell me you aren't talking about redesigning the game, but then I don't think you've considered that it actually takes a lot of effort and rewriting to make your version work, which is fine, but in my experience a 'dead end' with regard to actually getting people to play that way and test stuff out. Re: Points costs, given that we've already had several revisions to unit costs, based on feedback from the community, I think it's disingenuous to call them "wild-rear end guesses under the best of circumstances." Note that this does not mean that I think that everything in the game is appropriately costed. But if you change the way characters work at a fundamental level, you will absolutely need to revisit the points cost for every character in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
  Adepticon is in less than 9 weeks! Who all is going, and what events are you signed up for? WOM and I are flying up, and we're in the Thursday Gentlemen's and Friday Friendly. Here's my log to build and paint, going to be a busy two months! 
MasterSlowPoke fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:Right now, Morale checks happen after 1 round of psychic powers, shooting, and combat. In your system, it'd happen after an additional round of combat, which means that, on average, units would have taken more casualties before making a morale check (and as a result, suffer more casualties). Your unit activates. It charges my unit, meeting its charge distance and initiating melee combat. Your models fight and my models fight, just like they do for close combat now. You inflict more casualties than me. I take a morale test, possibly suffering further casualties. With me so far? It's no different than the current turn structure, where a morale check happens after 1 set of movement, shooting, psychics, and close combat. Now let's say the next chit out of the bag is mine, and for sake of argument, let's say that the ONLY unit I have left to activate is the unit you charged. OK, cool, I activate that unit. I take my movement phase - I could elect to move out of close combat (new in 8th Edition), but that has some consequences that I don't want to invoke, so I stay put. I have to forego my shooting phase, because I'm in close combat. If I have any psychic abilities I can use that might benefit me here, great, I use them now. Now it's the close combat phase. My models fight and your models fight, just like they do in close combat now. Once again, you inflict more casualties than I do, so once again my unit is forced to take a morale test. Note that the frequency at which my models are rolling CC dice against yours and vice versa - as well as the number of morale tests to fight phases is exactly the same as it is under the current rules. Again, I'm NOT talking about alternate activation within a particular phase (although that is interesting - but like you say, a more complete re-write), but rather alternate activation by which a single unit completes its entire turn's worth of activities (move, shoot, psychic, assault, etc). This doesn't break any phase-based stuff. "Until your next psychic phase" means exactly that - until the psychic phase of that unit's next activation. What happens between then and now (how many other units activate and in which order) is largely irrelevant. If anything, unit-based alternation makes bubbles and buffs more interesting, because the order in which you activate your units matters. You might want to use your Farseer's abilities to enhance the performance of a nearby unit, but you might decide that you don't want to risk that nearby unit getting shot at again before it gets its (now enhanced) activation. You might be in the same boat with your bubble-buff - You need to move your Kataphrons to line up a shot on a really juicy enemy target, but if they do that, they're out of Cawl's bubble. Do you move up Cawl first, and gamble you'll draw another activation chit and be able to use those Kataphrons before the enemy moves (or uses) the juicy target? Decisions, decisions - ergo, a more engaging and interesting game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Have you ever played a game of 8th? It's pretty easy to see why you're mistaken, and it'd take almost as much time to play one game as it takes to read one of your posts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Ilor posted:Argh. No. You're still not understanding what I'm saying, so let me see if I can put it differently. So in your system, units take multiple morale checks every turn? That's what it seems like, based on how you've worded this. e: Also despite your claims, in your system, if I activate 2 units and fight a unit of yours, your unit might fight an additional time, because it gets to fight every time it's charged. I activate, shoot, charge, fight, you fight back, then you activate, stay in combat, fight. Then I activate another unit, shoot, charge your guys, fight, and your dudes fight back again. Now they've got in 3 rounds of fighting in one turn. It seems like you aren't reading my posts though. I understand what you're advocating for. I *am* advocating for alternating activations within phases, and it seems like you keep ignoring that, and it's much, much less rewrite work TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:
I'll be there! In for the Gentlemen's and Friendly, too. and Blood Bowl on Sat and Sun! I also have a bunch of poo poo to paint 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:
I couldn't finish this in 2 months... I've already given up on having a GT quality list ready, and just decided to focus on Zone Mortalis and Team Tournament. Also, PM me your info so we can do a goon meet up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Ilor posted:My models fight and your models fight, just like they do in close combat now. Once again, you inflict more casualties than I do, so once again my unit is forced to take a morale test. That's not how combat works. Your models fight once per turn, not once every time a unit is activated against them. If I have 2 units in combat with your one, both of my units will fight once and your unit will fight once.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:
Hmm this list looks familiar That is a bunch to get through in 2 months.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
The Sex Cannon posted:I'll be there! In for the Gentlemen's and Friendly, too. and Blood Bowl on Sat and Sun! You still want to get together and do an assembly day?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 20:17
|
|