Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.

98 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
8 posts
5,513 battles

Hello, Max here! After lots of 'gentle' consideration about the current status of tier 10 game play (I have a Des Moines, and an Izumo and regularly get placed in tier 10 matches) I have come to a range of conclusions about the state of the game at the higher tiers. Without discussing too much I would quickly like to say unless you're a Yamato, Shimakaze or an aircraft carrier you're going to way of HMS Hood.

Cruisers 

You're effectively the prison [edited]of tier 10 game play. Think you can dodge torpedoes? 15 of them? Tier 10 cruisers are naturally very heavy and are not as manoeuvrable as their predecessors. They say you're the natural predator of DD's but that is not the case (feel like every game you're hunting for Red October), you never detect them and guess what happens when you do? Yes SMOKE. Destroyers stay at such a great range you N E V E R detect them and when you do it's because you're in the centre of the map and you're being focused more than the Yamato at the Leyte Gulf. 

Yes all the cruisers have insane AA, does it matter? No. The majority of the time they're consistently destroyed before you even see a squadron of 'Skill-planes™'. How often do you really have carrier games and when you do, do the 'skill-planes' ever come closer? Nope

Battleships

If you're not a Yamato is there really any point? The Montana is great at killing cruisers but by the time you see them they'll all be detonated by e v e r y t h i n g else. If you're a Battleship, fair play to you being able to deal with the mental strain of torpedoes. I'm not surprised your ship isn't triggered every time it sees one. I'm tired of feeling like the USS Arizona every damn game. I can't take any moor.

Destroyers 

You're an American destroyer and you're meant to be destroy other DD's right, you get shot once and lose all your guns

Even in a destroyer a 15 torpedo spread from a Shimakaze isn't that easy to dodge, you'll get decked. And seriously 6 Km detection range on the Japanese destroyers? And the matchmaking associated with tier 10 seems to be destroyer spam over and over and over again. Each game getting 5/6 destroyers on each team is seriously draining

Carriers

'Skill-planes™'

Conclusion

What are your thoughts on the current state of tier 10 game play? I'd love to hear your opinions and suggestions. I know this seems to be over the top but I seriously think there are some issues with tier 10. After all did you really grind ships like the Colorado, Karlsruhe and the Izumo for this?  Feel like you need some anchor management? Drop a comment, if youve ever been involved with tier 10 game-play - I would love to hear you  

Edit: I hope in the future that the radar consumable is implemented into higher tier gameplay, however I feel that this would encourage long range 'camping dd's' even more, however I welcome change at higher tier and look forward to seeing how it affects gameplay. At higher ranges I believe everyone will be able to predict, dodge and compensate for torp spam. 

If carrier games are more frequent at tier 10 the Montana will begin to show its strengths over he Yamato, more carriers would focus the Yamato over the Montana due to its relatively weak AA, restoring some sense of satisfaction to Montana admirals. 

Without being to use your AA some significant strengths of certain ships are neglected. For example Japanese cruisers have torpedoes in some sort of attempt to create balance, IJN cruisers lack the AA firepower of American cruisers, which in my opinion creates unbalance due to the fact that IJN cruisers can utilise their strengths in certain sitatuions where American cruisers can use their strength due to the luck of matchmaking.... 

Edited by maxisrichrich
  • Cool 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2D]
Supertester, Beta Tester
763 posts
5,903 battles

Well you made a few points which are actually facts. Solutions to make high tier games more pleasant can be tricky.

 

I think one good start would be to cap the amount of DDs in each team. Recently I had plenty of games with up to 6 DDs in each team and most of them where Shimas. The amount of torp hell they can cause is hilarious. 

 

Spotting xp for Torps,ships planes could encourage people to help out more. Same for shooting down planes. 

 

We have to see what the cruiser radar will achieve in high tiers. 

 

Anyway. Not every tier 10 game is bad and time will tell what's gonna happen. Game development is a constant process. If you look at WoT things took a while to get settled. It's not perfect though. Anyway someday we will have some sort of clan wars where t10 will be the way to go. 

 

I only focus on t8 with the aim to unlock t10 for the day when cw arrives.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,102 posts
2,442 battles

I fully agree, although (or maybe just because) i don´t own any ship on the live server above my Tirpitz. However, somehow my Tirpitz must have accidetially been equipped with a "tier X" badge on it´s delivery, since i usually get matched against Yamatos and Shimas. The one out of X times i end up "top tier", the enemy team usually gets stuffed with tier 8 IJN DDs (which boost up to 15km torpedo range), so basically, all i experience in high tier PvP, no matter if i take my Tirpitz, or go for a tier X ride on a testbed, i end up in "torpedoes everywhere". I totally stopped the grind past tier 7, since any ship above tier 7 can end up in tier 10 games.

The game is basically dead for me, since 9 out of 10 tier 8+ games are just pure frustration. The DDs with their long range torping add to the situation, but the large maps and the long range sniping of any BB up from tier 8 doesn´t make it better aswell.

However, i can understand it. There is just no point to lead an attack in a BB, nor going for a scouting mission in a CA, no matter the backup from your team (which is usuall a "we are with you and turn around, as soon as we get shot"). All you end up with is a huge repair bill. Team battles might be a difference, but tier 8+ random battles are no fun at all.

A better economy, smaller maps, a torpedo range limit at 10km and a balance change to BBs for more short range fights and there might still be some hope for this game, if all of this comes at once.

Till then, there is no need or reason to "grind" for ships above tier 7. Yamato and Shimakaze are powefull and the only bearable ships (from my point of view), but alone the way to them and the time you have to endure at tier 8 and 9, fighting tier 10 battles, isn´t worth it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles

 

 After all did you really grind ships like the Colorado, Karlsruhe and the Izumo for this?  Feel like you need some anchor management? Drop a comment! 

 

colorado is actually good ship. dont put it in same sentence with karl..

 

also cruisers have sonar for smoke.

 

my problem with t10 games are more about players than ships. sniping from 20+km, border hugging, second line torping, selfish cv. all basic player problems you see on lower tiers are only magnified on t10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
613 posts
6,393 battles

A cap on dd's per team is needed as it can be completely ridiculous right now.

Will have to wait and see how the radar changes things.

As for balance between ships at t10.

Yamato is just far superior to the Montana even now they have nerfed its heal.

Montanas guns have sod all accuracy and its armor is pathetic.

Example 1.

Engaging a Tirpitz bow to bow 3 salvos of AP do 0 damage while the Tirpitz hits me for 4k+ each time.

Example 2.

Scored 65 hits in one game every single shell was into broadsides of T7+T8 bb's not one citadel or incap. And yet first hit from a Colorado while I was angled hits my citadel.

Example 3.

5km From a Yamato who is Broadside. I put all 12 barrels into him aiming for underneath that 2nd turret. I get 10-15k damage no citadel.

Turn my bow ready for the return volley and shocker citadel through the bow 20k+.

Not once have I ever citadeled a Yamato in the Monty but have in the Amagi.

As for the Gearing that thing is a dam joke Shima looks at you and your turrets explode.

Or my fave which happened again today shell hits the water next to me no damage at all and yet a turret still decided it would go pop.

Shima is by far the better T10 dd including its guns. Killed a Fletcher with 3 salvos in my 2nd game in a Shima such balance.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PLO]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
5,408 posts

I have played 384 games at tier 10 so far, with Midway, and i'm enjoying it. Long waiting time in queue is the only issue for me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester
385 posts

The cruisers essentially need to be less powerful against battleships (nerf fires ffs) and buff their effectiveness/counter abilities against destroyers (the upcoming radar is a good start).

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8 posts
5,513 battles

All jokes aside i feel like tier 10 needs to be altered in a way which it is much more enjoyable. Referring to another post discussing the 'torpedo spam' which is very frequent in every game. However I was in game earlier and another team-mate pointed out to be that the only thing the majority of people will the strength to grind is destroyers. They're fast paced, rewarding and they don't cost a huge amount to repair. I started playing my Des Moines 40 or so games ago with 40,000 credits - I know have just over 1,000,000 (with 500k coming from a mission) and i wouldn't say i'm a bad player(ive received around 90k experience), I also have premium and the majority of the games i play i loose money, its very frustrating not have more rewards from tier 10 game play.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
1,952 posts
6,062 battles

Destroyers 

You're an American destroyer and you're meant to be destroy other DD's right, you get shot once and lose all your guns

Even in a destroyer a 15 torpedo spread from a Shimakaze isn't that easy to dodge, you'll get decked. And seriously 6 Km detection range on the Japanese destroyers? And the matchmaking associated with tier 10 seems to be destroyer spam over and over and over again. Each game getting 5/6 destroyers on each team is seriously draining

 

 

Well you are missing a few things here.

USN DDs can have low detection ranges similar to IJN DDs, Benson and Fletcher ~5.8km. Gearing ~5.9km, Fubuki ~5.5km, Kagero ~5.3km, Shimakaze ~5.9km.

USN DDs also take on a more torpedo boat role like IJN DDs at high tiers, starting from the Mahan you can stealth torp and the Fletcher has some of the best torpedoes in the game (havent reached the Gearing yet but the torpedoes dont look bad).

Losing guns varies from game to game, IJN guns are invincible either and are lost quite easily as well. Numerous times I have have turrets destroyed and no HP damage in IJN DDs. This isnt a USN DD problem it is a DD problem.

Dodging torpedoes is less about reaction and more about prediction. It is best to try and have you bow/stern pointed in the direction of incoming torpedoes (this is less doable in bigger ships). When engaging other DDs turn towards or away from him in between shots especially if you are broadside on. Vigilance is also available if you need more help.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I401]
Beta Tester
1,002 posts
8,019 battles

More carrier would solve all problems, CA anti-air would be more useful, there would be less DDs and less stationary Yamatos floating around.

Edited by kfa
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8 posts
5,513 battles

 

Colorado is actually good ship. dont put it in same sentence with karl..

 

also cruisers have sonar for smoke.

 

my problem with t10 games are more about players than ships. sniping from 20+km, border hugging, second line torping, selfish cv. all basic player problems you see on lower tiers are only magnified on t10

is there any use in using sonar when you're praying for that one game with a carrier and cant wait to decimate his planes, the one thing you've been waiting to use? Sonar is only a viable option on German cruisers in my opinion...

 

Colorado was used more for an example, it isnt bad at all 

 

I agree though, youd expect the majority of players to be more experienced in the way they play, in terms of team work which can be very enjoyable and rewarding i think wargaming should try their best to encourage it 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles

is there any use in using sonar when you're praying for that one game with a carrier and cant wait to decimate his planes, the one thing you've been waiting to use? Sonar is only a viable option on German cruisers in my opinion...

 

 

 

well i always look at the problem like this. in every game i can expect at least 2-6 dd. in every 5-10 games i can expect cv. so my sonar can be potentially effective for 10-30 ships compared to one time i see one cv. sonar>def AA (unless playing low tiers where there are lot of cv)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
613 posts
6,393 battles

 

Well you are missing a few things here.

USN DDs can have low detection ranges similar to IJN DDs, Benson and Fletcher ~5.8km. Gearing ~5.9km, Fubuki ~5.5km, Kagero ~5.3km, Shimakaze ~5.9km.

USN DDs also take on a more torpedo boat role like IJN DDs at high tiers, starting from the Mahan you can stealth torp and the Fletcher has some of the best torpedoes in the game (havent reached the Gearing yet but the torpedoes dont look bad).

Losing guns varies from game to game, IJN guns are invincible either and are lost quite easily as well. Numerous times I have have turrets destroyed and no HP damage in IJN DDs. This isnt a USN DD problem it is a DD problem.

Dodging torpedoes is less about reaction and more about prediction. It is best to try and have you bow/stern pointed in the direction of incoming torpedoes (this is less doable in bigger ships). When engaging other DDs turn towards or away from him in between shots especially if you are broadside on. Vigilance is also available if you need more help.

Fletcher is a far better dd than the Gearshite.

Faster more agile with higher damage torps that reload quicker.

Gearing has a hp advantage and a dpm advantage until it gets hit and loses both front turrets.

Not lost a turret once yet in my Shima and having now played both I can comprehensively state the Shima is far superior.

Once you get the Gearing you will understand there is only one dd truly worth using at T10.

As for vigilence I actually take that on all my ships. Great for both safety of your team and yourself.

 

Edit for lies don't have vigilence on my IJN dd's with faster torps being the better option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8 posts
5,513 battles

Losing guns varies from game to game, IJN guns are invincible either and are lost quite easily as well. Numerous times I have have turrets destroyed and no HP damage in IJN DDs. This isnt a USN DD problem it is a DD problem.

 

I agree with you on the basis that you can easily dodge torpedoes just by predicting them, frequently I kill destroyers by simply going as close to them as I can. However Japanese guns are not invincible but they're not the primary way of causing damage to the enemy team, not in the same way that the US destroyers are dependant on their guns. Without their guns they're rendered useless in most cases, especially with the Gearing - if it loses one turret its effectively loses a third of its fire-power. 

More carrier would solve all problems, CA anti-air would be more useful, there would be less DDs and less stationary Yamatos floating around.

If Wargaming encouraged more carrier play it would solve a lot of issues and make the game much more immersive and realistic as well as solving the notorious DD issue. I think more carrier gameplay would encourage better teamwork in the sense that battleships would value cruisers much more and vice versa...  

 

well i always look at the problem like this. in every game i can expect at least 2-6 dd. in every 5-10 games i can expect cv. so my sonar can be potentially effective for 10-30 ships compared to one time i see one cv. sonar>def AA (unless playing low tiers where there are lot of cv)

Logically speaking yes using sonar would be better and more practical in terms of numbers to detect DD's and evade torpedoes, however personally for me in the Des Moines with my insane 100/100 AA using the anti air fire perk is so incredibly satisfying not being able to use it in a selected game would be unsatisfying. Before searching for a game I hope that I get a carrier game... As well as this not using my AA perk means I wouldn't effect the drop of enemy carriers on friendly ships.. 

I feel like more carriers would be much better, as well as making them less of a grind and easier to play... (without making them overpowered) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KHAB]
Players
3 posts
2,384 battles

I think the main problem is how easy it is for some DD's to just spam torps without being detected. Sonar isn't good enough to find DD's, even the superior German sonar only increases acquisition to 5km, I hardly ever find myself that close to a destroyer - and just sailing up to smoke to seek them out isn't exactly a good idea. The new radar consumable might help to fix this, though it should probably be given to all cruiser lines. A DD limit for each team would help also, along with some buffs to gunboat destroyers (Maybe they could have a tweaked sonar consumable so they can hunt for enemy DD's hiding in smoke).

 

Just my 2 cents from a disgruntled Hindenburg owner.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles

 

I feel like more carriers would be much better, as well as making them less of a grind and easier to play... (without making them overpowered) 

 

5.1-> cv nerf

5.2-> i dont remember but probably cv nerf

5.3->cv nerf

5.4-> probably another cv nerf

 

so more cv isnt likely to happen

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
613 posts
6,393 battles

 

5.1-> cv nerf

5.2-> i dont remember but probably cv nerf

5.3->cv nerf

5.4-> probably another cv nerf

 

so more cv isnt likely to happen

Carriers needed to be nerfed they were bloody ridiculous.

However they have also had buffs like smaller spread and higher damage db's for example.

Problem with cv's is they are hard to balance and the difference between good and bad cv players is huge.

CV is the only class where you know if yours is bad your team are most likely screwed.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
Players
2,949 posts
14,953 battles

A cap on dd's per team is needed as it can be completely ridiculous right now.

Will have to wait and see how the radar changes things.

As for balance between ships at t10.

Yamato is just far superior to the Montana even now they have nerfed its heal.

Montanas guns have sod all accuracy and its armor is pathetic.

Example 1.

Engaging a Tirpitz bow to bow 3 salvos of AP do 0 damage while the Tirpitz hits me for 4k+ each time.

Example 2.

Scored 65 hits in one game every single shell was into broadsides of T7+T8 bb's not one citadel or incap. And yet first hit from a Colorado while I was angled hits my citadel.

Example 3.

5km From a Yamato who is Broadside. I put all 12 barrels into him aiming for underneath that 2nd turret. I get 10-15k damage no citadel.

Turn my bow ready for the return volley and shocker citadel through the bow 20k+.

Not once have I ever citadeled a Yamato in the Monty but have in the Amagi.

As for the Gearing that thing is a dam joke Shima looks at you and your turrets explode.

Or my fave which happened again today shell hits the water next to me no damage at all and yet a turret still decided it would go pop.

Shima is by far the better T10 dd including its guns. Killed a Fletcher with 3 salvos in my 2nd game in a Shima such balance.

 

its RNG mate. I gave to a yamato 30+k damage with my monti. Its full RNG. you see broadside, shoot and bam 30+k. next match the same situation, 4k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
Players
2,949 posts
14,953 battles

 

5.1-> cv nerf

5.2-> i dont remember but probably cv nerf

5.3->cv nerf

5.4-> probably another cv nerf

 

so more cv isnt likely to happen

actually 5.3 was no CV nerf. the nerfs came with 5.1. 

i suggest you to watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWA9Y2azUE8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,586 posts
7,303 battles

Carriers needed to be nerfed they were bloody ridiculous.

However they have also had buffs like smaller spread and higher damage db's for example.

Problem with cv's is they are hard to balance and the difference between good and bad cv players is huge.

CV is the only class where you know if yours is bad your team are most likely screwed.

 

 

I do wonder if CV really have a place in the game in its current form.

 

 

Because players aren't fighting CV directly and just rely upon automated AA it just becomes a question of whether you have a high enough AA DPM, if not a BB is virtually guaranteed to take hits no matter what they do.

 

 

CV are by definition either OP or UP, there isn't a sensible middle ground, either you can land hits without any risk to yourself in which case you are OP or you can't in which case you are UP.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4,180 posts
11,672 battles

I'm puzzled though: your top ship is a T9 CA (Baltimore). Av scores are something I could only dream off... Same as your T10 Des Moines. Very reasonable scores... I fail to see your problem. The thing you say have a point IMO: but I mainly blame it to my incompetence. My only T10 is the Montana. I've tried 6 battles in which I was the laughing stock in 4 of them. To be frankly honost: I'm scared off. all those battles were the same for me: whenever I ventured out of the AB of IJ line I'm butchered by the Shima torp spam wall (I'm per definiton on the non-6 Shima vs 2 other T8 DD side). In the cases I miracoulsly survive that I'm being hamered to the bottom by the Yamato (also per definition one of the 2 vs 0 in my disadvantage) by looking funny at me. While I'm shooting [edited] HE at him in order to MAYBE raise 1 eyebrow hair of impression.... 

I can't say I'm frustrated though: it bored me back to the T1 - 8 range. I'm @ those non-CV, non-USSR DD ranges with the rest of the ships, have 300K free XP and I'm in no rush to climb any higher. I think I would be as bored to have a Shima/ Yama and pratically do nothing other than to look funny at the reds to annihilate them: I want a nerve wrecking, retina detaching and extremely aggresive fight! Don't care if I win or lose as long as it has those 3 elements in them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
1,952 posts
6,062 battles

Fletcher is a far better dd than the Gearshite.

Faster more agile with higher damage torps that reload quicker.

Gearing has a hp advantage and a dpm advantage until it gets hit and loses both front turrets.

Not lost a turret once yet in my Shima and having now played both I can comprehensively state the Shima is far superior.

Once you get the Gearing you will understand there is only one dd truly worth using at T10.

As for vigilence I actually take that on all my ships. Great for both safety of your team and yourself.

 

Edit for lies don't have vigilence on my IJN dd's with faster torps being the better option.

 

Well I'll make my opinion of the Gearing when I get to it. I also plan on keeping the Fletcher anyway.

I have lost turrets plenty of times in the Shimakaze, Kagero and Fubuki. But experiences differ.

 

I agree with you on the basis that you can easily dodge torpedoes just by predicting them, frequently I kill destroyers by simply going as close to them as I can. However Japanese guns are not invincible but they're not the primary way of causing damage to the enemy team, not in the same way that the US destroyers are dependant on their guns. Without their guns they're rendered useless in most cases, especially with the Gearing - if it loses one turret its effectively loses a third of its fire-power. 

 

IJN DD guns are your best weapon against enemy DDs. I play quite aggressively and use my guns often so I might be placing a higher value on them than most other IJN DD captains. USN DDs start using their torpedoes more at higher tiers. They become your primary weapon against larger ships (mainly BBs). Most of the damage I deal in the Benson and Fletcher come from the torpedoes. Losing guns definitely means I play more passively, not being able to deal with enemy DDs is a problem, and is my least favourite mechanic in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles

Carriers needed to be nerfed they were bloody ridiculous.

However they have also had buffs like smaller spread and higher damage db's for example.

Problem with cv's is they are hard to balance and the difference between good and bad cv players is huge.

CV is the only class where you know if yours is bad your team are most likely screwed.

 

problem with cv was never that cv were OP (cv were meant to be OP vs single targets), but lack of teamplay that could counter cv. i remember before 5.1 when ppl were actually providing AA cover, and nowadays i dont see any of it. every player for himself...

 

actually 5.3 was no CV nerf. the nerfs came with 5.1. 

i suggest you to watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWA9Y2azUE8

 

5.3 had cv nerf

t8/t9/t10 us cv nerfed

AA on t8+ was buffed (indirect cv nerf)

i think there was third thing they nerfed in there, but dont remember now.

 

seeing flamu having a good game on lex doesnt mean cv werent nerfed. well they were slightly buffed on low tiers, but they were definitely nerfed on high tiers. yes having a strike setup can do lot of damage, but having non retarted enemy cv player can easily counter strike setup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
613 posts
6,393 battles

 

its RNG mate. I gave to a yamato 30+k damage with my monti. Its full RNG. you see broadside, shoot and bam 30+k. next match the same situation, 4k.

I agree RNG plays a part but it happens way too often for it to be just RNG.

I mean 83 games in Montana and not once have I got a citadel on a Yamato.

And just to be sure yes I mean hitting its broadside.

While the Yamato can regularly citadel my Montana regardless of angle.

That is not just bad RNG the Montana is simply nowhere near as good.

The lack of balance makes for boring games with little variety in ships.

And to the poster that talks about low tier games and dd's. There is less of a problem due to torp ranges simple really.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
613 posts
6,393 battles

 

problem with cv was never that cv were OP (cv were meant to be OP vs single targets), but lack of teamplay that could counter cv. i remember before 5.1 when ppl were actually providing AA cover, and nowadays i dont see any of it. every player for himself...

 

 

5.3 had cv nerf

t8/t9/t10 us cv nerfed

AA on t8+ was buffed (indirect cv nerf)

i think there was third thing they nerfed in there, but dont remember now.

 

seeing flamu having a good game on lex doesnt mean cv werent nerfed. well they were slightly buffed on low tiers, but they were definitely nerfed on high tiers. yes having a strike setup can do lot of damage, but having non retarted enemy cv player can easily counter strike setup

Lol Midway was an absolute joke with nigh on invincible planes and manual drops that gave 0 chance of avoidance.

Essentially you are saying that cv class should be op. It is already bad enough as it is if you have a bad cv player. And you think they should be more op just no.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×