Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
leitmotiv

Anthropomorphic Controls in BoS

Anthropomorphic Controls in BoS  

354 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to have Anthropomorphic Controls in BoS (This feature ensures that the pilot can't do things in the cockpit that a real pilot couldn't do considering they only have two hands)

    • 1. Yes
      134
    • 2, No
      218


Recommended Posts

I would like it,

I like that my airplane is simulated realistically in game so i wont also that my pilots behavior or limitations in RL are simulated realistically in game.

Edited by Yaklover
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

        In theory it's ok, but in reality it is a major pain in the a$$. Every time you have a little spike in controls here and there in some axis ,or touch some button it messes up with your controls.

 

 Imagine this: You take a fully loaded Ju-88, warm it up, take off from far away, fly half an hour to the target, get bounced twice, line up the damaged plane with the target, open the bomb bays, and when you press the release button nothing happens.  :dash:    You moved some random control a very little bit without knowing and the game won't let you press that release button.

 

It gets old quick.

Edited by Jaws2002
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in case of multi-crew airplanes this should not be on effect as player has to control minimum two people in airplane at same time (pilot, bombardier), so from the start its not the real situation.

 

small mistakes happening in CloD with this feature, could be resolved with better programming, small not intentional movements could be eliminated by some min dead band what will not trigger this feature to react.

 

If the feature is programmed good then it will work with no bugs.

 

hardest job is for player to adapt to this restriction of having only 2 hands in game instead 3-5 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bomb release conflict happened to me both with bombers and jabo. This feature caused a lot of problems in Clod. You had no idea what was happening. A lot of players wasted hours trying to figure out what was wrong with their controllers and why things don't work.

 

Even if you code it right, you then get the whining about plane A that had the switch x in one place, compared to another plane. For example in Spitfire you needed to switch hands immediately after take-off in order to raise the gear and flaps.

 

Too much headache for very little gain.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO it's allways a bad idea since it can't be "natural", it's not possible to have a feedback and understand intantaneously why an action doesn't work. It will allways disturb the player and bring nothing in "immersion" or "simulation". It can't replace the fact that you're not in a real cockpit with a specific organisation of intruments and controls with specific ergonomic and physical limitations. It can just bother the player with unatural and unintuitive limitations. It's not a question of good or bad programming... it's just a bad idea. There's no way to anticipate all the possibilities a pilot can use to act on the controls with both hands, feets, knees, or even other parts of his body.... possibilities which are different on each cokpit ergonomies.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think they still have time to add entirely new features three months away from the release date?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think they still have time to add entirely new features three months away from the release date?

 

it's more likely 6+ months until release of full game not just 3, but no i dont expect they can implement it in that time, but would like to see it added in some patches after game is out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

        In theory it's ok, but in reality it is a major pain in the a$$. Every time you have a little spike in controls here and there in some axis ,or touch some button it messes up with your controls.

 

 Imagine this: You take a fully loaded Ju-88, warm it up, take off from far away, fly half an hour to the target, get bounced twice, line up the damaged plane with the target, open the bomb bays, and when you press the release button nothing happens.  :dash:    You moved some random control a very little bit without knowing and the game won't let you press that release button.

 

It gets old quick.

 

You should probably jettison your bombs and rtb.  Otherwise you are unnecessarily risking the aircraft and the future missions it could perform. :P

 

Anyway, I like the anthropomorphic controls in Clod.  I don't have any joystick spiking problems so it has never been an issue, except it requires me to put a bit more forethought into what I am doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that you try to simulate controls in a certain, fifty years old aircraft, while all of us, have many different types of modern controllers, that we can map to our heart content. I don't think there are two of us that have controls setup exactly the same. Most of our sticks are light years ahead compared to the ww2 planes controls. I have bunch of buttons, sliders and rotaries at my finger tips. Why not use them.

      So, since we don't have the exact controls like in the original plane, how can you do this right?  You can't.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. It requires each cockpit be individually studied to identify what can and can't be operated in unison. Development time wasted that could be used in other areas that more people could enjoy.

Edited by FuriousMeow
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that you try to simulate controls in a certain, fifty years old aircraft, while all of us, have many different types of modern controllers, that we can map to our heart content. I don't think there are two of us that have controls setup exactly the same. Most of our sticks are light years ahead compared to the ww2 planes controls. I have bunch of buttons, sliders and rotaries at my finger tips. Why not use them.

      So, since we don't have the exact controls like in the original plane, how can you do this right?  You can't.

Yep!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no, simply because the feature was implemented in an earlier version of IL2 and although it work as designed it was just a bad idea and didn't give a realistic representation of the workload in the cockpit.

 

As a pilot in a real life aircraft you can interrupt the sequence of the tasks your performing as the situation dictates, the anthropomorphic controls in game as implemented simply didn't allow you to do that. Once you had started an action you couldn't interrupt the sequence and perform a different action. It was just unrealistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no, simply because the feature was implemented in an earlier version of IL2 and although it work as designed it was just a bad idea and didn't give a realistic representation of the workload in the cockpit.

 

As a pilot in a real life aircraft you can interrupt the sequence of the tasks your performing as the situation dictates, the anthropomorphic controls in game as implemented simply didn't allow you to do that. Once you had started an action you couldn't interrupt the sequence and perform a different action. It was just unrealistic.

 

Sure you can.  There's a split second delay in when you can start the next action, but what you are saying here is not accurate in regard to Clod.

 

This is another case where people call something that is more difficult "unrealistic" as a way to try to defeat it.  Better to admit that we don't always want everything as accurate as possible because we enjoy shortcuts in our computer games.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And on the flip side, just because it makes it more difficult does not make it more realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what situation does this actually make a difference. I mean realistically now, not theoretically.

 

I was actually interested in testing that feature in CloD, can't say i liked or disliked it, because it didn't really make a difference to me.

 

I also can't see how it would make things more "realistic".

 

See in a real plane, people would probably need to move their hand away from the throttle all the way over to the other side of the pit to the gear-up handle/switch. Would anthropomorphic controls simulate that in a flightsim? I don't think so, people could still put the gear-up command on their flightstick or throttle quadrant, making it way easier than the for the real pilot. He would just need to hold his throttle still for split second and click the gear-up button in the meantime. It would still be unrealistic.

 

So overall, when would this actually make a difference that can be justified by realism (if realism is the argument for implementing this, which i understand it is)?

 

It sounds good on paper, but it's an unnecessary feature imho. I also see no reason why they would need to implement it as a feature, if people really want to fly like that. Based on CloD, it would have no chance at all seeing use in MP (everyone with minor spiking issues on his hardware wouldn't join that server in the first place) and if you want to use it in SP, you can already do it. Just don't move prop-pitch and throttle at the same time (on planes that wouldn't allow it without losing control of either lever).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better to admit that we don't always want everything as accurate as possible because we enjoy shortcuts in our computer games.

Sorry, but I totally disagree with this particular issue.

When I'm piloting IRL, I don't have to think about where my hands are and if they are able to cope with multiple control or not. It's "natural". In a game, artificial antropomorphic limitations are unatural, because I have no way to know instantaneously why an action on control has no effect... first I will take some time to perceive there's no effect, then I wil think about and try to understand why (and there could be other reasons than the artificial antropomorphic limitations), and finally I will maybe get it and take "correct" (gamey) action. Of course, with experience and practice I will get quicker to do it and therefore gain an advantage on lesser experience user, it it would be a pure gamey experience, unrelated to real life piloting. It's not accurate nor simulationnist in any way. It's just "gamey".

If you want an accurate experience with ergonomy and antropomorphic limitations, there's only one possible way: build a cockpit (a generic one, or if you want some more accurate sensation, then build the cockipt of you favorite plane, and pilot only this one).

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:good:

No. It requires each cockpit be individually studied to identify what can and can't be operated in unison. Development time wasted that could be used in other areas that more people could enjoy.

 

 

In what situation does this actually make a difference. I mean realistically now, not theoretically.

 

I was actually interested in testing that feature in CloD, can't say i liked or disliked it, because it didn't really make a difference to me.

 

I also can't see how it would make things more "realistic".

 

See in a real plane, people would probably need to move their hand away from the throttle all the way over to the other side of the pit to the gear-up handle/switch. Would anthropomorphic controls simulate that in a flightsim? I don't think so, people could still put the gear-up command on their flightstick or throttle quadrant, making it way easier than the for the real pilot. He would just need to hold his throttle still for split second and click the gear-up button in the meantime. It would still be unrealistic.

 

So overall, when would this actually make a difference that can be justified by realism (if realism is the argument for implementing this, which i understand it is)?

 

It sounds good on paper, but it's an unnecessary feature imho. I also see no reason why they would need to implement it as a feature, if people really want to fly like that. Based on CloD, it would have no chance at all seeing use in MP (everyone with minor spiking issues on his hardware wouldn't join that server in the first place) and if you want to use it in SP, you can already do it. Just don't move prop-pitch and throttle at the same time (on planes that wouldn't allow it without losing control of either lever).

 

 

Sorry, but I totally disagree with this particular issue.

When I'm piloting IRL, I don't have to think about where my hands are and if they are able to cope with multiple control or not. It's "natural". In a game, artificial antropomorphic limitations are unatural, because I have no way to know instantaneously why an action on control has no effect... first I will take some time to perceive there's no effect, then I wil think about and try to understand why (and there could be other reasons than the artificial antropomorphic limitations), and finally I will maybe get it and take "correct" (gamey) action. Of course, with experience and practice I will get quicker to do it and therefore gain an advantage on lesser experience user, it it would be a pure gamey experience, unrelated to real life piloting. It's not accurate nor simulationnist in any way. It's just "gamey".

If you want an accurate experience with ergonomy and antropomorphic limitations, there's only one possible way: build a cockpit (a generic one, or if you want some more accurate sensation, then build the cockipt of you favorite plane, and pilot only this one).

I change my vote .. No .

Edited by Mustang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@FuriousMeow more people enjoy the simulation standards of WarThunder so why trying make somthing more and enhanced and call it real simulation, when somthing that basic and simple like WarThunder is now caled WW2 aircraft simulation.

 




hq_Matt For example:

 

Aircraft A has flaps on wheel so pilot had to rotate that wheel 4-7 sec with his hand to lover flaps, could not at same time increase power with that same hand if he wonted to lower them to desired position. In aircraft B pilot had to just pull some lever and flaps would go down automatically he lost only 1s with hes throttle managment hand on this so better designed function in hes airplane he has advantage in DF situation when he wonts to use flaps to turn hard. 

 

without anthropomorphic controls in game both A and B airplane react same like pilot needs only 2 hands to move stick lower flaps and decrise power in same time but in real for airplane A he would need 3 hands to do the same for 4-7 sec. As player dosent have the limitation of better or worse airplane control design,  why bother simulate correct CEM or FMs to 1940-45 standards if modern control system can give you same level of airplane control in good designed as in not so good design controls of airplanes.

 

just look at LaGG3 engine control levers pilot could not decrease/increase throttle and prop pitch at same time with only one hand , but in game i can without this function, in this case 109s design was better but you dont expiriance this.

Edited by Yaklover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just look at LaGG3 engine control levers pilot could not decrease/increase throttle and prop pitch at same time with only one hand , but in game i can without this function, in this case 109s design was better but you dont expiriance this.

 

 

Yak is better example then 109 as its auto-prop, on yak 1 with one hand you can at same time use prop-pitch and throttle so you can expiriance benefits of better disigne of engine control system

Edited by Yaklover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aircraft A has flaps on wheel so pilot had to rotate that wheel 4-7 sec with his hand to lover flaps, could not at same time increase power with that same hand if he wonted to lower them to desired position. In aircraft B pilot had to just pull some lever and flaps would go down automatically he lost only 1s with hes throttle managment hand on this so better designed function in hes airplane he has advantage in DF situation when he wonts to use flaps to turn hard.

And what does disallow the real pilot of the real plane A to rotate thee flap wheel during 2 seconds, stop doing it to increase power and then put it back to the flap wheel (it would probably take less than 1s IRL to switch hand from flap wheel to gaz lever, to push it a bit and to swap back the left hand to the flap wheel if he's well acustomized to the cockpit ergonomy)?

The anthropomorphic limitations, has they are usually implemented would disallow the player to do anything except moving the stick during these 4-7 seconds... which is totally unrealistic.

 

If you want to do something "more realistic", then change the controls for plane A (disallow slider for flaps): make that each time the "flap down" key is hit, then the flap wheel only moves by a certain amount (a fraction of rotation), as for IL2 manual landing gear for example.... but please, don't make it wrong by artificially building complex system of conditionnal anthropomorphic limitation about how the pilot is suppose to use his left and right hand, something that can't be done, and that will only add some artificial gamey experience to the game.

 

Note also that whatever you do, users with advanced input system like Cougar for example, will program their Hotas to take the best advantage of it. The more complex you do it, the more advantage they will gain on casual players with basic input equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, well your WT argument is a red herring.

 

How about this, notice how prop pitch, mixture, and throttle are all grouped together within fingers reach of each other? Usually with other in flight engine controls?

 

The throttle can be manipulated at the same time as mixture and/or prop pitch since these nice appendages on our hands have the added benefit of dexterity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aircraft A has flaps on wheel so pilot had to rotate that wheel 4-7 sec with his hand to lover flaps, could not at same time increase power with that same hand if he wonted to lower them to desired position. In aircraft B pilot had to just pull some lever and flaps would go down automatically he lost only 1s with hes throttle managment hand on this so better designed function in hes airplane he has advantage in DF situation when he wonts to use flaps to turn hard. 

Like i wrote, i can think of countless theoretical situations, where this could be a problem. But not practical ones. In this example, even with anomorphic controls, you would first move the throttle, which takes a quarter of a second. Then use your lever or button to lower the flaps without thinking about it. Much quicker and less cumbersome than it would ever be in a real plane. So, apart from people being forced to use throttle first and flaps afterwards, there's no added "realism" aspect by implementing anomorphic controls.

On the other hand, i could think of more situations where anomorphic control could be quite bothersome. Incase for a moment you do something that restrics/stops throttle movement ingame for instance, while you do move your real-world controller throttle in a different position. In that case, because that controller action would not get recognized ingame, your controller would be in a different postion than ingame throttle is. Not very statisfying imho, even if you should blame yourself for making a mistake by moving the throttle while you shouldn't have been possible to do that. So you have to move the throttle again to bring it up to make it match the current ingame setting, so that both are in the same positon. Yuk.

 

As for simultanious prop pitch and throttle movement, i'm not all too familiar with how it works on the soviet planes. However, simultanious action (or using the levers in wrong order) could lead to engine damage by detonation and overreving, depending on how quick pro pitch and throttle input would react on those planes. So it's something you most likely would need to avoid anyhow, regardless of anomorphic controls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like using a mouse to flip switches. Not realistic, just gimmicky. In real life no one fumbles for another object to manipulate or adjust switches and levers. Just the same as there aren't seconds of delay trying to adjust flaps and trim for landing. Quite often the pilot adjusts one then the other then goes back to the previous all in fractions of seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what does disallow the real pilot of the real plane A to rotate thee flap wheel during 2 seconds, stop doing it to increase power and then put it back to the flap wheel (it would probably take less than 1s IRL to switch hand from flap wheel to gaz lever, to push it a bit and to swap back the left hand to the flap wheel if he's well acustomized to the cockpit ergonomy)?

 

...

 

 

 

nothing stops you to do just that when its done correctly

Yes, well your WT argument is a red herring.

 

How about this, notice how prop pitch, mixture, and throttle are all grouped together within fingers reach of each other? Usually with other in flight engine controls?

 

The throttle can be manipulated at the same time as mixture and/or prop pitch since these nice appendages on our hands have the added benefit of dexterity.

 

 

in most airplanes yes, not in LaGG prop-pitch lever is below them, in yak 1 you can move them all with fingers of one hand as they were better placed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that goes to wasting dev time studying each cockpit to introduce limitations based on arbitrary guesses of how long it would take to operate a lever or wheel for something closer to gimmicky than simulating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question I have is how much of an advantage does not having this actually create? I don't like the idea as I feel it should more up to the player to how they want to map their controls (or creating a home cockpit, as suggested), but I'm open to it should it be done well. I don't have the greatest controllers, so I do suffer from occasional spikes and I'd rather not have an ultra sensitive form of this.

 

To me it sounds like over-complication as most controls are supposedly being modeled with an appropriate delay. I sit more in lobbying for having G restrictions/fatigue than whether or not I can simultaneously adjust my throttle, prop pitch and trim while maneuvering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure you can.  There's a split second delay in when you can start the next action, but what you are saying here is not accurate in regard to Clod.

 

This is another case where people call something that is more difficult "unrealistic" as a way to try to defeat it.  Better to admit that we don't always want everything as accurate as possible because we enjoy shortcuts in our computer games.

I run a HOTAS setup(Warthog - lots of period toggle switches) and a Bodnar based switch panel (more toggle switches) and 3 axis trim wheel box. The four devices are physically separated. I feel that actually having to trim your elevators (in a WWII Flight sim) using a ten turn pot is probably more realistic than having setup on the joystick hat switch.

 

I feel that I get a more realistic work load using those devices (Having to actually move my hands from one device to another, spinning trim wheels throwing physical switches etc) than artificially imposing them through software.

 

I choose to use my controllers the way I do because it gives me a more immersive experience in flying.

 

Maybe there are some people who would program macro's and arrange their systems to get an advantage? Well good luck to them, after all it is just a game and if winning is so important to them that's their business.

 

Looking at the poll result I guess I am not alone in my belief that unless something like the Anthropomorphic Controls is implemented correctly it's better not being there in the first place, or like that earlier installation of IL2 be placed in the options panel so it can be turned off by people who don't want to deal with it's issues.

 

Whats the Devs take on the Anthropomorphic Controls?

Edited by Skoshi_Tiger
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats the Devs take on the Anthropomorphic Controls?

Well, we're not making them.

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. It just make  even harder to  get new people to play the game. The absolute majority of people will not understand what is goign on and will simply  not play the game anymore

This  is one of those  things that   the realistic way is BAD for the community  and  for gameplay. I wonder  if peole that like this type of  stuff forced in game  would  like to  be forced to rebuy the game every time  their are killed in game....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Antroprmogshgsfph... Those control systems mentioned in the OP are IMRO a good sounding feature, but pretty redundant in reality if you take a deeper look at the issue. I think that before anthprghf... limited manipulation of controls you need to give me a few features:

 

1) Fully modeled physical cockpit for each of the planes with all switches in the right place and perfect force feedback

2) The exact physical sensations of flying a plane

3) Full resolution, infinite FPS and 180*120 degrees viewing area with lagless head tracking

 

* Stick and G-forces could be reduced to simulate me as someone who would actually be allowed anywhere near a real plane and some kind of icons would have to be used for the same reason, since no resolution can help my less than perfect vision.

 

The thing is, after those the athn... feature becomes completely redundant, because I'm already experiencing the plane as it is. Without the actual cockpit, all the instruments and the insanely brilliant viewing system that is the real human eye that helps me keep track of what's going on in the cockpit and around it you actually need unrealistic capabilities to offset the unavoidable loss of capability due to sitting in front of a computer.

 

I think this applies to many realism-related design decisions such as icons, zoom levels etc. You have to look at the big picture and try to model the whole experience and capabilities of a real pilot. If you just model every limitation in real world and just add those provided by the keyboard - computer screen environment on top, you will end up emphasizing the fact that you are in fact in front of a computer screen and not in a real plane. Or an extremely limited capability person flying a fighter plane, which to my knowledge wasn't very common. Wooden legs might be passable, but can you imagine Bader enlisting with terrible tunnel vision or for example the ability to feel which position most of his controllers are in or which ones of them he is actually currently manipulating with his hands?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 it it would be a pure gamey experience, unrelated to real life piloting.

+1

 

Sure smells like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like this feature so it can be migrated back to Rise of Flight - I'm tired of priming my guns while pulling multiple gees and flying inverted... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I think that this feature only caused problems in BoB as it was not really obvious if its "the feature" or some problem with the controller(s).

 

So no thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we're not making them.

Good.

Useless feature for a game, cant remember the feature was beloved in Cod ever, why not profitate of that expierience.

In beginning with AC enabled i wasnt sure if it is a bug or just a feature.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why we need it. I've only got two hands anyway, and one of those is on the joystick, so the other will either be holding the mouse or using the keyboard...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted NO !

 

I've experienced this kind of limitation with IL2 Cliffs of Dover.

Most of the time it provided results that didn't match with the reality (I'm a pilote for real and I know what its possible and what is not possible to do with two hands and two feet).

I prefer to trust the simers themselves to behave like real pilots and to perform as much as possible realistic sequences of actions.

If some pseudo simmers find any enjoyment to perform impossible simultaneous actions (because they have an up to date and sophisticated equipment), let them do !

They're just spoiling their own pleasure.

And as far as I am concerned, I've chosen to fly in a squad where we all share this point of view.

We trust each other and we know thant no one will try to cheat the others.

So far so so good !

 

An other point is that realistic AC (Anthropomorphic Controls) might be quite difficult and long to program.

I think that the dev team has many others more important concerns to deal with to make IL2 BOS the simulation we've been expecting for so many years.

Saving the efforts of AC programming for these concerns seems to be (IMMO) a better choice.

 

Anyway, if AC should eventually be implemented in BOS, please leave it as an option and let pilots choose how they prefer to fly !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted NO !

 

I've experienced this kind of limitation with IL2 Cliffs of Dover.

Most of the time it provided results that didn't match with the reality (I'm a pilote for real and I know what its possible and what is not possible to do with two hands and two feet).

I prefer to trust the simers themselves to behave like real pilots and to perform as much as possible realistic sequences of actions.

If some pseudo simmers find any enjoyment to perform impossible simultaneous actions (because they have an up to date and sophisticated equipment), let them do !

They're just spoiling their own pleasure.

And as far as I am concerned, I've chosen to fly in a squad where we all share this point of view.

We trust each other and we know thant no one will try to cheat the others.

So far so so good !

 

An other point is that realistic AC (Anthropomorphic Controls) might be quite difficult and long to program.

I think that the dev team has many others more important concerns to deal with to make IL2 BOS the simulation we've been expecting for so many years.

Saving the efforts of AC programming for these concerns seems to be (IMMO) a better choice.

 

Anyway, if AC should eventually be implemented in BOS, please leave it as an option and let pilots choose how they prefer to fly !

 

I for one voted yes, and in a way I agree with you, all the geeks that spend weeks finding the perfect configuration so that they don't take their hands off their stick and throttle make me giggle, because they should focus all that energy on getting your flying and tactics right..

 

Having said that, I think that your control of the simulator shouldn't be limited by what you can afford in terms of peripherals, and it should still reflect how things really were in the cockpit of the aircraft. 

 

I'll bring the example I discussed somewhere else: the flap control on the Bf109 was done by means of a wheel that had to be turned manually, and when doing that you surely couldn't control your throttle. I think that sort of features should be implemented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×