Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

During the IL-2 Sturmovik through IL-2 1946 days (2001 - 2006) We were taking part in online campaigns like Bellum War, VEF I & II, Czech War, SEOW, VoW etc...

 

I don't recall ever having issues with imbalance, however - this may have been due to the format. Co-op host downloads mission, pilots join both sides until all slots are/close to full and mission is launched. 

 

With a dogfight format - we have to face it, without forced side balancing, there will always be lopsided times within a 24 hr period. The format inherently allows pilots to come and go as they please and chose whatever side they want.

 

It is not anyone's (...we the players) duty to perform server balancing for the admin IMHO. Reason, if they wanted the sides to be balanced - they would have been implemented it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not realize the intent of Depots was for them to be "level bombing only" targets. They are serious targets and even a large coordinated group should expect heavy losses trying to do precision (low level) bombing on a Depot. I think it is strange to try to make precision bombing impossible. I would be in favor of respawning AAA inside a single mission, after some time, especially if the respawning AAA was small calibre. Indestructible AAA seems very unrealistic to me.

 

Last TAW I flew Red in some fairly large formations, sometimes with 8-12 players. We attacked Depots. We suffered significant losses, not just by AAA but also by enemy players (Hydra was often waiting for us at the Depot, they knew our tactics and players and looked out for us). We knew that attacking a depot was risky. All of our sorties were upwards of 30 minutes, sometimes an hour including flying both ways. We didn't "rush depot, kill an AA, die, respawn, do it again." I don't think we did anything unsportsmanlike or unfair, and of course Red lost the TAW by quite some margin. 

 

Having said all this, of course, players can adapt. If it's very suicidal to do low-level bombing of Depots, maybe we will see high level bombing as well as fighters and escorts up high. That would make a change from all the action being on the deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to tell you this, but the only certain way to get a truly fair campaign is to have a closed server. Otherwise you won't be able to fully control what people do on it. This is a major reason why our (Air Combat Group) campaign works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Banzaii said:

Hows this for ya...landing on an enemy airfield where aaa can either not hit you, or its down, then, anytime someone spawns in, shoot them with your gunner.......second transgression on another server.....land a tank busting aircraft on a road, and taxi to the tank column, and use the cannon while taxi'ing around to destroy it, ala P-39 action....then there's the action in question several pages ago in which there are several theories about what he did, but who cares, hopefully he's gone or if another alt pops up it'll be instantly recognizable. This is a flight simulation game, dont expect to treat a competitive campaign like this like your playing GTA V.

 

Thanks for the explanation. I see now, however I didn’t expect that the AA at spawnable airbases can be destroyed. I assumed the spawn bases AA weapons respawned as in WOL. 

 

Perhaps there should at least be 1 or 2 invulnerable/respawning guns at player bases to prevent this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Alonzo said:

We didn't "rush depot, kill an AA, die, respawn, do it again." I don't think we did anything unsportsmanlike or unfair, and of course Red lost the TAW by quite some margin. 

 

You did. Check the post that the *LG* member wrote.

 

18 hours ago, =LG=Coldman said:

 but last 2 TAWs some people came and ruin our perspective and abuse our gentelmen's rule only to win as fast as it is possible no matter what the cost is. We want restore this philosophy and sportmanship to TAW. What do You think about it guys?

 

Unfortunatelly the rules were not so clear for me. Please change the text. What we have right now?

 

3.6 Depots

Depots are strategic points located far away from the front lines. They consist of many buildings representing factory industries and storages. Depots are heavily defended by AA. You should attack them by the horizontal flight with heavy bombers

 

Sorry, but "SHOULD"  is totally wrong. That is the reason why some players broke the rules. For us it means that it is just like advice, but you have your right to do it in your way. Seems we were wrong. Sorry for THAT! I will not attack the depots with the fighter any longer, and for sure will inform the opponents that our group has started to fly to the target.

 

Sorry again. I will play fair now.

 

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SCG_Schneemann said:

Ban this idiot. And lock gunners as a default please. New patch unlocked them?

image.thumb.png.444b349a563d6e4c473dd92cad9e8fd9.png

Rimjob_Ranger was banned permanently. 

2 hours ago, Norz said:

 

Unfortunatelly the rules were not so clear for me. Please change the text. What we have right now?

 

3.6 Depots

Depots are strategic points located far away from the front lines. They consist of many buildings representing factory industries and storages. Depots are heavily defended by AA. You should attack them by the horizontal flight with heavy bombers

 

Sorry, but "SHOULD"  is totally wrong. That is the reason why some players broke the rules. For us it means that it is just like advice, but you have your right to do it in your way. Seems we were wrong. Sorry for THAT! I will not attack the depots with the fighter any longer, and for sure will inform the opponents that our group has started to fly to the target.

 

Sorry again. I will play fair now.

 

It is an advice in deed not a rule. We thought that AA is strong enough but it turned out organized group is able to clear it using low level fighters.

 

We have discordant opinion in our team about attacking depot/AF by low level fighters but we will try to make it harder and more dangerous in the future. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, =LG=Kathon said:

It is an advice in deed not a rule. We thought that AA is strong enough but it turned out organized group is able to clear it using low level fighters.

 

Does it mean that we can continue to use our strategy this campaign? It will be good to know. There is at least one big group of the players involved.

 

I am not sure that it possible to improve it somehow if about 5..10 fighters are coming to eliminate the AAA units.  Maybe the right way is to set the rule to deny these attacks (In my opinion it will be wrong decision).

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I am all for allowing low level strikes on any target, even spawn fields,  as long as it is a 'Hit & Run'.   It is the people hanging around waiting for new planes to spawn so they can swoop again that are the problem.  In the real war fields & other well protected targets  got attacked by low level strikes but it was accepted by all attackers that you only got one pass and hanging around would be fatal.   I used to think that making very accurate & lethal 'can't miss' AAA that takes 30 seconds to spawn (so allowing a single pass) then despawns after 5 minutes of inactivity would solve the issue but it appears that even at its highest settings the AAA can be evaded.

 

Perhaps we need to ask 1C to produce a special edition AI setting just for this scenario that almost guarantees to kill any attackers within range?

 

Another thought, which can be done with current scripts and state of the game, is to open up an airspawn high above the field 30 seconds after the spawn fields Light AAA starts firing (and remove the airspawn 2 minutes later)   That should cause major headaches for vulchers & remove their targets (as nobody is spawning on the ground and AAA will keep respawning immediately)  while allowing the enemy to make a fast pass at low level and have a good chance of being out of sight before any defenders are able to  airspawn and use their altitude to give chase. I think thirty seconds at treetops at full throttle with a change of course is enough time  though maybe it needs to be longer as some attackers are slow like a stuka or IL2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With how the AA currently works, there is no way to make it solve the problem by adding additional ones. 

 

The only way to stop this meta is to get a system in place where the defender has a chance to actually defend against it. Currently there is no effective way to defend. The only chance (in this case) for VVS to try to win against this is by only flying Peshkas. Fighters have become completely useless.

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Alonzo said:

Last TAW I flew Red in some fairly large formations, sometimes with 8-12 players. We attacked Depots. We suffered significant losses, not just by AAA but also by enemy players (Hydra was often waiting for us at the Depot, they knew our tactics and players and looked out for us).

 

You suffered significant losses because 1. your attacks where very predictable and 2. you were flying VVS.

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Fighters have become completely useless.

 

Did i forget something? Almost every VVS fighter can take 2x100kg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Norz said:

 

Did i forget something? Almost every VVS fighter can take 2x100kg.

 

Yes you are.

 

why would you want to fly a fighter with 2x100kg when you can take a peshka? The reason why LW fighters with bombs are so good is because they can disengage quite easily. VVS fighters can never do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

Yes you are.

 

why would you want to fly a fighter with 2x100kg when you can take a peshka? The reason why LW fighters with bombs are so good is because they can disengage quite easily. VVS fighters can never do that.

 

I have a lot of reasons for that. Seems that you did not attack the ground targets for a long time.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Norz said:

 

I have a lot of reasons for that. Seems that you did not attack the ground targets for a long time.

 

then please enlighten me with your wisdom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

then please enlighten me with your wisdom?

 

 Attack tanks, attack defend points, after that stay there to help your Pe2 or Il2 or whatever.

 

Is it not enough? Ok, than you can try to load 6RS82 and try to destroy the hangar. Maybe it works better than by the last campaign. But for you it is not so interesting, right? Better to start to say that someone plays not fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Norz said:

 

 Attack tanks, attack defend points, after that stay there to help your Pe2 or Il2 or whatever.

 

Is it not enough? Ok, than you can try to load 6RS82 and try to destroy the hangar. Maybe it works better than by the last campaign. But for you it is not so interesting, right? Better to start to say that someone plays not fair enough.

 

I don't know why you are trying to make it about me as a person? do you feel attacked in some way or something?

 

Of course you can do that, but why would you take a fighter for that? there is simply no reason. A peshka has a better survival chance and a better bomb load. By taking a VVS fighter you are putting an already disadvantaged aircraft in an even worse state i.e. getting spotted first and being at a lower energy state then the defender. There is a reason why nobody is doing it really. 

 

Can you do it theoretically? yes of course. Is it effective? not at all. Especially when you consider that VVS will nearly always be outnumbered.

 

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to make it about VVS vs. LW because it affects both sides really. In defensive terms (objectives) the Fighter pilot has no place currently and i don't think that should be the case. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Norz said:

 

Did i forget something? Almost every VVS fighter can take 2x100kg.

 

So, we work hard to get A (one) fighter that can almost match the luftwaffe counterparts......to get blown to bits by the uber effective german AA to try and kill a few trucks with the little bombs we carry, if we get away with it......we are then over a flak infested target, which is also infested with 109's at a massive number advantage to us, and we are at a low altitude.....with no energy or hope of escape................yer right norz.......was this the blue half (or perhaps 5/6ths?) of your brain doing the thinking.............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

I don't know why you are trying to make it about me as a person? do you feel attacked in some way or something?

 

There are about 3..4 persons who directly wrote that it is wrong (what we did) and so on.

 

Some of these persons just plays not enough hours that it makes sense to discuss the balance issues with them. So, you are one of them, who played TAW before (enough hours) and should understand how it works.

 

Just a small example: I played about 30 hours in TAW for 4 weeks (it is absolute OK for most of the players), got 10 kills, 50 ground targets (or something like that). After that i went to the forum and wrote all i think about a balance in the game. Not sure it is normal behavior. 

21 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Can you do it theoretically? yes of course. Is it effective? not at all. Especially when you consider that VVS will nearly always be outnumbered.

 

 

Again, that is exactly what we did on the red side by the last campaign. Unfortunately i was there only last 4 maps, but as i know, first 4 maps was the same strategy. 

Edited by Norz
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Norz said:

Again, that is exactly what we did on the red side by the last campaign. Unfortunately i was there only last 4 maps, but as i know, first 4 maps was the same strategy. 

 

Again, you are making it about VVS vs LW when it is a general issue.

 

Currently there is no way to effectively defend an objective because you don't get enough intel. This applies for both sides. Best thing you can realistically hope for is to kill the enemy after they dropped their payload. Worst thing is you made the wrong guess and were uselessly circling a target for an hour or more. 

 

Of course there are people who will tell you to "simply" patrol certain routes/areas but this is simply not effective in any way without any form of intel. The situation got even worse with the recent patch when you can't even see the airfield activity on the enemy airfields anymore.

 

That's why i think fighters are defensively useless currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Currently there is no way to effectively defend an objective because you don't get enough intel. 

 

That is exactly the reason why we do not wait as a lot of players on the both sides over the AFs, depots and so on. That is the reason why we attack instead of wait something somewhere.

 

Your choice is to wait. Our choice is to attack. Now you (and someone else) said, no, it is wrong, in my dream it should be different. OK, i can agree. Just modify the rules, inform us, no problem.

 

P.S: For sure it is not so interesting to play 45 vs 30. But here we cannot help. Next campaign we will go to the red side, maybe we will play again 30 red players vs 45 axis players, who knows. But there is only a lack of motivation on the red side. The balance is (in my opinion) good.

 

 

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, Norz said:

The balance is (in my opinion) good.

 

 

Which is why there are 45 blues to 30 reds........I actually think your trolling and arguing for the sake of it, maybe there’s not enough for you to do in the server so you come here for a bit of sport.

Edited by SYN_Repent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

58 minutes ago, Norz said:

Your choice is to wait. Our choice is to attack. Now you (and someone else) said, no, it is wrong, in my dream it should be different. OK, i can agree. Just modify the rules, inform us, no problem.

 

You don't understand. It is not about that one tactic that you are playing. It is nothing new. In theory it was already considered the best way to play LW a long time ago. This is just the first time people do it 12 hours a day more or less. I am not complaining about it because this is actually something the devs can fix. However i have a problem with the mentality of some players like i said in a previous post. 

 

58 minutes ago, Norz said:

P.S: For sure it is not so interesting to play 45 vs 30. But here we cannot help. Next campaign we will go to the red side, maybe we will play again 30 red vs 45 blue, who knows. But there is only a lack of motivation on the red side. The balance is (in my opinion) good.

 

This is just ignorant.

 

Saying that a simple lack of motivation is the reason red side is losing and will likely not to take any map this campaign is just discourteous and has nothing to do with the real problems. But i don't think we have any ground to discuss the issue any further when you consider the balance as good when your side is 4-0 up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

This is just ignorant.

 

Saying that a simple lack of motivation is the reason red side is losing and will likely not to take any map this campaign is just discourteous and has nothing to do with the real problems. But i don't think we have any ground to discuss the issue any further when you consider the balance as good when your side is 4-0 up...

 

Really? What is the difference with 2 last campaigns? Last one was a draw. One before was also not so bad.

What do you mean when you said "balance" and after that mentioned "4-0"? Please clarify.

 

For me the balance is almost the plane set.

Current Map.

Spoiler

 

MiG-3 ser.24 1/1 0/0/0
LaGG-3 ser.29 2/2 0/0/0
Yak-1 ser.69 1/1 0/0/0
La-5 ser.8 1/1 0/0/0
Yak-1B ser.127 1/1 0/0/0

 

Bf 109 F-2 2/2 0/0/0
Bf 109 F-4 2/2 0/0/0
Bf 109 G-2 1/1 0/0/0
Fw 190 A-3 1/1 0/0/0

 

 

 

It is really so bad? Please, just stop it. We played it in some combinations a lot of times. But exactly now it is not good enough, really? 

 

3 good planes vs 4 good planes. Do we need +1 Yak1 or La5 or Yak1b? Maybe my answer is YES, but it is not about the balance, it is about how to make it more attractive for the red team. 

50 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

This is just ignorant.

 It is not. If we have only 30 red players, some reasons are there. I don't know them. Maybe they play these days on WOL, i don't know. A lot of usual players just not here. No one from them wrote something about balance here. 

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CSW_OTU_Rannisokol said:

Hello,

when I want to join Taw and I click Multiplayer, I see only 7 servers. Before this, there was an actualization. Before actualization it worked perfectly. I tried to restart the game, but it is same. My friend told that he also see only these servers.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1674906367

 

Hotfix has been releases an hour ago so probably the server has not been updated yet:

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2019 at 10:22 PM, =LG=Coldman said:

Yes we will provide some limitations to raping low level airfields and depots. those targets should be only level bombing targets.

 

Alelluya :)

 

nice to ear  you

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, SCG_Schneemann said:

Ban this idiot. And lock gunners as a default please. New patch unlocked them?

image.thumb.png.444b349a563d6e4c473dd92cad9e8fd9.png

 

LOL with a call sign like that - I'd definitely keep that guy off my six! 

  • Haha 7
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 4:16 AM, SCG_Schneemann said:

Ban this idiot. And lock gunners as a default please. New patch unlocked them?

image.thumb.png.444b349a563d6e4c473dd92cad9e8fd9.png

 

How would I discern human gunners from AI gunners in the TAW log?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So here it is.

Just got to server to see what's going on. 18(blues) vs 7(red). Just 2 open fields. One field with with a train just 10  km from it under attack of just 1 fighter. I spawned on the field and immediately was killed by xJammer. No AAAs, no defense nothing. Then I checked his records for today.

1st - attacked the field in F4, killed 3 AAAs and got killed by them. ( I recall earlier there were even fewer red pilots on the map)

2nd - attacked the same field in A3, killed 7 AAAs, damaged but got back to base.

3rd - attacked the same field in A3, killed 2 AAAs, ditched

4th - attacked the same field in F4, killed 2 pilots who tried to take off, killed the rest of AAAs, now the field has 0 defense.

How can ONE pilot in a fighter make so much damage? Didn't care to loose the plane, to be killed, the penalty, didn't bother to attack the train just 10km away.

That's the flow in the server that was clearly exploited by the pilot.

I don't think it makes any sense to talk about any gentleman's rules, any agreements, etc etc etc. The guy doesn't care about anything like that. We need rules to stop it, clear and simple because he does destroy the spirit of the game and I am sure nothing can change his behavior. Too bad we have such kind of people but it's reality and the devs need to deal with it.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

So here it is.

Just got to server to see what's going on. 18(blues) vs 7(red). Just 2 open fields. One field with with a train just 10  km from it under attack of just 1 fighter. I spawned on the field and immediately was killed by xJammer. No AAAs, no defense nothing. Then I checked his records for today.

1st - attacked the field in F4, killed 3 AAAs and got killed by them. ( I recall earlier there were even fewer red pilots on the map)

2nd - attacked the same field in A3, killed 7 AAAs, damaged but got back to base.

3rd - attacked the same field in A3, killed 2 AAAs, ditched

4th - attacked the same field in F4, killed 2 pilots who tried to take off, killed the rest of AAAs, now the field has 0 defense.

How can ONE pilot in a fighter make so much damage? Didn't care to loose the plane, to be killed, the penalty, didn't bother to attack the train just 10km away.

That's the flow in the server that was clearly exploited by the pilot.

I don't think it makes any sense to talk about any gentleman's rules, any agreements, etc etc etc. The guy doesn't care about anything like that. We need rules to stop it, clear and simple because he does destroy the spirit of the game and I am sure nothing can change his behavior. Too bad we have such kind of people but it's reality and the devs need to deal with it.  


It's disheartening that admins are allowing this to happen. A big reason why I've lost my appetite for TAW. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, StG77_Kondor said:


It's disheartening that admins are allowing this to happen. A big reason why I've lost my appetite for TAW.  

+1
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

So here it is.

Just got to server to see what's going on. 18(blues) vs 7(red). Just 2 open fields. One field with with a train just 10  km from it under attack of just 1 fighter. I spawned on the field and immediately was killed by xJammer. No AAAs, no defense nothing. Then I checked his records for today.

1st - attacked the field in F4, killed 3 AAAs and got killed by them. ( I recall earlier there were even fewer red pilots on the map)

2nd - attacked the same field in A3, killed 7 AAAs, damaged but got back to base.

3rd - attacked the same field in A3, killed 2 AAAs, ditched

4th - attacked the same field in F4, killed 2 pilots who tried to take off, killed the rest of AAAs, now the field has 0 defense.

How can ONE pilot in a fighter make so much damage? Didn't care to loose the plane, to be killed, the penalty, didn't bother to attack the train just 10km away.

That's the flow in the server that was clearly exploited by the pilot.

I don't think it makes any sense to talk about any gentleman's rules, any agreements, etc etc etc. The guy doesn't care about anything like that. We need rules to stop it, clear and simple because he does destroy the spirit of the game and I am sure nothing can change his behavior. Too bad we have such kind of people but it's reality and the devs need to deal with it.  

 

For the third time (:) ), the easiest way is to make the AAA at airfields and depot's indestructible.  In reality, they were both ringed with too many AAA to count, something that can't be done with this sim for performance reasons.  Thus, by making all AAA at these locations indestructible, they better emulate the anti-air danger that was always there no matter how many times they were attacked, and thus can't be "gamed".

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

xjammer again eh.........what a surprise

Edited by SYN_Repent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

He was shot by the AA on his first attempt. This guy was killed 32 times and got captured 10 times in this campaign, so he obviously doesn't give a damn about his virtual pilot life. Looks like the punishment for loosing your pilot is simply not hard enough. What about some death limit? If you loose more than 10-15 pilots in a campaign, you are out. Another option would be, to make it per map. If you loose more than 3-4 pilots per map, you have to wait till the next map to be able to fly again. This might sound hard at first, especially for the ground attackers and bomber pilots,  but it might be a way to stop those suicide pilots.

Edited by I./JG62_Knipser
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

i think that would promote chute killing tbh, but your right knipser.....something should be done to stop this suicidal "anything to win".

 

simply ban chute killing.....and something like you suggest might work........2-3 lives per 24 hours?

Edited by SYN_Repent
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

please don't start the cute killing debate again :rolleyes:. If you value your pilot's life, you should still be able to stay below those limits, even if you get chute killed once in a while. don't think a daily limit would do the trick, those kind of players would just wait till the next day and start the same shit over again.

Edited by I./JG62_Knipser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" If you value your pilot's life, you should still be able to stay below those limits, even if you get chute killed once in a while. "

 

I hope u are joking.....I have been killed every single time hanging in chute..thats easy math....100 %

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LLv24_Oke said:

" If you value your pilot's life, you should still be able to stay below those limits, even if you get chute killed once in a while. "

 

I hope u are joking.....I have been killed every single time hanging in chute..thats easy math....100 %

 

Last and this campaign did not happen to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Norz said:

 

Last and this campaign did not happen to me. 

 

you argue against everything norz

 

the sky wouldnt be blue for you if someone said it was on here

 

Edited by SYN_Repent
  • Haha 1

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

×
×
  • Create New...