Jump to content
US93_Larner

4.006 DM Discussion

Recommended Posts

Screw the DM, that's simply a beautiful sight Chill seeing that soaring above the countryside.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

 

 

To understand you correctly, since after some bullets hit and your plane broke up at 6 g, you assume sturctutal strenght of the Dolphin is 9 g?

 

As we are truly riding ther very edge of the envelope in this game, there are probably several factors in play that give us what we see.

No the dolphin isn't as bad 6.5 to 7 is about the limit a few bullets hit you you're down to 5, I was talking about the camel, 8.5 is the limit a few bullet hits down to 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tycoon said:

I was talking about the camel, 8.5 is the limit a few bullet hits down to 5.

Ah, ok, makes sense.

 

 Still, 5 is a lot and in the game we can easily go there, but in real life in my experience mor common flight speeds hardly allow such accellerations and may make you stall out. What @Chill31 describes above is more in line with my experience.

 

This just made me wonder if there was a (FM?) factor we are not considering (yet?) that makes us or allows us fly these crates in the game like we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chill31 said:

 

Fokker Dr.I and D7 have extremely light control forces at all speeds...they are not a good example of the effects you guys are trying to study.  Aircraft with non-aerodynamically balanced controls are the ones most susceptible to those effects.  In my experience, old airplanes are built with enough control authority to break them with aggressive pitching.  Ailerons can get very heavy though, and I would be surprised if any aircraft modeled in FC would break from rolling.  

Thanks Chill.  I was wondering whether breaking the (undamaged) wings off various machines by being able to pull sharply out of a fast dive could be considered realistic.

2 hours ago, J5_Klugermann said:

 

The stick stiffens to some degree.(joystick that is)

J5_Foghorn Leghorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Chill31 said:

I flew the turns in the FC Dr1 the way I did in this video, with no regard for maintaining height.  At 1:25 in the video, you can see that I have demanded everything from the airplane, and it hits an accelerated stall with slight right wing drop.  If i am pulling 3-4 Gs, these are the easiest Gs I've ever pulled in my life.


Beautiful video. 

And, this is where my interest lies concerning the DM as it currently is...

While testing the new DM Talbot, Baer and I shot down a lot of player-controlled planes. We flew mock-dogfight after mock-dogfight after mock-dogfight against each other and recorded each type of aircraft shoot-down and, when we remembered, the number of bullets fired (not hit) to shoot the aircraft down. What we were finding was that aircraft with even a little bit of damage were breaking up under G-stress in what we thought were basic combat manoeuvres (Split-S, short diving corkscrews, etc). 

After a while, it seemed apparent to us that a lot of the 'wing-off' shoot-downs were being caused by overloading the damaged wings during these manoeuvres, even with seemingly minimal damage on some aircraft - which is contrary to the pilot accounts that I've read. With that in mind, I started wondering about a couple things. Namely, are the planes pulling more Gs than they should be in these manoeuvres, or is the G-counter not displaying the correct figures? 

From the losing-wings-in-a-split-S, I'd suspect the former - from the 10G Pfalz, I'd suspect the latter...

EDIT: For added clarity, I'm fully prepared to believe that a damaged aircraft could shed its wings at a lower G-load! What I'm trying to determine is whether the amount of Gs we're pulling in manoeuvres currently is 'about right', or too exaggerated? 

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =CfC=FatherTed said:

J5_Foghorn Leghorn

 

  Aint but one rooster here, an that would be me.  (bright boy but he got the attention span of a firecracker)

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Re: Amount of bullets breaking wings...the three 'weakest' types we tested were the Albatros, Halberstadt and the SPAD 13. Unfortunately we only thought to start recording bullets fired after we'd done the Alb tests, but we have the results so far for the Halberstadt and the SPAD. 

To explain the test scenario we were running, it's pretty simple: 

We'd start with the 'offensive' aircraft at a height advantage (vs. Halberstadt this was the SPAD, vs. the SPAD this was the Albatros). He would then dive on and attack the 'target' aircraft and attempt to bounce him, at which point the 'target' plane would go evasive and either fight back or try to escape based on the situation. So, in shorter terms, we would have a "real" dogfight (albeit set up for testing purposes). In order to vary the results a little, we'd have the 'target' either "fail" to notice he was about to be bounced, or "spot" the attack. Typically (but not always) the failure to notice resulted in a PK or a flamer. However - we did see some Halb's wings come off within the first burst in level flight. 

In other words, the aircraft were, in most cases, being subjected to combat manoeuvres during these tests after taking wing damage. It's also worth noting, however, that not all of the rounds fired would have been hitting the wings!

Not having a parser set up on Talbot's server, we had to calculate the amount of bullet hits in another way once we had the number of bullets fired (ascertained via icons-on). For this I looked at the J5 Flugpark stats and came up with a general average accuracy. Most pilots had between 10-20% accuracy, so I thought 15% would be a fair assessment. 

 7f7pMYql.png 7nOlbKal.png

 

All I can say is I'm not glad to be flying a SPAD at the moment....but at least I aint a Halb pilot! 

 

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to further test it still however since 2 days Flugpark remains underpopulated, the fewest players since a longer time.

 


Anyway I do not share this ethusiasm, from the first fights I see that the G-loading factor is the nexus of all problems. I am not sure how it co-exists with WWII planes in the sim but certainly for WWI planes it does not feel right. I have the feeling wings fold in G-manuevers even faster than pre-patch.

 

I need more (combat) flight time PvP

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ya'll need to dispense with the testing and get back to populating servers- otherwise this is all academic.

 

Give it a rest for a while and go try to have some goddamn fun.

Edited by J28w-Broccoli
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

Ya'll need to dispense with the testing and get back to populating servers- otherwise this is all academic.

 

Give it a rest for a while and go try to have some goddamn fun.

It's hard to have some goddamn fun when your wings are flying off.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, US93_Larner said:



What I'm trying to determine is whether the amount of Gs we're pulling in manoeuvres currently is 'about right', or too exaggerated? 

 

Then fly some manoeuvres where the G-load is known exactly.

 

Flat coordinated turn.  The gs are defined by the bank angle alone. Do it as close to the sea as possible - Kuban map good for that. 

 

As posted earlier, I did this, and got the results I expected, so I am not so far convinced there is anything wrong with the g measurement.  Now that was judging the bank angle by eye, and it is not easy to keep it constant and maintain exact altitude, especially in the Dr.1 which is hard to fly exactly coordinated, so I recommend the D.VII for testing.  If someone has TacView installed I imagine that will record bank angle throughout?

 

If you can turn at a set height at 60 degree bank and the g counter shows 2, the game is right.  See gif. 

 

I think the problem is our lack of real feedback in the game, either through the stick or seat of the pants. 

Load_factor_in_a_turn.gif.acb95ba81fca239dd3ed3b4d38c1fec2.gif

I now have a Track and Tacview file of doing just this - 60 degrees is indeed 2 gs in the game.  Not sure what files I should post if anyone wants to look at this - but the best way to see is to do it yourselves.

Edited by unreasonable
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tycoon said:

It's hard to have some goddamn fun when your wings are flying off.

 

Get gud, bro

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually heard that a lot today.

 

Why doth the high and mighty f 14 ace visit us lowly ww1 peasants?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Actually heard that a lot today.

 

Why doth the high and mighty f 14 ace visit us lowly ww1 peasants?

 

And who is that?

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know who but I ain’t satin’ lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Please gentlemen. This is schoolyard behaviour. Let us not denigrate Tycoon's ordinary flying skills and abysmal marksmanship.

 

Who was it Adam? Just tell me ok ….

Edited by catchov
spelling
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

Ya'll need to dispense with the testing and get back to populating servers- otherwise this is all academic.

 

Give it a rest for a while and go try to have some goddamn fun.

 

What? Uhm, no, we'll do both, but hey thanks for your suggestion.

 

I guess D7 flyers are going to say its fine, lets just have fun. Well it ain't fun in a SPAD, Dolphin, Halberstadt, Albatros and probably Se5a and Camel. 

 

Having flown PvP with the new DM quite a lot now i can confidently say i feel no difference in 4.006 vs 4.005 for the planes above-mentioned. Maybe the Alb and SE are slightly more resilient, but its still any wing hit and you're a non-combatant.

 

What WAS fun was the pre-4.005 DM. Nobody disagrees with that.

Edited by US103_Baer
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, US103_Baer said:

any wing hit and you're a non-combatant.

 

That's completely untrue in my game.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, US103_Baer said:

I guess D7 flyers are going to say its fine, lets just have fun. Well it ain't fun in a SPAD, Dolphin, Halberstadt, Albatros and probably Se5a and Camel. 

 

Easy fix: remove the D.VIIF (and Bristol F.III, Halb 200hp) from rotation for a week.

 

If a Dr.I can now cause a SPAD to retreat by hitting his wings once or twice and a Halb can get a Camel off his six within seconds rather than minutes, there's really no more need to have a late 1918 F around.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, US103_Baer said:

What WAS fun was the pre-4.005 DM. Nobody disagrees with that.

 

It was FUN, but I'm not sure if it was always realistic.

 

Some of the maneuvers you are required to do in a Halberstadt to survive an encounter with a Camel are not realistic. Steep turns of more than 60 degrees, loops and hammerhead turns, all with a gunner on board just don't seem like a good idea. It's something I've been complaining about since the days of RoF. However if you don't do that, you're dead. Even if you critically hit a Camel's engine, he will stay in the fight long enough to have every angle he needs to kill you first. In fact, the one hope you have is a swift pilot kill.

 

Now all of this sounds fine and translates to fun gameplay (especially for the Camel), but it's not at all matching the historical reports of the Halberstadt being "as feared as the Bristol" (do we really fear Bristols, still?) and historical reports of Schlastas (typically 4 machines) dispatching attacking Camels (typically 2 machines) in seconds. In fact, Halberstadt losses were very low, even in the last days of the war.

 

Now a Halberstadt losing his wings in 4.005+ because he's pulling crazy high g turns I'm absolutely fine with. He shouldn't have to do those maneuvers in the first place to survive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a joke, thanks for making the Camel a piece of garbage. The wings are ripping off more now then before the patch and the blacking out is even a bigger joke and always will be in WWI planes. I'm all for some realism but I think it's gone to far and now it's sucking all the fun out of flying these planes. Nobody asked for these ridiculous changes.  

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, US103_Baer said:

any wing hit and you're a non-combatant

 

 

Nobody would program that to happen;  the problem is that players' perception of the number of times they were hit,  cannot be expected to match the reality,  which makes this whole discussion meaningless.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, No.204_REDMAN said:

What a joke, thanks for making the Camel a piece of garbage. The wings are ripping off more now then before the patch and the blacking out is even a bigger joke and always will be in WWI planes. I'm all for some realism but I think it's gone to far and now it's sucking all the fun out of flying these planes. Nobody asked for these ridiculous changes.  

 

Quote

GROUND RULES: 

1) If you are reporting something you feel is wrong / you are unhappy with / etc, please post some information or observations about your experience in-game, as well as specifically why you think it's wrong! If you are comparing to historical anecdotes, including these might be helpful.  

2) Tying in with No.1, please try to remain generally respectful and objective. It's important to remember that the dev team have put hard work into this, specifically at our request. 

 

And there goes the remain respectful and objective part.

 

I also think we are not there yet but the patch was a step in the right direction. I tested the Albatros D.Va today in singleplayer and yesterday I flew her in multiplayer. What I gathered is when the bracing wires between your wings are gone then you can not fly any basic combat maneuver anymore. Every attempt to fly a "Split S" without your wires will result in your wings detaching from your plane. Even if you throttle back in your maneuver. The wires seem to get shot off very easily sometimes. Judging by the sounds of bullets hitting your plane only a handfull of bullets are needed to criple your plane so much you will ripp the wings off in your next maneuver. Also the wires on both sides left and right disappear at the same time which is hard to understand, when you shooting at the right wing why would the wires on the left wing disappear? 

 

But I don't think phrases like What a joke, my insert plane name here is a piece of garbage and these are ridiculous changes, will persuade the devs to even consider putting more work into it, when everytime they listen to us and doing something for us we tend to put them under heavy flak. How would you feel when your work of which you are proud off and put countless hours into it beeing ripped apart in a disrespectful manner by the people you are doing your work for. That doesn't sound very motivating does it?

 

Edited by J99_Sizzlorr
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

After a while, it seemed apparent to us that a lot of the 'wing-off' shoot-downs were being caused by overloading the damaged wings during these manoeuvres, even with seemingly minimal damage on some aircraft - which is contrary to the pilot accounts that I've read. With that in mind, I started wondering about a couple things. Namely, are the planes pulling more Gs than they should be in these manoeuvres, or is the G-counter not displaying the correct figures? 

Exactly. I was talking about this from begining - just what look like only few holes in the wings and after G load manuver you can break wings so easy. But unfortunately yours wings are  still on the first visual damge level feedback (there are olny 3 types of visual damage model -devs words). This can't be used as messure for next move as next acrobatic manuver will make you dart thowards the earth winthout wings. If that would be visual feedback two or better three - then yes, reasonable pilot woud stay away from that G intensive manuvers - he sees broken ribgs, lack od flying wires or big holes torn fabric. Now I see 3 small bullets holes so why shoud I be afraid looping the loop?

39 minutes ago, No.204_REDMAN said:

What a joke, thanks for making the Camel a piece of garbage. The wings are ripping off more now then before the patch and the blacking out is even a bigger joke and always will be in WWI planes. I'm all for some realism but I think it's gone to far and now it's sucking all the fun out of flying these planes. Nobody asked for these ridiculous changes.  

 

We are playing mostly on one server - Flugpark , there is one server option for this - just flip the switch to enable previous G tolerance. I do like new G implemantation but on WW2.

On 5/21/2020 at 5:16 AM, Chill31 said:

I want to say that they had the aircraft modeled so that G force damage was cumulative...anyone know if that is true?  At any rate, I saw a load testing of the Dr.I...I think it was done by Fokker or maybe Achim Engles.  The result was a load limit for the Dr.I at about 6.5 to 7 Gs.  Lets say you hit 6 Gs several times in a fight...the 4th time, you could be pulling the wings off, despite being under the ultimate load limit.

I don't know for sure but from my in game experience , I would suspect that there is buildup reduction of structural strength during G intensive maneuvers especially when yours wing were hit previously. Like you can take 3-4 Gs ,5 times but 6 times you are without wings.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's certainly something to be said now for the Camel being reported as slow. Not that it couldn't fly fast, only that it shouldn't.

 

 

The situation with weaker g tolerance to wings, while perhaps less fun (I think we can all agree that fun is a highly subjective matter), it may be more realistic in general, even if it will require many of us to unlearn bad habits.

 

I still don't like to see wingshedding, but I accept that it's a piloting issue with receiving conflicting feedback as to how many g your wings can take.

 

 

Spoiler

Weeeeeee!

 

WeepyClearDromaeosaur-size_restricted.gi

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, J5_Hellbender said:

 

Now a Halberstadt losing his wings in 4.005+ because he's pulling crazy high g turns I'm absolutely fine with. He shouldn't have to do those maneuvers in the first place to survive.

 

You know perfectly well that's not what we're talking about.

 

Minor wing damage and spiralling away can cause wings to fold easily on certain planes including the CL2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Exactly. I was talking about this from begining - just what look like only few holes in the wings and after G load manuver you can break wings so easy. But unfortunately yours wings are  still on the first visual damge level feedback (there are olny 3 types of visual damage model -devs words). This can't be used as messure for next move as next acrobatic manuver will make you dart thowards the earth winthout wings. If that would be visual feedback two or better three - then yes, reasonable pilot woud stay away from that G intensive manuvers - he sees broken ribgs, lack od flying wires or big holes torn fabric. Now I see 3 small bullets holes so why shoud I be afraid looping the loop?

 

We are playing mostly on one server - Flugpark , there is one server option for this - just flip the switch to enable previous G tolerance. I do like new G implemantation but on WW2.

I don't know for sure but from my in game experience , I would suspect that there is buildup reduction of structural strength during G intensive maneuvers especially when yours wing were hit previously. Like you can take 3-4 Gs ,5 times but 6 times you are without wings.

I've suggested that several times but didn't get anywhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, US103_Baer said:

 

You know perfectly well that's not what we're talking about.

 

Minor wing damage and spiralling away can cause wings to fold easily on certain planes including the CL2.


I was flying a SPAD the other night with Talbot. Bidu was a DVIIF that we attacked and hit pretty well with a few passes. He in turn inflicted  minor damage to My aircraft that resulted in my wings shredding in a basic slow wing over and slight spiral dive while having a go back at him. I pulled 4-5 G in that one manoeuvre.  
 

Something is off. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly already mentioned, bullet strikes on the target sounds like you have been hit from behind and causes you to disengage, once used to it you are not sure if you are being hunted or it's you hitting the target.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the new DM is a step forward compared to the last version, but there are still a couple issues to explore.

 

-There's not a lot of feedback telling you about over-stressing the aircraft. You have some visual cues, but there's no feeling or sound of over-stress to warn you if indeed you are going too far. You seem to have the case of "everything is ok... whoooosh... wings gone". There's no creaking or snapping or other sounds you'd expect out of overstressing a large wooden frame structure - that would warn you about the losing your wings. The G-meter was somewhat helpful in this regard, but it's not the same as the more organic indicators that would help you in a heated fight. I haven't shed control surfaces in a dive yet, though maybe I need to push even harder - another indicator you're going too fast.

 

-The aircraft handle damage (and flight in general) in a manner that is perplexing when you consider them relative to one another. I've gone into at very high speeds - well over 170mph in the SE5a and the Spad, but I've had D.VII and Dr.1 aircraft follow me right into the dive and stay with me even at very high velocities. You're left with the issue that the one thing the SE5a and Spad should have as an advantage doesn't seem to work. Then there's the Pfalz handling very high-stress moves in a way that seems to exceed the Spad. The SE5a doesn't seem to accelerate and retain energy well at all. Little stuff like that, but which becomes a fertile ground for frustration because the aircraft seem to be comparing in a perplexing way.

 

I think these two areas are worth looking at because they leave players with the feeling of "something here wasn't quite right...", and then after it happens a few times they get frustrated.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Possibly already mentioned, bullet strikes on the target sounds like you have been hit from behind and causes you to disengage, once used to it you are not sure if you are being hunted or it's you hitting the target.

 

I noticed this too in the Spring Offensive campaign and reported it. It's being beta tested apparently. Haven't noticed it as badly in MP unless I'm just used to it now? The first time it happened I thought it was one of those invisible kites lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ST_Nooney said:

Possibly already mentioned, bullet strikes on the target sounds like you have been hit from behind and causes you to disengage, once used to it you are not sure if you are being hunted or it's you hitting the target.

I think todays update fixed that...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Krispy_Duck said:

. The SE5a doesn't seem to accelerate and retain energy well at all. 

 

Pardon me Krispy I edited it a bit. There's a thread about this but the devs are keeping shtum about it as far as I'm aware. Some of the chaps are working with Shuttleworth and their Viper Se5a to get the low down. Perhaps this will help. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Krispy_Duck said:

I've gone into at very high speeds - well over 170mph in the SE5a and the Spad, but I've had D.VII and Dr.1 aircraft follow me right into the dive and stay with me even at very high velocities.

 

The D.VII (and Dr.I to some extent) have some known issues with propeller RPM in dives.

 

 

Still, you should be able to outdive both of them easily in a SPAD, S.E.5a or Dolphin, as they have higher structural limits for top speed (at 1g).

 

On the other hand, bullets are hard to outdive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

 

 

And there goes the remain respectful and objective part.

 

 

 

But I don't think phrases like What a joke, my insert plane name here is a piece of garbage and these are ridiculous changes, will persuade the devs to even consider putting more work into it, when everytime they listen to us and doing something for us we tend to put them under heavy flak. How would you feel when your work of which you are proud off and put countless hours into it beeing ripped apart in a disrespectful manner by the people you are doing your work for. That doesn't sound very motivating does it?

 

I paid money for this product now i feel like I threw my money out the window, as a paying customer I expect to get my monies worth and if they can't deliver I want a refund.

   

Edited by No.204_REDMAN
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, J5_Hellbender said:

. Even if you critically hit a Camel's engine, he will stay in the fight long enough to have every angle he needs to kill you first. In fact, the one hope you have is a swift pilot kill.

Sometimes they burn well.(bottom video)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, No.204_REDMAN said:

 

I paid money for this product now i feel like I threw my money out the window, as a paying customer I expect to get my monies worth and if they can't deliver I want a refund.

   

Paying money for something does not entitle you of beeing disrespectful. We all are paying customers and not satisfied with the state of the game. It is just a matter of how you are expressing your feelings. The devs are human beeings like you and me. So they work the same way in terms  of motivation just like you and me.

Edited by J99_Sizzlorr
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here we go with hurt feelings, give me a break they don't care about my feelings it's a two way street. it's all about customer service, that should be motivation enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, No.204_REDMAN said:

here we go with hurt feelings, give me a break they don't care about my feelings it's a two way street. it's all about customer service, that should be motivation enough. 

I am just saying that your way of aproaching the problem is not the way to a quick resoloution of that problem. More to the contrary. Throwing money at people doesn't get things done. Motivation does...and what motivates people can be different. But I tell what does not motivate: People beeing disrespectful of your hard work. 

Edited by J99_Sizzlorr
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

I am just saying that your way of aproaching the problem is not the way to a quick resoloution of that problem. More to the contrary. Throwing money at people doesn't get things done. Motivation does...and what motivates people can be different. But I tell what does not motivate: People beeing disrespectful of your hard work. 

 

Yes, but to some degree, you can turn your statement around and say that REDMAN's money is his hard work. So it works both ways, does it not?

  • Upvote 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...