Doko

January 24

1 hour ago, Jamopower said:

On theiryhammer side (and by reading peoples woes) it looks initially like chaos, lizards and vampires have been toned down a bit from what they were in 6th, while high and dark elves, dwarfs and beastmen are bit better, which in overall sounds pretty promising as it would go pretty well according to their ”tiers” in the 6th ed. Wood elves look to be pretty same as they were, other armies I haven’t looked in too much detail as I don’t have them.

tier list going around is this:

top: orcs and goblins

t1: beastment and warriors of caos

t2: high elfs,brettonian and khemri

t3: wood elves,empire

t4: dwarfs and legacy armys

January 24

i wont continue saying the same because this forum is very positive and dont acept negative coments,but rigth now internet is burning with everyone laughing of the supposed gw gave same love and effort toward legacy armys;

only some examples of errore with legacy armys that cores domt have any:

-dark elfs murderous skill is buged and dont work with the units that have it

-vampire counts have a spell that is 9/12 but the description say 7/9

-dark elves havent black ark fleetmasters.

-the power level of legacy is balanced betwen legacy armys but is way way worse than core armys.

oh this is only a example and explained in a better english than mine.

January 24

2 hours ago, The Red King said:

Armor of blood or a shield on the dreadlord + the full plate armor of a dragons scales? So not even a magic item. Even better than I thought. Plus the pendant gives a 5+ ward against everything AND a 4+ ward against anything strength 6 or higher. Which is huge because you'll need strength 6 or poison to reliable wound it.

falsr,you cant use blood armor and full plate armor.both are armor and you must choose one.

dark elfs cant get better than save 3 as i said and ward 5 while high elf have s2 ward 5 and regen 6

January 24

2 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

You should be comparing the troops to the 6th edition book, not to the latest (in various degree broken) versions. The game is clearly a new edition of the 6th edition game, which has some additions from 7th and 8th (and plenty from Warhammer Historicals).

ok if i compare to 6th edition,so tow vs 6th:

-1ws

-2 initiative

-lost ward6 and rerolling ALL wounds near to cauldron.

so even vs 6th edition now they have worse defense(no ward and worse ws and worse initiative doing them go second many times) and worse damage(no rerolls and worse ws and initiative).

i think is the most nerfed unit in entire tow and im salty because was my favourite units and the half of my list was wycthes+cauldron that now is plenty bad

January 24

19 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

Doesn't have the black dragon a better breath attack and 1 better attack (serrated maw)? What do you want that the Black dragon is an exact copy of a Star dragon?

I don't see the problem at all with the 3 types of HE dragons vs the Black dragon. I certainly don't see the Black dragon as weaker than teh Star Dragon.

Edit: Maybe I am missing something, but the damage output plus a very good breath attack makes the Black dragon even a bit stronger than the Star dragon against various unit types.

in fact serrated maw is a downgrade because you must waste one attack of ap2 in one maw with same s but 0 ap.

yes black dragon have better breath,but i think NOBODY gonna waste 500 points in a dragon to do breaths attacks and dont go to melle.

also the wyches who was my favourite units,have lost everything.

-they have lost the ward(now the cauldron have a 10% chance to give it when before was 100%)

-they have lost the reroll wounds rolls

-they lost 2ws

-lost 2 initiative and attack first(in some editions)

in general the wyches have gone from be hard to play(frenzy) and with bad defense(ws 6,attack first and ward5) but with huge damage that killed everything that they touch(3 attacks rerrolling all misses and all the wounds rolls with attack first i6 and ws6 ) to be the worst defense of tow with 1w t3 and 0 saves and also weak attack with no rerrolings,worse ws and while having same problem of frenzy.

the nerfs to wyches plus the huge nerfs to the cauldron have killed the wytches.

old cauldron was a allways with zero counterplay or chance,a ward plus rerollimg wounds.

new cauldron must choose betwen the ward or others buffs and now must do a spell with around a 50 % chance to cast and then the enemy have a 75% chance to cancell it with his lvl4 mage doing in practice useless this cauldron.

who tougth that have bound spells in models that arent wizards is balanced when enemy can cancell them with +4 bonus? these bound spells mustnt can be cancelled or change it to a leadership test as empire priests or khemri so enemy cant cancell it.

rigth now everyone is starting to do numbers and see that is imposible do these bound spells with only +2 models while enemy have +4 to cancell it

January 24

10 hours ago, Bosskelot said:

Cold One Knights with full plate are 2 points cheaper than dragon princes and have all of their attacks at S4 (remember, the mount exists and it has 2 attacks with armourbane). Not only are they deadlier in prolonged combat but the Knights themselves are hitting at S6 on the charge which is a much more important breakpoint than S5 on the charge.

Not to mention Black Guard have Stubborn and Immune to Psychology compared to Fear (not super useful on a unit like PG) and Veteran.

yes sure lets see:

cold ones:

in total: 2 attacks at ws3 s4 0rend +1 attack ws5 s6 rend 2

high elfs:

in total: 1 attack ws 3 s3 0 rend + 2 attacks ws 5 s5 rend 2

you think dark elfs are better? because i think highs elfs are better in every situation and also ignoring that dark elfs have stupidity that is the worse rule in tow.

also you cant compare stubborn that is useless in tow and imnume psy(that isnt bad) to fear that is the best stat in tow and veteran that again is one of the best stats and also having ward6 better too.

im not saying dark elfs are unplayables,but are just plain downgrades of high elfs

January 24

10 hours ago, The Red King said:

Had to go back and check you are in fact talking about the Dark Elves with the easiest access to a 2+ armor save dragon who can also get a 5+ ward against weak attacks and a 4+ ward against anything that could actually hurt him (pendant of Khaelith which btw is only 10 points more than the standard 5+ ward magic item that literally everyone is taking)

yes high elf dragon with +1 ws than dark elfs and +1 stomp sttack with save2 ward 5 and 5regen vs black dragon save 3(where are u finding the save 2?) ward 5 and no regen.

i see worse the black dragon

January 23

after study some of these i think in my opinion gw put zero effort to legacy armys and zero testing,they arent balanced,they are way way underpower than core armys.

i only have studied vampire counts and dark elves,but these have lost every flavour than they had and they are now a copy but with worse rules than high elfs and khemri.

per example dark elfs and high elfs allways have had the same bonus to magic(some editions was a +1 to cast). but now here high elfs can reroll one spell PER TURNS while dark elfs only can reroll one spell one time PER GAME.

so they had same skill im fantasy but here dark elf is just plain worse.

as white lion cloack and sea dragon cloack,now both are only a +1 save to shooting,but old white lion was +2 save to shooting and sea dragon was +2 s to shooting AND +1 save to melle,but now both are only +1 to shooting nerfing so much more the dark elf

oh by the way the black ark fleetmaster is missing......great effort put yes.....

-executioners are swordmasters but for +2 points and obviously even being more expensiver have worse stats with-1 rend,worse ws,worse initiative and dont have ward vs shooting.

-black guards are copied the phoenys guard but 1 points less and dont have ward neither fear. for only 1 point phoenys guard are better again

-cold one cavalry vs dragon princess, have HALF attacks for same points and worse save(dont have ward) and are stupid. same cost for half damage,worse save and worse rules

-cold one charriot vs white lion charriot: same cost and dark elf have +1 impact hit as pro and handicap........worse ws than lions,worse s the pilots and worse rend,also worse save(white lion cloack) and dark elf have stupid, again same cost for MANY WORSE stats

and the list in infinite, dark elves are a mirror of high elfs but with worse rules and expensiver. if we give a 8/10 to high elfs then dark elfs are a 5/10.

playables but not balanced with core armys

January 22

9 minutes ago, Ogregut said:

Am I missing something. Witch elves have the murderous rule but can't use it as they have 2 hand weapons and murderous can only be used with one hand weapon.

"great love and effort put to those pdf"

January 22

3 hours ago, Sception said:

Yes, though they do have one magic item, the flayed hauberk, which is heavy armor that a wizard can still wear.

Spells or armor is a pretty tough decision for vampire lords. Lots of power and utility in magic, but lack of armor makes you pretty vulnerable. Then again, if you're not a wizard you can't be the general, which lets you take a big expensive killy vampire lord, maybe on a monster, and throw him into combat secure in the knowledge that your load bearing general is a hero wizard safely burried in a second line infantry block.

i was thinking get the vampire on dragon,not mage because in tow is lvl 4 or nothing(there numbers showing this).

but in those pdf the vampires are almost as goblins heroes of 40 points but for 160 lol

vampires in tow are a shadow of how they were.

i think i wont use any vampire in my competitive vc plays

January 22

36 minutes ago, Beliman said:

I'm not a fan of the Battle for the skull pass thunderers. Anyone know if quarrellers and thunderes had another double kit or something?

yes,battle for the skull pass thunderers and warriors were diferent to the regular late 6th edition kit.

the skull pass models were only one piece while the regulars have 3/4 piece each model

-warriors of skull pass were only one hand and shield while the regular kit was warriors with one hand and shield or two handed axes

-the skull pass only had thuderers in one bit with zero upgrades. while the box of late 6th had the option to build with crossbows or guns(quarrelers or thuderers) also a extra axe to build them as rangers

January 22

that box MUST have double amount in everything to be the real deal,that box had 4 units when even orcs have 6 or 7 units.

also pretty dissapointed with the balance of core armys vs pdf army.

only seeing the balance in mirror units or skill,the pdf are worse and expensiver.......just why yes.

examples:

-high elfs and dark elfs had allways a +1 casting,now high elf have reroll one failled cast EACH TURN while dark elf only reroll one failled cast ONE TIME IN ENTIRE GAME.

so it is a mirror skill but better in core when was mirror in fantasy.

-black guard vs phoenyx guard, similar stats and cost but phoemyx guard have ward 6 better for same cost.

again not huge but for same cost have same stats but core army a extra of ward6

-executiomer vs swordmasters: same stats in general but dark elf cost +2 points than high elf and only have killing blows while swordmaster have +1 rend,+2 ws,+2initiative,ward6 to shooting and the 6 to wound ignore saves.

again mirror units but pdf have worse stats and cost more.

-dark elfs on deep one vs dragon princess, have worse save,half attack(1 vs 2)and have stupidy that is worse than impetious.

again same cost for mirror units but core have better save,double damage for same cost.

it isnt huge but if wr give a 8/10 to high elfs per example then dark elfs are 5/10

and is the same with vampire counts and lizardmens(i didnt see the others).

pdf armys arent useless or umplayables,but for sure they are one tier under core armys

January 22

5 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

Btw, out of curiosity. What's the procedure in a case like that? You send the whole box back and you "lose it"? Considering that the box is out of stock. Or do you contact them and they send you back the damaged sprue?

I only had problems with Salvat's magazine (Spanish Hachette filial) and whenever something is wrong or missing they send the whole issue to you.

i have had some cases where my battleforce or start collecting had one unit missing,they just sent me the unit missing.

also many times i got some bits brokens and when i asked for a change i had diferent results(all this is from shops non gw ofitial,i never buy from ofitial gw): the 80% of the times they just send me one new unit and i keep the old damaged but some weird ocasions they ask that i give the damaged unit back.

i know is a bit stupid ask for a new unit only for damaged bits,but after ser how others companys as tamiya or bandai use plastic box with each matriz to keep them safe.......i just dont acept anymore pay a overcosted money from gw and get a new product with damaged parts when i payed the full amount.

per example i got black knigths with the tail broken,blood knigths with the wing of the captain broken,khinerais with wings or even one tail broken,and my brother got many lumineths with arrows broken or even lances. all these from 100% new boxes from stores

January 22

this mate must be a genious because that list is hard to play and with a huge pile of things to keep in the head each turn.

after see the final with city vs city and both lists with two comand corps i think is easy to guess that the comand corp gonna be nerfed,very posible add unique to it or go beyond and even nerf it to not work on same unit.

glad see 0 fusilers after hear rivers of cryers and haters everywhere

also if they nerf the humans just because they won one tournament after months since the release, i hope they also take note as both players had 0,0 elfs and dwarfs.

so if they nerf humans i hope they are logical and buff the underpower units as dwarfs and some elfs

January 21

8 minutes ago, Noserenda said:

But don't take my word for it, Alan Merret confirmed as much in his Jordan Sorcery interview, and he's one of the best people to know. (Though I was surprised he put elves ahead of vampires)

yup i was looking for the vid where i read this. but empire was one of the less sold armys in fantasy even if they were the favorite army of many fantasy designers and said by this boss of gw,they tried push the sales of empire giving them more units that other armys and more plastic kits but this didnt worked.

the top seller was warrior of caos,then high elfs and dwarfs,then many others mixed and at the botton empire,bretonian and khemri

also we dont know if tow have been a success or not,they produced very SMALL amount of boxes and these sold out fast.

but this dont mean nothing.

they could have done only one box of each and these dudes think that was a success because was sold out.

we know that many stores only had ONE box delivered,sell one box by each store is a huge success? i dont think so

January 20

3 hours ago, brocktoon said:

This is something my regulars have been talking about quite a bit recently, so this is good timing. We're home players, though I play games infrequently at stores, as well. We're also strictly narrative players. Since day one with AoS (back in first edition), we've gone through intensive play weekends once a month where we'd do Path to Glory, build up an army to wherever we ended up with it, then stop and repeat the next month's weekend with a different army. Some stray thoughts from this standpoint.

AoS2 was our main game. We've barely played AoS3. We never articulated it as a disaster, it's just that it didn't take. The cognitive load is simply higher when compared to the prior editions. Two of our four regulars aren't the sort to read rules and army books extensively and they've always been in a cycle of sort of relearning the game every month. 1st and 2nd that wasn't a problem, 3rd is. That's not to say that 3rd is complex but it is the case that whatever invisible line there is where it tips over from able to pick up quickly to I can barely manage to comprehend this after one game was crossed in the transition to 3rd.

The cognitive load is just slightly too high. This is a problem with 40k, too, especially 9th. But I don't think 10th is a massive improvement. I like CPs just fine but that's where the load is. I have to remember this thing on this other sheet, then remember 5 or 10 or 15 others. I can help this by buying doodads, but if I'm a casual player I'm not going to do this. I might not even know they exist.

Part of this is what we've called the stats problem. Basically, GW since the mid-00s has refused to lean on differences in stats to differentiate units and instead increased the number of additional unit rules. Casting your mind back, a 1-10 scale on stats allows for immense variety in how units behave. But instead of, say, having WFB elves use an initiative 6, they decided to do elves strike first. But then there was maybe an edge case where that shouldn't happen, or it should happen more. So they add more specific, bespoke rules to things. I daresay that this now nearly 20 year old design ethos, much as I loved earlier editions of AoS, is why AoS was created in the first place. Design for rules, not stats, and you end up in a weird cognitive load space which we're in now, where it's started to feel like a card game (I even need cards or digital facsimiles to remind me everything my unit can do). This won't be fixed.

There are things I like. Monstrous rampages. I like the current use em or lose em CP system, even if there are maybe three too many generic CP dumps.

PtG in 3rd suuuuccccckkkssss. You have to track so much that it's just overwhelming, and the gesture toward taking your PtG army and playing matched play with them was both useless (nobody did this) and made you feel like it sort of didn't matter because matched is what matters anyway. It's annoying for me but I know the rules; our casual players, no chance they can handle this. It's everything bad from Crusade without the regular-ish cool campaigns that at least make Crusade worth looking at. Thankfully, you've got a good attempt at fixing it in the narrative forums here at TGA, even tho our default when we do play is to just go with how 1st and 2nd did it, albeit with slightly tweaked tables.

The added cognitive load doesn't really give gains across the board. By this I mean that stuff like monster rampages feel pretty good and limited, while heroic actions have expanded too much and don't feel like they gain you much (everyone is just rolling for the extra CP anyway, which you only do because of the system which increases cognitive load, which increases cognitive load further.

It's not just me. AoS during 2nd was the game at local stores. AoS nights were hopping and 40k nights lagged behind. Everyone was getting on board. Now, at what should be the best time for 3rd with full suites of army books and rules supposedly finely tuned? Dead. The local AoS FB groups are down to a couple posts a week. The product is piling up at the local stores. I don't want to extrapolate from local conditions to global too much, but I think the weird pace of AoS releases compared to past years shows some sort of slowdown GW is aware of (remember the 3e rules boxes at release which didn't move, we figured was due to the pandemic, only for them to still be on shelves three years later?).

All in all, the game feels sort of unwell. We mostly houserule or strip out things we don't care for and it's fine, but the magic of 2nd isn't really there (and it was magical). When we're spending time figuring out how to port new 3rd edition units to 2nd or how to make a 2.5 sort of hybrid, that's not swell.

thanks i couldnt writte it better.

our store had a similar situation,in 2.0 we had around 3 or 4 games each week,in 3.0 with luck we have one game in a full month(i have been this last month looking for a adversary with no luck).

2.0 was great,only build a random list and lets play!

3.0 we need think first in our list and what units we gonna need to do the tactics,then in the game we need keep in our head the tactics that we must do each turn and with wich unit.

its hard? no , its fun? NO

aos 2.0 was fun because the lists didnt matter and the game was won by who got double turn.......jokes asike. aos 3.0 is lost in many situations since the army list creation if you dont bring any mage,or fast units,or especific units(as khinerai in dok).

i wont say that aos 2.0 was better or worse than 3.0(that to me was better) but for sure was more friendly to casual gamers and more fun

January 20

3 hours ago, Riff_Raff_Rascal said:

Very few mentions of shooting being an issue so far.

its a problem,but for shooting armys,everyone hate shooting and gw have nerfed this edittion every single balanced shooting unit untill it is overcosted and dont worth use it.

sentinels werena example,then sc longbows crossbows,blisbarbs,fusilers of city(and very posible other nerf incoming) and also very posible other nerf incoming to sharks.

in general rigth now every single shooting unit is overcosted but in general people dont like shooting,so majority is happy with whooting being bad and gw is happy.

January 20

11 minutes ago, Hollow said:

Would you rather they were split across the 9 core factions to upgrade existing models (of which there is clearly a market for) or use those resources to release entirely new factions like Kislev, Grand Cathay, Araby or Moot?

i preffer first option.

this actual release have killed all the hype in my club of new players waiting for their favorite army to be released while old players are happy because they can finish their army without pay the price of second hand.

so with actual release and only in my club they wont get any new player and only 1 or 2 units sold to old players to finish their old collection, i think is a faill.

if they would have done the same than kemri and bretonian then we had around 7 new guys hyped for their army release and was going to do 7 new full armys and also those same old players were getting the new kits and finishing the old collection also.

so.......i think they have done a huge error,release new units for every army and sell well each army and then with time release these new armys was a better option than actual option of bad sells of core armys but hope for good sales of the new armys with the game allready dead

January 20

yes i agree with you.

orders in general are bad designer,bad balanced and only delay the game as the battle tactics do.

dwarfs orders are useless,the mortals back is ******(2 mortals for each 12 died and we must waste one hero and that is our army skills?), and the shieldwall as i have sent multiples feedback to gw is useless,only work in enemy combat phase and the magic,shooting,charges or our combat phase is a 0.

they must change shieldwall to be for a full turn untill our next turn or change forever but you loose it if you charge.

also i have said many times that ironbreakers are overcosted and a unit with 6'6 damage and 0 rend being slow must cost around 100 points(the save3 dont worth it as 10w save3 is worse than per example clanrats 20w save 5 for 100 points)

also dwarfs lost every buffs posible,the old +1 wounds of longbeards gone,the +1 attack of king gone again,the +1 hit of hurricanum gone,the +1 rend of runelord gone also(for ramged deleted and for melle nerfed into useless going from 2+ to casting it to 4+)

in general dwarfs dont have any support and is as you must play them. forget ironbreakers and irondrakes that are overcosted by 30%+ and only play hammerers without support and lomgbeard as msu units to fill the batleline tax.

is ironic but the better support that dwarfs have are the humans,have a human close and fusillers make the hammerers inmune to shooting or the enemy gonna give you a free shooting to your humans.

elfs are in better place,the retreat order is ******,but the attack first order is very strongth,, also the velociraptors are great for their cost,they are fast and 10 w with s3 for that cost is our best tank unit(only compare to ironbreakers for same cost)

also the drakespawn ryders have 2", have you tried a unit of 10? that gonna do ok damage for only 260 points and 20w with s3 is great,also some melle charriot doing mortals together is good.

but i can agree with you,city is only competitive in actual meta with humans and with the very posible incoming nerf this can even change too.

i am not a big tournament player and im fine with the balance of dwarfs and elfs,for sure they need some support from humans to work and as i said some units are umplayables as irondrakes or ironbreakers but in general isnposible play lists with 70% being dwarfs and elfs and win games

January 20

i wont be a hater.......i only gonna say this reveal is very dissapointint and not what i was expecting getting for each faction.

a new box with 0 new unit or heroe.

the box dont have nothing extra as rulesbook etc

the box is only around 5 old units and for sure with less disscount that khemri and bret(i hope this box cost around 99/100 € with the units that bring)

also 0 new units in the release.

only two new foot heroes on fw resin and thats all.

i think we can forget our dreamw for dwarfs.

i guess the shieldbearer new on fw and thats all,then come back the fw bsb and they dont bring nothing new.

also the box around 30 warriors,25 quarrelers and 1 cannon

January 19

12 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Thorgrim seems a bit off for TOW, remember that Alriksson was the High King at that time (btw, I want him too).

About new BSB, I just hope to see a plastic King/Thane on (3) shieldbearers, with an option for the Thane to have a BSB. That would be a good equivalent of the Baron dude on pegasus.

About the box, I hope you are 100% right (maybe thunderers instead of quarrellers, and I prefer cannons instead of organ gun, but either way, really good box).

Btw, TK and Bretonia had a new/resculpted units. What do you think about new resculpted Slayers or Rangers?

yes i know,so i said thorgrim as prince and not king,rigth now the king is alive and is his uncle if i remember rigth.

the box i said quarrelers and organ guns,but these boxes are multikit and both can be built as thunderers and cannons if they use the last version of late 6th edition for warriors,quarrelers etc

as i said i think rangers gonna be the new unit,we havent any real model for them while even if they are ugly and old we have slayers.

so seeing as they released the old metal battle pilgrims and the new unit was the unit withouth models, im sure if we get new unit gonna be the rangers.

January 19

wishlist for tomorrow:

dwarf box with:

-32 warriors

-32 quarrelers

-16 miners

-2 organ gun/canon

-new hero on shieldbearer

with the new book we get also:

-new fw model of grombindall with rules on the dwarf book

-new bsb of fw resin

-return of the kit of thorgrim on fw resin with rules as prince on the new book

-a new plastic kit with rangers

this is the more realistic,but my wildest dream is a new plastic kit style bretonian pegasus with a throne of power and the options to build on it a king with every option(one hand and shield,two hand and the bsb) or a runelord on it.

January 19

this new dok hero is the perfection,greek vibes and not over the top as usually is in aos.

the city box i am not fan,but if it cost around 40€(and not the rip off that was backtalon) i would get it to use in citys,a wh for my tow empire and a castellan for sc is usefull.

the lumineths im torn,the armored are great but the armorless are too much plain

January 17

in general to me aos 3 have been a downgrade of aos2 and have done less popular aos in my store.

its slower,more tedious,less fun and have created a bigger wall to new players because they must learn many extra things as heroic skill,monsters skills,battle tactics etc

-battle tactics are horrible and everyone hate them, is a huge waste of time doing longer the games,they are VERY UNBALANCED betwen armys and nobody in my zone likes the style of play that promote(wait turns doing nothing,run in circles and dont engage in combat etc)

-new coherency is horrible and have done useless and unplayables every unit with 1" range weapons and bases of 30" as vulkites berzerkers and also again make the games longer.

-new rule that mages doing a double 1 dont do more spells is again stupid and punishes mages with multiples spells(nagash 1k points doing a double 1 in first spell and then dont do nothing for entire turn)

in general i wish they just deleted every aos 3.0 rule and back to 2.0 that was faster,funnier and best in everything.

only the monster habilitys are a good thing because monsters have been weak for a long time but even this do games longer

January 17

14 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

What does the Sorceress do in a list that doesn't bring elves?

a mage with +2 to cast(+3 in settler gain) with a great inbuilt spell of d3 mortals AND -1 hit to enemys and with a +6 to their range of spells(with the enhacement of elfs)

and you can choose if you preffer hoarfrost or blizard,i usually choose blizard in case some enemy come close.

i allways play one and many times even two,usually dreadspears as sacrifice but sometimes i even use black guards.

maybe not the most competitive option,but in my store the combo of black dragon doing mortals to enemy with each miss+roar+sorceres 24" spell to put -1 hit to enemys have been umbeatable so far(granted we dont do 30+ tournaments of 5 rounds and we usually the best are 14 people with 3 rounds)

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Gallery

Store

Downloads

Blogs

Events

Posts posted by Doko