Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Arena Gameplay Settings Thread

Recommended Posts

Weren't you the same guy who didn't care for sprint since it isn't nearly as bad as Reach and 4?

 

If we're using radar to "balance" our gameplay mechanics, perhaps we need to rethink those game mechanics.

 

I think y'all need to really get on making that video of yours....It'd be an easier and more accessible way of understanding all your positions on Halo 5's gameplay and what arguments in favor of mechanics I question are. Love to see it. May clear things up for me.

1. Once again, you are failing to look at anything other than the surface of my arguments. I did say that Sprint is barely a factor in H5 compared to Reach/4, but I do believe that it creates an opening for abuse caused by the other abilities. Sprint alone is hardly worth using because of extremely harsh tradeoffs and an irrelevant speed increase.

 

Sprint combined with Slide/Thrust/Charge is extremely damaging. In fact, I'd say Slide is the most broken ability in the game. None of these abilities on their own break consistency and map movement but the ability to chain them and repetitively use them makes for extremely inconsistent player information and team coordination.

 

2. And you just contradicted yourself. You claim that no one has a defensive argument for Radar but then admitted that it is being used to balance the mechanics built into the game. As I just told you above, I do believe the mechanics can be toned down to a degree but as of now, Radar smooths out an inconsistency with player movement and map control/informational knowledge. It also can test players reaction times, but thats just a small quirk, not a major defense.

 

No one is saying "well it isn't that bad, we can just keep it". I feel like you are only saying that to devalue people's actual defense of that because no competent person would actually nonchalantly address an issue in that manner.

 

And keep in mind, I'm against Radar for Halo 5, but I refuse to allow people devalue the argument for it, because it does exist. In addition, the issue gets even deeper if you combine the argument to maintain vanilla/universal settings for competitive play, which is something that I am very adamant about.

 

 

3. My video has nothing to do with gameplay.

 

Edit- stupid mobile moving right before I click threads

 

OT: I am of the opinion that settings, at least Team Arena/Slayer/Objective should be the same as any pro settings. Whatever they decide on, keep in consistent throughout.

 

Agreed entirely. The argument for using vanilla settings goes far beyond what most people believe the argument is for. I'm also very upset a Quinn/MP Team for jumbling up the settings across gametypes/playlists/custom games. Everything should have just remained universal and consistent, regardless of whether the changes were good or bad.

 

Does anyone still believe that 343 will change anything about radar, weapon balance or anything else?

 

 

Not using the approach that people are currently taking.

Share this post


Link to post

It also can test players reaction times, but thats just a small quirk, not a major defense.

 

 

I can respond to the rest of the post later but wouldn't no radar test reaction times more on average? It's far more challenging for me to react if someone pops out of nowhere than if I see a dot a second before the guy comes around a corner, for example.

Share this post


Link to post

I can respond to the rest of the post later but wouldn't no radar test reaction times more on average? It's far more challenging for me to react if someone pops out of nowhere than if I see a dot a second before the guy comes around a corner, for example.

 

 

Fair point, true.

 

But then this becomes an argument of what are acceptable methods of giving information to the player, which really is a just a hyper-subjective argument that never ends.

Share this post


Link to post

Regret Refresh:

 

  • Storm Rifle(s) moved/removed to Tunnel
  • Needler moved to Arch
  • Plasma Pistol moved to P1
  • DMRs moved to Ramparts
  • Boltshots moved to DMR
  • Fuel Rod replaced by Plasma Caster

 

This is the newest iteration in Quinn's Map Inventory. I dig mostly everything.

However, I think Plasma Pistol and Needler should switch and DMRs shouldn't be on Ramparts. I've also never been a fan of Carbines in the bottom bases because they don't really serve any role or purpose after the opening rush.

Share this post


Link to post

1. Once again, you are failing to look at anything other than the surface of my arguments. I did say that Sprint is barely a factor in H5 compared to Reach/4, but I do believe that it creates an opening for abuse caused by the other abilities. Sprint alone is hardly worth using because of extremely harsh tradeoffs and an irrelevant speed increase.

 

Sprint combined with Slide/Thrust/Charge is extremely damaging. In fact, I'd say Slide is the most broken ability in the game. None of these abilities on their own break consistency and map movement but the ability to chain them and repetitively use them makes for extremely inconsistent player information and team coordination.

 

2. And you just contradicted yourself. You claim that no one has a defensive argument for Radar but then admitted that it is being used to balance the mechanics built into the game. As I just told you above, I do believe the mechanics can be toned down to a degree but as of now, Radar smooths out an inconsistency with player movement and map control/informational knowledge. It also can test players reaction times, but thats just a small quirk, not a major defense.

 

No one is saying "well it isn't that bad, we can just keep it". I feel like you are only saying that to devalue people's actual defense of that because no competent person would actually nonchalantly address an issue in that manner.

 

And keep in mind, I'm against Radar for Halo 5, but I refuse to allow people devalue the argument for it, because it does exist. In addition, the issue gets even deeper if you combine the argument to maintain vanilla/universal settings for competitive play, which is something that I am very adamant about.

 

 

3. My video has nothing to do with gameplay.

 

 

 

Agreed entirely. The argument for using vanilla settings goes far beyond what most people believe the argument is for. I'm also very upset a Quinn/MP Team for jumbling up the settings across gametypes/playlists/custom games. Everything should have just remained universal and consistent, regardless of whether the changes were good or bad.

 

 

 

 

Not using the approach that people are currently taking.

I will respond to this later, currently stuck on mobile and i can't spell worth a damn

Share this post


Link to post

One thing for Arena, Have it like Modern Warfare to where all players must be in game chat. So annoying when solo searching 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

One thing for Arena, Have it like Modern Warfare to where all players must be in game chat. So annoying when solo searching 

And then people will just not use their mic.

 

There's a reason Call of Duty got rid of it for most, if not all playlists in later titles.

Share this post


Link to post

And then people will just not use their mic.

 

There's a reason Call of Duty got rid of it for most, if not all playlists in later titles.

I thought it was only in Search so you couldn't get on the enemy team and call everyone out.

Share this post


Link to post

I thought it was only in Search so you couldn't get on the enemy team and call everyone out.

Not sure about recent games, I know MW2 put it in most playlists.

Share this post


Link to post

I am really hoping that they implement the radar that only shows players that are using spartan abilities/sprinting. I think this would be a huge improvement over what we have now. 

 

I think I remember hearing that 343 has been testing this, but I don't remember what the source was. 

Share this post


Link to post

I am really hoping that they implement the radar that only shows players that are using spartan abilities/sprinting. I think this would be a huge improvement over what we have now. 

 

I think I remember hearing that 343 has been testing this, but I don't remember what the source was. 

Ninja said it was being tested. 

 

Take it as a grain of salt. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

https://www.twitch.tv/naded/v/60883417

 

This is a great video where Naded talks about H5 and its setting for a good amount of time. He seems to agree with what people here are constantly saying. He also calls out 343 for not listening. 

 

Rant starts at 2:25:10

 

Thanks @@NavG123 for finding this. 

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

https://www.twitch.tv/naded/v/60883417

 

This is a great video where Naded talks about H5 and its setting for a good amount of time. He seems to agree with what people here are constantly saying. He also calls out 343 for not listening. 

 

Rant starts at 2:25:10

 

Thanks @@NavG123 for finding this. 

Here's a link to the time exactly https://www.twitch.tv/naded/v/60883417?t=2h25m10s

 

To do this all you gotta do is type "?t=2h25m10s" at the end of the URL. the h stands for hours, the m for minutes, and the s for seconds. Kinda weird but good to know lol.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

(Edited out of Pro thread, pasting here.)

 

 

 

I think Halo 5 has solved this because it has really increased the skill cap on movement. 

 

The existence of Thruster definitely helps make Auto battles more interesting/skillful than they otherwise would be.  The direction and timing of thruster usage can make or break an engagement between autos, because they not only affect your reticule aim, but they also reset the bloom, so they return you to tap accuracy.  If you thrust too early, you'll be too bloomed to guarantee a finish.  If you thrust too late, you'll get cleaned up before you can start firing again.  If you thrust just right, you get rewarded with a return to perfect accuracy shots just in time to clean up a player.

 

If you thrust backwards, you weaken your ability to land shots.  If you thrust straight ahead, you give your opponent free time to land shots.  If you thrust sideways, you may throw off your reticule too much or keep to much distance between you.  But there's situations where each of those is necessary.  Thrust usage with strafe is slightly less impactful in pistol battles because there's no recoil or bloom/spread with precision weapons in this game (slight recoil per burst with BR, but that's the only case and it resets with every shot)... so using your thrust to reset your aim with autos is super important.

 

I just think autos promote camping.  People wouldn't camp as much if they just had a pistol because you cannot quickly get a kill and get away like you can with an auto.  I think it's fine to have a few autos on the map but the respawn timers need to be inflated greatly so there aren't half the players on the map with storm rifles like there is on regret and empire.

 

For me, autos also promote charging.  If I have an SMG or Storm Rifle, I'm far more likely to go for a sprint+thrust+slide+leap play somewhere blind because I know I can get in range with my SMG to win the battle.  Of course, I'm also bad at this game and charge too much.

 

Really, though, it's situational and depends on the information you have.  If you don't know what's around a corner and don't have help, camping is usually the better choice regardless of the weapon you have.  You won't risk getting caught off guard or giving up first shot to someone by being impatient.  And this (to me) is more of a motion tracker issue than an autos issue (but the combination of the two, and the fact that autos have faster kill time than the pistol, definitely exacerbates it).  If there were more counterplay to someone crouched/immobile around a corner than to just stay away from that corner, it'd be different...but the fact that you attempting to push gives up information to him and you can't possibly be aware you gave up the information until it's too late is problematic.  But that's an issue we've already beaten to death as a community. :p

 

I just wish, if the Motion Tracker is here to stay, there was either some counterplay to it, or some way for it to indicate when you're spotted on someone else's motion tracker.  I've seen Down Periscope...I know submarines know when they're being pinged by others' radar! (I know this is a 100% accurate depiction of how submarines work because it was in a movie and movies never lie.)

 

Even adjusting grenades to improve counterplay options would be better than leaving as is...  Up the smoke on a frag grenade so players can push behind the cloud undetected.  Up the distortion/flash of plasma grenades so they become mini-flashbangs when they don't stick a target.  Add a radar pulse when a Splinter grenade detonates to tell you if a target is crouched around a corner as you throw the grenade blind.  Little things like this would at least improve the hand we've been dealt without 343 having to stray away from their vision of the game (regardless of whether or not we like their vision.)

 

 

2. Your idea that autos reward positioning while pistols only reward brute accuracy is fallacious. If I'm sitting behind good cover and I catch a player in the open who has a better shot than me i can very often win the engagement. Why? Because I'm using intelligent positioning. Implying that whipping out an AR in close quarters is in some way more rewarding to good map movement and positioning than using a pistol is ridiculous. In reality, you're reducing the skill gap in positioning because someone's ridiculously good strafe or evasive map movement that might otherwise throw off another player's superior accuracy is negated by AR spraying.

 

I think you misunderstand the point.

 

If I'm a player with mediocre aim, and positioned well... with nothing but a pistol, there's a pretty good chance I lose the battle anyway, because mediocre aim.

 

If I'm a player with mediocre aim, positioned well, and armed with an AR... but I choose to use a pistol, there's a pretty good chance I lose the battle anyway, because mediocre aim.

 

If I'm a player with mediocre aim, positioned well, and armed with an AR, and I choose to use the AR, I get rewarded for my positioning and weapon choice, and I probably win the battle as a result.

 

 

Situation #2 actually happens a lot in this game (especially Diamond-mid Onyx levels) -- people try to use their pistol in situations where an AR could've guaranteed a kill and they die.  It's poor use of their Valuation skill, and they get punished for it, despite having good route taking or spatial awareness to know where a target was and how to approach them.

 

If the sandbox were balanced well, there's still the opportunity for the pistol user to reactively thrust away from my AR and out-shoot me, but at least in that case, even if my aim is poor, I likely got more damage into the player than I would have with a precision weapon and set the player up to be cleaned up by a teammate.  Because I took the weapon with the higher % chance to kill/deal damage in the situation.

 

 

It's similar to the situation you see a lot from weaker players where they panic when they're losing a battle and they attempt to throw a grenade rather than continue shooting -- they're not only forfeiting the battle and resigning themselves to a death, but they're also getting rid of an easier chance to ensure that player dies by weakening the player for their teammate.  The higher level play you watch, the less these "panic grenades" happen, and players will just shoot until they die because they know they can get a teammate to clean them up...whereas if they throw a grenade, it's typically going to be dodged as they get finished off...and the player will be healthy and possibly even able to turn a double kill.

Share this post


Link to post

Automatics, for better or worse, are part of Halo. When you remove them from the game, you are bending the rules to your vision.

 

Instead of thinking of automatics as "easy mode kills" and "less skilled weapons" think of them as slower kill time shotguns with extra counterplay on the side of the player being attacked. Because most of the time, if you're out of close range, the automatic loses the battle to the pistol user anyway. Likewise, they are also weapons that reward superior positioning, rather than superior gunskill.

 

I think it's absurd to reward only players with good gunskill and completely shun players with fantastic route taking who have weaker gunskill. Because the ability to fire a gun straight is not the only skill existent in Halo. Allowing weapons like automatics and boltshots and Hydras and Plasma Casters to exist in the sandbox allows players to find a more intelligent approach to the game and still win without necessarily having to have the best ability to move their thumbs.

 

If you want the game to be only about a player's ability to put a pistol reticule over a player's head and shoot 5 times better than the other player's ability to do the same, you are dumbing down an otherwise diverse game and reducing the potential diversity and player pool just to fit your own definition of skill.

 

You're shunning players like me who can't aim but still find ways to win games. I've generally gravitated away from the competitive playlists in the past because default Halo is more enjoyable. And if you're talking about competitive Halo, why are you not playing competitive Halo, but rather a stripped down version of the game that rewards your own idea of the game? David Sirlin has a term for those kind of people. It's scrub.

1. We are inevitably engaging in a selective process when we make a competitive playlist. We choose to not have team snipers, team rockets, team fiesta, etc, and we also choose not to include certain maps. These things are all "part of Halo" but we choose to exclude them based on the idea that not everything in halo is well-suited for competitive play.

 

2. Your idea that autos reward positioning while pistols only reward brute accuracy is fallacious. If I'm sitting behind good cover and I catch a player in the open who has a better shot than me i can very often win the engagement. Why? Because I'm using intelligent positioning. Implying that whipping out an AR in close quarters is in some way more rewarding to good map movement and positioning than using a pistol is ridiculous. In reality, you're reducing the skill gap in positioning because someone's ridiculously good strafe or evasive map movement that might otherwise throw off another player's superior accuracy is negated by AR spraying.

Share this post


Link to post

Autos don't need skillful gameplay to them. Especially not when they're homogenized to a point where they all roughly dominate the same range, except one auto also has a shield stripping ability that makes it objectively better than any othee (storm rifle).

 

You want skill? Add some predictable spread patterns to them. Making them random with more range is doing nothing but making autos as prevalent as they are and rewarding players with less gunskill in a pure 1v1 while precision weapon users get dicked on so bad.

 

Of course, I believe autos should be a part of the sandbox; lets avoid Reach, 2 and 3 where they were removed because they were weak in every regard. But making them strong in nearly every regard is bad business too.

 

Honestly? Autos power is directly related to the pistols power, but not the other way around. Making the pistol kill faster with reduced bullet magnetism, to me, will both keep defensive gameplay with the abilities and other means in check, along with promoting a more skillful but difficult to use weapon as a constant in-game, rather than being swapped out for any other objectively better precision weapon.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Autos don't need skillful gameplay to them.

It certainly won't hurt. I miss the Sentinel Beam.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think you misunderstand the point.

 

If I'm a player with mediocre aim, and positioned well... with nothing but a pistol, there's a pretty good chance I lose the battle anyway, because mediocre aim.

 

If I'm a player with mediocre aim, positioned well, and armed with an AR... but I choose to use a pistol, there's a pretty good chance I lose the battle anyway, because mediocre aim.

 

If I'm a player with mediocre aim, positioned well, and armed with an AR, and I choose to use the AR, I get rewarded for my positioning and weapon choice, and I probably win the battle as a result.

 

 

Situation #2 actually happens a lot in this game (especially Diamond-mid Onyx levels) -- people try to use their pistol in situations where an AR could've guaranteed a kill and they die. It's poor use of their Valuation skill, and they get punished for it, despite having good route taking or spatial awareness to know where a target was and how to approach them.

 

If the sandbox were balanced well, there's still the opportunity for the pistol user to reactively thrust away from my AR and out-shoot me, but at least in that case, even if my aim is poor, I likely got more damage into the player than I would have with a precision weapon and set the player up to be cleaned up by a teammate. Because I took the weapon with the higher % chance to kill/deal damage in the situation.

I didn't misunderstand anything. You characterized it as a binary choice between positioning-based gameplay with ARs or brute accuracy-based gameplay with pistols when you said the following:

 

]I think it's absurd to reward players with good gunskill and completely shun players with fantastic route taking who have weaker gunskill. Because the ability to fire a gun straight is not the only skill existent in [email protected]

 

"If you want the game to be only about a player's ability to put a pistol reticule over a player's head and shoot 5 times better than the other player's ability to do the same, you are dumbing down an otherwise diverse game and reducing the potential diversity and player pool just to fit your own definition of skill."

 

After I pointed out that positioning is still rewarded EVEN IF A PLAYER HAS MEDIOCRE ACCURACY, you pulled these three scenarios out, which basically illustrate that the only real skill gap that you're talking about is knowing when to pull out an AR. Aka the easiest thing to know in the universe

Share this post


Link to post

It certainly won't hurt. I miss the Sentinel Beam.

The sentinel beam is not even close to an auto.

 

Btw I miss it too, cool way of putting a lighting gun in Halo

Share this post


Link to post

I didn't misunderstand anything. You characterized it as a binary choice between positioning-based gameplay with ARs or brute accuracy-based gameplay with pistols

 

I'm more saying that the existence of autos is an amplifier for positional gameplay, whereas the "brute accuracy-based gameplay" mutes (not removes) the potential rewards of superior positioning if you simply don't have the same level of accuracy to back it up.

 

Superior positioning is still good (see: StelluR) but it is devalued compared to just being able to land shots and strafe well.

 

 

 

I think this community, as a whole, puts too much focus on landing shots to determine whether or not a player is good.  I think it's an important skill, but gets overvalued in lieu of some of the more subtle aspects of top level Halo.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm more saying that the existence of autos is an amplifier for positional gameplay, whereas the "brute accuracy-based gameplay" mutes (not removes) the potential rewards of superior positioning if you simply don't have the same level of accuracy to back it up.

 

Superior positioning is still good (see: StelluR) but it is devalued compared to just being able to land shots and strafe well.

 

 

 

I think this community, as a whole, puts too much focus on landing shots to determine whether or not a player is good.  I think it's an important skill, but gets overvalued in lieu of some of the more subtle aspects of top level Halo.

I agree, Halo isn't just about one particular aspect over another. There are plenty of times in CE where my positioning has saved me more than my shots ever will.

 

The problem is that how autos and precision weapons are balanced remove the situational aspect, as there are CLEAR upgrades to certain weapons, which is not conducive to strategy in a so called arena shooter.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'll briefly throw out my thoughts since I think both sides of the argument are being illustrated fairly well.

 

The purpose for autos in my opinion is to provide an earned advantage for close quarters combat by increasing DPS and ease of use. The argument shouldn't be that "these weapons don't take skill" because one could argue that an SMG takes a ton more skill than Rockets, or Shotgun, or Sword. It's a stigma circle jerk that doesn't have any objectivity to it, and this is amplified by the way Automatics are handled/balanced in Halo 5.

 

I think the balance of autos solely relies on those three factors (not including gunfight variability, radar, or map design/flow):

 

  1. How difficult is it to obtain them
  2. How forgiving is the ease of use
  3. How much damage is outputted

The Assault Rifle has the lowest damage output and is in the middle of the three for ease of use, but you don't have to obtain it, therefore it's not balanced.

 

The Storm Rifle has insane damage output and is arguably the easiest to use (although one could argue against this because the Storm Rifle has a lot of variables... random spread, projectiles, fast overheat, etc.), and has inconsistent obtainability (on a map like Rig, its in an unfavorable position – balanced; On a map like Riptide/Empire, there are two of them in favorable positions – not balanced)

 

The SMG has a difficult usability due to spread and ranged recoil, mid-tier damage output, and is also mid-tier in obtainability.

 

It's for these reasons that I don't mind the Storm Rifle on maps like Plaza or Rig because it provides a situational advantage at the cost of extreme sacrifices of map control. However, they are completely gamebreakinig on Empire and Riptide. The SMG on a map like Fathom or Coliseum provides defensive utility and aggression but can still be bested if caught of guard at range (the SMG's new placement also helps this flow). The Assault Rifle needs a nerf because you spawn with it, simple as that.

 

The point is that the argument that "Autos take no skill" is the reason why none of you will ever make any progress towards their balance or removal, because that isn't what the issue is. Tons of weapons throughout all of Halo's history have had varying degrees of easiness, even in Halo 1, but they were balanced around situational viability, obtainability, and strength.

 

Halo 5's problem primarily lies in placement of automatics, quantity of automatics, as well as other factors such as map design and Radar.

 

Edit: I also have a very in-depth argument that says Tier 1 timers shouldn't exist (everything Tier 2 or Tier 3), and this would heavily nerf automatics – particularly the Storm Rifle.

 

Edit 2: Fuck man this post is actually fire and no one in the HCS Thread is going to see it  :flip:

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

The argument of "universal settings" and "playing the same game/thing" is for out of box settings to be good in the first place and to use that, not to compromise with less than stellar settings/maps/gametypes/whatever. If it turns out work needs to be done to the game post release that improves upon the game (and I'm not talking drastic, as it should be fairly good already, ideally) then it would be up to 343 to support that (or not but we're talking ideal here) and roll those changes out everywhere. They could simply say something along the lines of "Due to player feedback, backend data and in house testing we've rolled out changes/adjustments/balances/whatever to __/___/___ to help improve ___. We'll continue to monitor the game, so send us your feedback".

 

 

 

 

As far as the "no radar being too different from the base game", I have one question, one outlook that I want to ask people. Assuming the rest of the game is the same, whether theres adjustments or not and assuming having no radar doesn't turn the game into ass, couldn't/wouldn't an outlook "outsiders" have for no radar simply be that it makes it harder? Puts more emphasis on teamwork/communication/coordination? Something like "Oh hey they play the same thing as I do but its a littler harder with no radar because you need better teamwork, you can't rely on radar". Is this not a simple perspective that non competitive players can have? It'd be pretty easy to spin too. Am I crazy? Is it too simple? Why is there the assumption that if you remove radar the perceived reaction would be something along the lines of "omg theres no radar, its so different, fuck this shit" and nothing more?

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'm more saying that the existence of autos is an amplifier for positional gameplay, whereas the "brute accuracy-based gameplay" mutes (not removes) the potential rewards of superior positioning if you simply don't have the same level of accuracy to back it up.

 

Superior positioning is still good (see: StelluR) but it is devalued compared to just being able to land shots and strafe well.

 

 

 

I think this community, as a whole, puts too much focus on landing shots to determine whether or not a player is good. I think it's an important skill, but gets overvalued in lieu of some of the more subtle aspects of top level Halo.

By your definition of what "positional gameplay" seems to be, I could say that hammer or sword secondaries amplify the rewards of superior positioning. No. Talking about rewarding positioning is not so simple as saying that dumbing down the accuracy component to kindergarten levels with ARs will amplify the rewards of smart positioning. These two ideas (aiming skill and positioning skill) don't exist on a seesaw. As I said before, someone could use confusing trick jumps, strafing, or smart routes to overcome their bad accuracy and win an engagement against a better player; however, a great strafe, confusing trick jumps, and intelligent routes won't be as likely to throw off the aim of an automatic noobcannon

Share this post


Link to post

Tons of weapons throughout all of Halo's history have had varying degrees of easiness, even in Halo 1, but they were balanced around situational viability, obtainability, and strength.

I'd be inclined to ask you what weapons you think in past Halos were like this. More so CE. Utterly curious. Mainly because I personally can't say I know another weapon in any other Halo that's as powerful as the Halo 5 Storm Rifle is to other weapons in its respective sandbox, utility included.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

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

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.