Goodgame Studios forum archives ::

[4278933] Grim Reaper9 (US1) [None] :: Feb. 3, 2016, 11:54 p.m.

Metros and capitols how many has neph stolen?

[4278939] Tempus (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 4, 2016, 12:18 a.m.

Grim Reaper9 (US1) said:

Metros and capitols how many has neph stolen?

Stolen? None

Bought? At least one we know of.

How many OPs have they pushed their subs and friends to take during this war is a better question.

Or better yet, I think the terminology in the points system is "Can you survive a Zombie Apocalypse"

Mirin the manipulation of others to keep your own hands clean so you can post hypocritical alliance descriptions.

[4278958] We_Ner (US1) [None] :: Feb. 4, 2016, 1:41 a.m.

Grim Reaper9 (US1) said:

Metros and capitols how many has neph stolen?

Clear cut answer would be 3 metros and 3 towers from DT due to spineless traitors. Metros/Caps actually taken by force in entire existence of KON would be a big 0.

Edit- Almost makes you wonder why people believed them when they promised property to everyone that helped them. Not like they even know how to capture one.... but good luck pissing away your cash trying to keep face....

[4278968] GB11 (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 4, 2016, 2:22 a.m.

Manatee (US1) said:

bonkerz (US1) said:

Does KoN stand for Negan in another language? It makes sense since she is the only one that does anything. Can anyone confirm this theory?

I hadn't realized Torcherers lost all those members and towers by just one single person. In fact, we at GK often wonder what would happen if you guys got hit by 2 people. But no need for overkill, right?

But I wouldn't worry; if this Negan-only thing is a recent development, then surely you'll have an active roster, numerous troops, and many towers back again real soon.

Happy Hump Day!

In this post we see manatee thinks KTs are the most important thing that matters. tfw we have had 2 kts for half a year and you still can't take any property

tfw GK has lost more subs than us. feels good mane

[4278969] LightSwayer (US1) [None] :: Feb. 4, 2016, 2:24 a.m.

GK, wasn't presented proof.

And decided to deny it.

[4279617] Manatee (US1) [None] :: Feb. 4, 2016, 7:44 p.m.

GB11 (US1) said:

Manatee (US1) said:

bonkerz (US1) said:

Does KoN stand for Negan in another language? It makes sense since she is the only one that does anything. Can anyone confirm this theory?

I hadn't realized Torcherers lost all those members and towers by just one single person. In fact, we at GK often wonder what would happen if you guys got hit by 2 people. But no need for overkill, right?

But I wouldn't worry; if this Negan-only thing is a recent development, then surely you'll have an active roster, numerous troops, and many towers back again real soon.

Happy Hump Day!

In this post we see manatee thinks KTs are the most important thing that matters. tfw we have had 2 kts for half a year and you still can't take any property

tfw GK has lost more subs than us. feels good mane

My post was mostly for humor, responding to humor. But when I saw this, I was disappointed to see that you would try to make such conclusions. But hey, desperate times call for desperate posts

Mistake #1
KTs are not the most important thing, but they are a reflection of those things that are more important, such as an active member roster. As well as the ability to have enough people on enough constantly making troops instead of just buying offense when they're on, and defending what you have. In a broader sense, the most important thing is the activity level and governorship that make your alliance a fun place to be.

There are other important things as well (skill, wallet power, diplomacy, etc.) but there's a reason I mentioned towers 3rd and not first. There's also a reason you chose to ignore those other ones. Until those more important things change, you guys are only going to be able to maintain so many towers.

Mistake #2
In wartime, maintaining 1, 2, or 3 KTs is easy for strong alliances of our caliber (e.g. GK, KoN, Torcherers, M:U, and others) often independent of roster activity level. Above that though, it starts getting tougher for every tower you own if you don't have that active roster. GB11, I would not boast about holding 2 towers for 6 months. It means we've prevented you from doing anything to climb out of that level of strength and support. Explain it away however you'd like though.

Plus, as you know, it's not your 2 towers that matter. It's your 2 plus M:U's towers (they can hold more than you guys can right now). Though personally, I think you guys can probably hold 4 right now in Torcherers if you chose to put the pedal to the medal.

Mistake #3
We've lost more subs than you? Holy cow, what a straw man argument, lol. Are you forgetting our alliances' (and our subs') relative reputations of strength at the start of this war compared to now? And the fact you even refuse to acknowledge the subs you did have? I'm not trying to kick you while you're down or be elitist or anything, I don't even have any inclination to minimize how well you guys play, you do have members that play very, very well. But if anyone is going to be talking about what others have lost, it shouldn't be you guys.

[4279733] Manatee (US1) [None] :: Feb. 4, 2016, 9:25 p.m.

Annnnd... that was more like talking down from a pedestal than I meant. Sorry if the tone seemed argumentative.

Suffice it to say that KT's aren't the be-all, end-all, we've always known that and never said otherwise (but you guys have, in trying to create a position for us, lol). But we do know that the ability to maintain a hold on those KTs is a reflection of an alliance's consistent activity and strength and an indication of how you're doing in the war.

I don't expect you guys to remain at 2 towers for long, you should be at 4 or so and will probably climb back to that at some point. But soon (my belief) is that 2 towers will be your legitimate number you can hold, and from there we'll try to push further. And actually I think you guys had 3 towers just a couple of weeks ago, and 4 towers not long before that (though I'm not certain on that last part).

[4279844] GB11 (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 12:53 a.m.

Manatee (US1) said:

GB11 (US1) said:

Manatee (US1) said:

bonkerz (US1) said:

Does KoN stand for Negan in another language? It makes sense since she is the only one that does anything. Can anyone confirm this theory?

I hadn't realized Torcherers lost all those members and towers by just one single person. In fact, we at GK often wonder what would happen if you guys got hit by 2 people. But no need for overkill, right?

But I wouldn't worry; if this Negan-only thing is a recent development, then surely you'll have an active roster, numerous troops, and many towers back again real soon.

Happy Hump Day!

In this post we see manatee thinks KTs are the most important thing that matters. tfw we have had 2 kts for half a year and you still can't take any property

tfw GK has lost more subs than us. feels good mane

My post was mostly for humor, responding to humor. But when I saw this, I was disappointed to see that you would try to make such conclusions. But hey, desperate times call for desperate posts

Mistake #1
KTs are not the most important thing, but they are a reflection of those things that are more important, such as an active member roster. As well as the ability to have enough people on enough constantly making troops instead of just buying offense when they're on, and defending what you have. In a broader sense, the most important thing is the activity level and governorship that make your alliance a fun place to be.

There are other important things as well (skill, wallet power, diplomacy, etc.) but there's a reason I mentioned towers 3rd and not first. There's also a reason you chose to ignore those other ones. Until those more important things change, you guys are only going to be able to maintain so many towers.

Mistake #2
In wartime, maintaining 1, 2, or 3 KTs is easy for strong alliances of our caliber (e.g. GK, KoN, Torcherers, M:U, and others) often independent of roster activity level. Above that though, it starts getting tougher for every tower you own if you don't have that active roster. GB11, I would not boast about holding 2 towers for 6 months. It means we've prevented you from doing anything to climb out of that level of strength and support. Explain it away however you'd like though.

Plus, as you know, it's not your 2 towers that matter. It's your 2 plus M:U's towers (they can hold more than you guys can right now). Though personally, I think you guys can probably hold 4 right now in Torcherers if you chose to put the pedal to the medal.

Mistake #3
We've lost more subs than you? Holy cow, what a straw man argument, lol. Are you forgetting our alliances' (and our subs') relative reputations of strength at the start of this war compared to now? And the fact you even refuse to acknowledge the subs you did have? I'm not trying to kick you while you're down or be elitist or anything, I don't even have any inclination to minimize how well you guys play, you do have members that play very, very well. But if anyone is going to be talking about what others have lost, it shouldn't be you guys.

I didnt realize I was boasting that we only have 2 kts lol. Strong twisting of my words. It just makes more sense to only hold a couple kts, especially with nearly every active person in this game now having crazy CY gems. Could we hold some more? sure we could. And are you serious about saying that you guys have never said KTs are a be-all, end-all? that was all you guys were saying at the beginning of the war when you gained the prime positions and took the kts. Now that you have realized how stupid you were to believe that, you act like you never said that.

As for the subs, im honestly interested what subs we lost? Unless you consider some of MU subs as our subs, the only sub i believe we have lost is TMK, who jumped to KoN right when the war kicked off so I wouldn't really consider that as a sub lost.

I do envy your ability to twist words and avoid certain topics and questions. A lot of people see right through that unfortunately.

[4279886] Manatee (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 3:01 a.m.

GB11 (US1) said:
And are you serious about saying that you guys have never said KTs are a be-all, end-all? that was all you guys were saying at the beginning of the war when you gained the prime positions and took the kts. Now that you have realized how stupid you were to believe that, you act like you never said that.

First let me say this isn't going to be an easy post without creating more arguments. Let's give it a whirl though!

You said "Manatee thinks KT's are the most important thing that matters."
That means me. And I am absolutely 100% serious that I've never held that position. I've held the position I mentioned above in my previous post. It's a mistake to lump me into things just because I and GK support KoN in the war (if that's what you did).

Here are a few examples of things I've been very consistent about this entire war:
1) My preference was for all sides to come to some agreement.
2) Battle reports on the forums are for fun and not indicative of a side's activity.
3) KTs are a means, not an end. And KT ownership is just a reflection of other indicators.
4) I hate multi-accounting and, and I hate when people take a forum/game and follow it into real life. I don't care whose side you're on.

GB11 (US1) said:
As for the subs, im honestly interested what subs we lost? Unless you consider some of MU subs as our subs, the only sub i believe we have lost is TMK, who jumped to KoN right when the war kicked off so I wouldn't really consider that as a sub lost.

You misunderstood I think. I wasn't saying anything about subs lost, I was saying you're using a straw argument. You went from almost no subs to .. almost no subs, lol. The real argument would be what our alliance families have gained or lost and how our strengths have changed (scroll up and see). I'll take a stab at your question though:

I'd say TMK, The MISC 2, and MOP and M:U were your subs. You lost 75% of them.
1. TMK - you don't want to count them, yet you guys are including subs we picked up *after* the war.
2. The MISC 2 - has 17 members left without a single rv and no activity. Been that way for months. It "exists" as a graveyard for you guys to farm, among others.
3. MOP - now called Rustling Jimmies, says they're MISC but not Torcherers.
4. There may be others too, I just don't know if they're subs of your sub M:U or not, but they're still part of your family.

(I'm a bit weak on the server's history of subs, so if you reasonably point out where I'm wrong above, I'm willing to consider it as education for myself.)

So back to what we're talking about... You brought up our subs and I said it was a straw argument, and to look at what's changed in terms of our strengths and reputations (and I don't mean good/bad rep). Yes you've lost some subs, but you've also lost dozens (over 100) players whom you kept pulling into MISC main from other alliances who have since left to form and strengthen independent alliances. You've lost almost all of your KTs. You've also lost about 1/2 of your power points (daily activity level) since the hey day of forming Torcherers, etc. In comparison, GK isn't in the same position. We've had a few people leave and pulled some more in, but there's been no hyper-revolving door. We also now have subs which are much stronger and more active than we were when we entered the war.

So I was pointing out the irony of you suggesting a look at subs when the big picture is quite well illustrated. Feel free to point things out, but make sure to keep perspective.

GB11 (US1) said:
I do envy your ability to twist words and avoid certain topics and questions. A lot of people see right through that unfortunately.

How do you make such comments with a straight face? Ahh, you don't

Please point out where I've twisted or avoided. Here's my synopsis:

1) You said you've had 2 KTs and still have them. If you don't feel like that's a boast, fine. I hardly think it's twisting or avoiding anything to say what I did though. Looking back at it I still think it makes sense.
2) The KT importance thing - only twist there is you, trying to suggest what I've said or think. Hey, if I could be more than 100% right about myself, I'd try, believe me. You may be lumping me in with other people, but that would mean you're twisting. Next time do more homework before trying to say something like that.
3) Subs - There was no twist or avoidance there. You simply misunderstood my post responding to your straw man argument. We may not agree, but I hope it's clearer now what I was saying. I've since tried answering a question of yours though about subs anyway. Take it easy on me though, subs aren't my forte

4) I'm pretty sure I've (twice now) addressed everything you brought up. And I'm pretty sure you're still avoiding discussing the roster activity level of our alliances. You probably only want to stay on the attack and I get that. But if you truly don't like twisting and avoiding, I think we need to start with cleaning up how you respond to posts.

[4279888] LightSwayer (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 3:03 a.m.

Oh no!, Flippers here is getting mad.

[4279891] Manatee (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 3:07 a.m.

Whoops! Noooooooooooo!

It's why I hate going into structured debate mode, it looks cold.

But three posts up I looked (to myself) like I was being condescending. And that's not going to solve anything, so I tried to pull back some. GB happened to like my first post though

[4279893] LightSwayer (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 3:10 a.m.

True dat.
I like arguing with you, your informative.
Why did GK deny the proof that MISC:UNITED has provided?

P.S Sometimes I can't take you seriously with that Manatee profile pic.

Ill be back tomorrow morning. Goodnight Manatee

[4279898] GB11 (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 3:56 a.m.

Manatee (US1) said:

GB11 (US1) said:
And are you serious about saying that you guys have never said KTs are a be-all, end-all? that was all you guys were saying at the beginning of the war when you gained the prime positions and took the kts. Now that you have realized how stupid you were to believe that, you act like you never said that.
First let me say this isn't going to be an easy post without creating more arguments. Let's give it a whirl though!

You said "Manatee thinks KT's are the most important thing that matters."
That means me. And I am absolutely 100% serious that I've never held that position. I've held the position I mentioned above in my previous post. It's a mistake to lump me into things just because I and GK support KoN in the war (if that's what you did).

Here are a few examples of things I've been very consistent about this entire war:
1) My preference was for all sides to come to some agreement.
2) Battle reports on the forums are for fun and not indicative of a side's activity.
3) KTs are a means, not an end. And KT ownership is just a reflection of other indicators.
4) I hate multi-accounting and, and I hate when people take a forum/game and follow it into real life. I don't care whose side you're on.

GB11 (US1) said:
As for the subs, im honestly interested what subs we lost? Unless you consider some of MU subs as our subs, the only sub i believe we have lost is TMK, who jumped to KoN right when the war kicked off so I wouldn't really consider that as a sub lost.
You misunderstood I think. I wasn't saying anything about subs lost, I was saying you're using a straw argument. You went from almost no subs to .. almost no subs, lol. The real argument would be what our alliance families have gained or lost and how our strengths have changed (scroll up and see). I'll take a stab at your question though:

I'd say TMK, The MISC 2, and MOP and M:U were your subs. You lost 75% of them.
1. TMK - you don't want to count them, yet you guys are including subs we picked up *after* the war.
2. The MISC 2 - has 17 members left without a single rv and no activity. Been that way for months. It "exists" as a graveyard for you guys to farm, among others.
3. MOP - now called Rustling Jimmies, says they're MISC but not Torcherers.
4. There may be others too, I just don't know if they're subs of your sub M:U or not, but they're still part of your family.

(I'm a bit weak on the server's history of subs, so if you reasonably point out where I'm wrong above, I'm willing to consider it as education for myself.)

So back to what we're talking about... You brought up our subs and I said it was a straw argument, and to look at what's changed in terms of our strengths and reputations (and I don't mean good/bad rep). Yes you've lost some subs, but you've also lost dozens (over 100) players whom you kept pulling into MISC main from other alliances who have since left to form and strengthen independent alliances. You've lost almost all of your KTs. You've also lost about 1/2 of your power points (daily activity level) since the hey day of forming Torcherers, etc. In comparison, GK isn't in the same position. We've had a few people leave and pulled some more in, but there's been no hyper-revolving door. We also now have subs which are much stronger and more active than we were when we entered the war.

So I was pointing out the irony of you suggesting a look at subs when the big picture is quite well illustrated. Feel free to point things out, but make sure to keep perspective.

GB11 (US1) said:
I do envy your ability to twist words and avoid certain topics and questions. A lot of people see right through that unfortunately.
How do you make such comments with a straight face? Ahh, you don't Please point out where I've twisted or avoided. Here's my synopsis:

1) You said you've had 2 KTs and still have them. If you don't feel like that's a boast, fine. I hardly think it's twisting or avoiding anything to say what I did though. Looking back at it I still think it makes sense.
2) The KT importance thing - only twist there is you, trying to suggest what I've said or think. Hey, if I could be more than 100% right about myself, I'd try, believe me. You may be lumping me in with other people, but that would mean you're twisting. Next time do more homework before trying to say something like that.
3) Subs - There was no twist or avoidance there. You simply misunderstood my post responding to your straw man argument. We may not agree, but I hope it's clearer now what I was saying. I've since tried answering a question of yours though about subs anyway. Take it easy on me though, subs aren't my forte
4) I'm pretty sure I've (twice now) addressed everything you brought up. And I'm pretty sure you're still avoiding discussing the roster activity level of our alliances. You probably only want to stay on the attack and I get that. But if you truly don't like twisting and avoiding, I think we need to start with cleaning up how you respond to posts.

MoP was dead before the war even started. Ask anyone on our side. We merged the remaining actives into TM during the D8 war.

Tm2 has been dead for almost a year and a half. They were ded during the HIVE war. Holtman is the only regular that plays their that im aware of. He's like a guardian of the dead lol

TMK I don't really see how we "lost" them during the war when we apparently had lost them to neph prior to the war lol

the subs were the only thing i really was interested in seeing a response of so i kinda just skimmed over the rest of your post. I'll probably reread it tomorrow sometime and get a better response. I figured you would mention Mop/TM2, but I don't think your side can take credit for them.

[4279926] Manatee (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 6:10 a.m.

Hey GB,

What you say may be true. I was being serious, I don't know much about your subs. I mostly tracked you guys as main alliances, and noted where many of the new players came from. That's why I didn't comment about your subs earlier, and why I asked for the education after you prompted me to say what I thought. Wouldn't be the first time I'm wrong!

Okay so TM2 has been a graveyard for you guys, MOP was mostly dissolving when the war started, and TMK switched sides just after the war started (or just before?). I know MOP did declare on us during this war though, and they had a pretty substantial number of members attacking us at the time... so possibly they were the actives before you merged them over.

But keep in mind, we've had similar situations (if not identical) regarding subs. For example, we brought 2 new subs in during the war, then they left a bit later. I know some of you were making a big deal out of it. Another example is a sub who was pretty much going independent anyway, and we just accelerated the process. At some point, we're splitting hairs on what counts.

I have no reason to doubt your stuff above, I have a PM from someone else in your alliance saying essentially the same thing. In trying to answer a question of yours that I admitted I don't have much knowledge about, I knew I'd get some stuff wrong. But it wasn't part of any point I was initially making. Thanks for the info.

[4279929] Nebulous (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 6:13 a.m.

Tempus (US1) said:

Or better yet, I think the terminology in the points system is "Can you survive a Zombie Apocalypse"

Mirin the manipulation of others to keep your own hands clean so you can post hypocritical alliance descriptions.

Tempus, you're a smart guy and have been playing this game far too long to post anything about defending Torcherers. Manipulation and hypocritical alliance descriptions? Lets talk about Misc...

It's funny how Misc uses the Alliance Tourn. as a way to make people dislike Neph when it's convenient to them as if Misc is above hitting for glory.

http://i46.tinypic.com/2v33dw9.png

Morentz's last alliance description about bullying was a gem. If he is so strong against bullying then why did Morentz go out of his way to make a YouTube account (xMorentz) and tell Keenen that he'd get BB members to "dislike" Keenen's Youtube video?

First Posts/Comment:

https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=mPV924wI-tA

Funny how Misc feeds their troops... Turning on your old team or desperate?

https://embed.gyazo.com/cca18431759820173c361f80381ab7df.png

https://embed.gyazo.com/d94f841768eafaab644526e52b71eebb.png

http://i.gyazo.com/182b94cec88182fb36d774c1dbb6f66e.png

[4279935] Warrior_Lord (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 6:27 a.m.

CaptainBro (US1) said:

Tempus (US1) said:

Or better yet, I think the terminology in the points system is "Can you survive a Zombie Apocalypse"

Mirin the manipulation of others to keep your own hands clean so you can post hypocritical alliance descriptions.

Tempus, you're a smart guy and have been playing this game far too long to post anything about defending Torcherers. Manipulation and hypocritical alliance descriptions? Lets talk about Misc...

It's funny how Misc uses the Alliance Tourn. as a way to make people dislike Neph when it's convenient to them as if Misc is above hitting for glory.

Not entirely fair neph gets to decide when theyre allowed to get hit or not, if your in the server war stay in it dont hit anyone else when its convenient for you
The misc doesnt have to use it as a way to make people dislike neph, ur doing it yourselves.

and lets not act like we dont know how negan got the glory, you cant brag about that

[4279936] Manatee (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 6:27 a.m.

LightSwayer (US1) said:

True dat.
I like arguing with you, your informative.
Why did GK deny the proof that MISC:UNITED has provided?
P.S Sometimes I can't take you seriously with that Manatee profile pic.

Ill be back tomorrow morning. Goodnight Manatee

LightSwayer,
What proof did we deny from M;U? Do you mean something from this thread? Or from another?
There's probably a number of things you could be referring to, so let me know and I'll answer if I can.

[4280192] bonkerz (US1) [None] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 11:51 a.m.

Damnit, someone flagged my post. It was you Manatee, fess up!

[4280299] Tempus (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 2:32 p.m.

CaptainBro (US1) said:

Tempus (US1) said:

Or better yet, I think the terminology in the points system is "Can you survive a Zombie Apocalypse"

Mirin the manipulation of others to keep your own hands clean so you can post hypocritical alliance descriptions.

Tempus, you're a smart guy and have been playing this game far too long to post anything about defending Torcherers. Manipulation and hypocritical alliance descriptions? Lets talk about Misc...

It's funny how Misc uses the Alliance Tourn. as a way to make people dislike Neph when it's convenient to them as if Misc is above hitting for glory.

http://i46.tinypic.com/2v33dw9.png

Morentz's last alliance description about bullying was a gem. If he is so strong against bullying then why did Morentz go out of his way to make a YouTube account (xMorentz) and tell Keenen that he'd get BB members to "dislike" Keenen's Youtube video?

First Posts/Comment:

https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=mPV924wI-tA

Funny how Misc feeds their troops... Turning on your old team or desperate?

https://embed.gyazo.com/cca18431759820173c361f80381ab7df.png

https://embed.gyazo.com/d94f841768eafaab644526e52b71eebb.png

http://i.gyazo.com/182b94cec88182fb36d774c1dbb6f66e.png

Even if all that in which you just posted is all true, and even if the subtext in which you are trying to enforce it with is legitimate. I would still take all of that over half of what I have seen KoN do in the past 14 months.

They've attacked people's personal identities, and encouraged them members to stalk them via other social media. Hence the BB.com issue, Keenan was stalking Morry there long before he made his Youtube page. Also, keep in mind, Keenan brought his Youtube page here, he opened that up for anyone to post on with those actions. I don't ever remember Morentz posting his personal BB.com profile page on this site.

They've lied to every ally on their side, and used them as human shields while they stack up points in events.

I have seen threats of bodily harm in Skype.

KoN leadership has harassed TM leader via the phone at all hours of the day.

You know you've crossed a major line when GGE themselves have to change your own alliance description.

But, out of all of that, I think the worst of it is the amount of deceit it took to get them to where they are now. The manner in which they've come to their current position is a rear view mirror full of burnt bridges, deceit and manipulation. The thing is, whatever, if that's how they wanna play, cool beans, but at least have the spine to admit it. If KoN wants to create some family wide points tournament where stealing OPs are worth so many points, go right ahead. If they wanna talk trash, go right ahead. If they wanna abuse friendships, more power to them. Just at least have some evidence of a conscious to admit you are doing it or have done it instead of numerous attempts at conjuring an alliance description to present the exact opposite.

Bad things can happen in the fog of war, understandable for sure, but don't stand around with a flashlight on a clear day cause ain't no one gonna believe it's foggy.

Nice talking to you again CB, be safe brother.

[4280353] vog12345 (US1) [US1] :: Feb. 5, 2016, 3:31 p.m.

Kon is Immortal, It won't fall If we just leave it on its own

« first previous Page 28 of 30. next last »