Rise of Nations

[Grumblefish]

Firstly, what an incredible game. I've had it for about a week now, and it just keeps on getting more enjoyable.

I just played a game a few minutes ago, a big 3 vs 3, and wound up winning somehow. I had a shitty partner, and a quiet partner, and it was an island map. I went Russia, and managed to protect my shitty partner by myself, and saved the rest of our island with the quiet partners aid. My resources were stretched during the entire game, and eventually the shitty guy did get killed in the end. I refused to save his arse anymore, mind you I had already rescued him about six or seven times.

I was too strained to press an attack onto their island, but it seemed the quiet guy (whose contribution to the island defence fund was a trio of musket men and a pair of cannons :rolleyes: ) was building a tremendous and unbeatable economy. After I hit industrial, the quiet guy (playing China) was on his way to information and had amassed enough resources to build a huge array of nuclear missiles and aircraft. Once he built his tanks, he just burst out of the island, nuked about four cities to the ground, and swooped down on their island in a massive blitzkrieg manouvere, leaving it 2 vs 2 rather than 2 vs 3 (our shitty partner died much earlier).

From that point on it was all him, although he did thank me for being the only reason we weren't beaten a good quarter of an hour ago. I have no idea why he didn't help me, save the symbolic musket man and cannons.

All told, it is a fabulous game and the point of this thread is to discuss it and/or arrange a game.


EDIT: At one point, the enemy that got smashed by the quiet guy when he first attacked tried to fend off the tanks with a charge of about 20 light cavalry. I have no idea why the hell he built 20 light cavalry, nor why he thought it would be an awesome idea to smash them into a fully fledged tank brigade that was supported by plenty of infantry.

[Colonel Kurtz]

This is Microsoft doing a more modern version of Age of Empires...or Empire Earth?

Still it looks like fun though

[Grumblefish]

Closer to Empire Earth, as it spans most of the periods up until the information age, instead of just until people get metal armour and fancy capes.

[coreageek]

I've been playing a lot of AoE II, and I've been thinking about giving Rise of Nations a try.
I'll have to go see if I can find an 'evaluation copy' for myself. . .

[iaidoka]

Iv got the shareware of this game, it lets you play skirmishes with the computer. Lots of fun.

My problem is while im happily building a great economy, the enemy swarms in and kicks my ass =(.

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by coreageek
I've been playing a lot of AoE II, and I've been thinking about giving Rise of Nations a try.
I'll have to go see if I can find an 'evaluation copy' for myself. . .

Just get the demo if you want to give it a spin. The demo is hardly restricting if you just want to see what it plays like.

[coreageek]

Originally posted by Grumblefish
Just get the demo if you want to give it a spin. The demo is hardly restricting if you just want to see what it plays like.

This game is amazing. It's like AoE, but so much better for many reasons. The strategy involved is probably the best I've found in games like this yet. I've played through the tutorial mission and then two "quick" games. I'm going to get the full version of this as soon as I can.

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by coreageek
This game is amazing. It's like AoE, but so much better for many reasons. The strategy involved is probably the best I've found in games like this yet. I've played through the tutorial mission and then two "quick" games. I'm going to get the full version of this as soon as I can.

Good, then I can beat you online. :cool:

[coreageek]

Originally posted by Grumblefish
Good, then I can beat you online. :cool:

I've been working on my skills (still with the trial, unfortunately), and I wonder if you play with Territory and Wonder victories turned off.
I have a feeling I'm going to get my ass kicked for a while once I get the full version. :)

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by coreageek
I've been working on my skills (still with the trial, unfortunately), and I wonder if you play with Territory and Wonder victories turned off.
I have a feeling I'm going to get my ass kicked for a while once I get the full version. :)

Default settings have territory and wonder victory on, and I usually just play the default victory settings (capital causes death after 3 minutes, wonder points at 8, territory at 70%). Sometimes I change them when I'm playing by myself, but if I'm online I'm not usually hosting (not my computer, so I don't want to mess around with the guys firewall stuff), and the host doesn't usually play around with the settings too much.

I like diplomacy mode though. I've played it once in a 3 way free for all. I completely destroyed one opponent, then decided to let him live before switching over and declaring war on the other guy and smashing him to bits. In the meantime, the guy I let live had rebuilt, and I had expended all my resources shattering the second opponent, and I made the same mistake of saying "okay, I want the game to keep going, I'll let you live mr.opponent number 2."

Predictably, they both formed an alliance and smashed me (I had ignored my economy after I had beaten the first guy, and my army was broken after beating up the second guy). The original guy basically steamrolled in and won, but for a while there I had a good half-hour of just taunting them while they were helpless, saying things like "RULE BRITANNIA, MARMALADE AND JAM" until they teamed up and made a come-back due to my laziness (I played Britain, by the way).

[coreageek]

Diplomacy and teams are my kind of game - free for alls aren't as fun for me unless it's one on one. Of course, I have been playing against the computer all this time.
Keeping the default victory settings seems to be a good bet - it keeps things interesting because you have to pay attention to a lot more than just blowing shit up (which is one reason I'm loving this game).
As far as keeping your economy going goes, I found an easy way to ignore it - I just build a temple in every town, and as I advance through the ages, I keep researching their money making capabilities. As long as you aren't using nukes, by the time your resource stockpiles run low, your gold will be in 4 digits and you'll be able to buy whatever you need at the market. I'm sure most people who play the game already know that you can do this, but it's just something simple that really has worked for me (against a computer, that is).

Today I only have laundry to do, so I'm going to spend some time trying to get the full version.

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by coreageek

As far as keeping your economy going goes, I found an easy way to ignore it - I just build a temple in every town, and as I advance through the ages, I keep researching their money making capabilities. As long as you aren't using nukes, by the time your resource stockpiles run low, your gold will be in 4 digits and you'll be able to buy whatever you need at the market.

I'm sorry, but even with the British double taxation bonus that idea is still doomed. You can't focus on gold alone, because when you buy resources they go up in price. If you buy everything, then you'll find that for a hundred units of steel you'll be paying some outrageous fee after a while, and you have to also couple in your opponents purchases. A good trick is if you hit the industrial age first, spend every single penny you have on oil. The price of oil will sky-rocket, you will be flushed with it and be able to buy all the latest tanks and stuff, while your opponent will go "oh shit" when he reaches the industrial age and realises he has to pay 300 gold for 100 oil.

Also, your opponent will mop the floor with you if you depend on gold, as the resource cap/building limit (one temple, one market per town) would mean that 4 resources going +200 or so would be a trillion times better than just gold going +150. Because of the caps, it is important to diversify, and to say "as long as you don't use nukes" is rather silly, because nukes are only in the last few ages. I'm neglecting my economy come the gunpowder/enlightenment age, a little bit even in medieval, which is usually when I start building a decent military. Early game it is also not a good idea to make gold your number 1 priority.

Enlightenment is my best offensive age though, as the light infantry absolutely rocks. My only weakness is against cavalry in this age, as the fusiliers are garbage and I never build enough of them to stop horses. I usually win though when I build a good cavalry force to couple with my army of highlanders (or whatever the light infantry unit is for the race of choice).

[coreageek]

Originally posted by Grumblefish
Because of the caps, it is important to diversify, and to say "as long as you don't use nukes" is rather silly, because nukes are only in the last few ages.

Well, the nukes put the embargo on you - and yes, they do come late in the game. Late in the game is really the only time when the focus on gold pays off. You can't ignore the economy until you know you have enough gold (and a way to regenerate it fast enough), and you don't have enough gold to really do that until very late in the game. Since I tend not to let my economy go until very late in the game anyway, the strategy seems to work okay for me. As I said, though. . . that's against a computer opponent.

As far as military goes, I've had my best success with attacking in the enlightenment age as well. I start my army building as soon as I can, though. As a small army builds up, I send them to stand just outside the national borders of the other player, and by the time I actually send them in to attack, the units are upgraded to the enlightenment age quality, and by that time, they usually have the support of whatever advantage a Wonder or two would give them. I suppose you could call it a very calculated rush. I'm not sure how well this would work on a human player, though.

I'm having problems obtaining the full version, so I may actually break down and buy a game for a change, depending on what my paycheck is like.

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by coreageek
As far as military goes, I've had my best success with attacking in the enlightenment age as well. I start my army building as soon as I can, though. As a small army builds up, I send them to stand just outside the national borders of the other player, and by the time I actually send them in to attack, the units are upgraded to the enlightenment age quality, and by that time, they usually have the support of whatever advantage a Wonder or two would give them. I suppose you could call it a very calculated rush. I'm not sure how well this would work on a human player, though.

If you just let your men trickle up to the enemy's border as they are recruited, then you would fail horribly. Usually there is at least one or two enemy scouts on auto-search, and they always just seem to radiate out from the borders. One only needs to be aware of the troops on his borders to know enough to build an army to smash them. The best position for your army is really near a city closest to the enemy, so that if you get attacked they are ready to defend straight away.

I just played, and if not for my useless partner would've won, a 2v2. I chose Russia, my teammate chose Greece, and the enemy was Russia and Germany. I expanded rather fast, and I had a third city up about a screen away from the borders of Russia's second city. Having been lucky enough to expand without hassle (sometimes you will get hit by an ancient or classical age rush, which would've destroyed me due to my risky expansion plan), my economy quickly grew into a wood/food juggernaut, and once I hit classical I built a good infantry force from 3 barracks (put near Russia's border, always best to put them on the frontlines).

By the time we hit Medieval, I was obviously the most powerful out of all except Germany (which I couldn't see, so I don't know how strong they were). I quickly built 2 siege factories, bought 3 trebuchet things, and put them right on Russia's borders (my temple upgrades and things had pushed my border very close to his second town). After a huge clash with our armies (I had a population limit of 75 I think, and about 50 of that was devoted to army), I was victorious due to the fact he suicide charged his cavalry straight into my pikes, and only brough javellins to back up his horsemen. I flattened his second town, conquered it, and began making defences to hem in his first town (I don't seem to beat anyone, just cripple them and ignore them until they are strong again) when the Germans suddenly appeared out of nowhere, with a mixed infantry force like mine (albeit they were green, I was injured).

Fast forward to the obvious "Attack the Germans please" to my teammate, followed by "HELLO? ATTACK THE BLOODY GERMANS YOU WORTHLESS GREEK SALAD EATING MORON" when he just sat there and did nothing. A couple more requests for military aid didn't change my partners mind, who thought it a smarter move to just sit in his base with about 6 heavy cavalry, about 25 infantry (a mix of crossbow and pikes) and a few catapults. Nevermind that he could easily have smashed the Germans, as their entire army was ruining my dreams of empire, he was obviously busy doing something like making more farms or some shit.

Long story short, I lost the city I conquered, and the best part of 10-15 minutes was spent desperately holding off both Germany and Russia on my southern borders while my Greek partner just sat there doing nothing. By nothing, I seriously mean nothing, because he didn't build another soldier, nor did he bother upgrading through the ages. Once the Germans hit the modern age, he left the Russians to try and break through to my third city, and focused his attentions on the Greeks. The Greeks were obviously thrashed, as hitting tanks with spears isn't an incredibly bright military strategy, and by the time I was in the Modern age the Greeks were all dead, and I was alone.

After abusing my useless teammate until he disconnected, I realised I was the only one who had bothered to develop nuclear technology. Sadly, nukes aren't a battle winner in themselves, and over about ten to fifteen minutes I lost all my bases and died. I think it is worth noting though that I dropped about 6 or 7 nukes in that time, ruining the German and Russian capitals, several of their secondary cities, and at one point smashing their entire combined army (which gave me enough time to construct the last few nukes, if they had been quicker and moved out of the way of the blast I would've been squished much earlier).

Personally, I think I lost because the whole game was basically a big 2 vs 1, with an oblivious moron in the top left corner who just sat there and built a small army of scholars to accompany his pikemen. After the Greeks died, I really had no hope of winning, as my economy was completely strained just holding the two opponents off, let alone trying to expand or conquer. The nukes were fun, and I did enjoy a brief stage of air dominance when I was the first to build an airport (helicopters are really good against tanks, by the way).

[Plough]

Is there a no cd crack for RON ?

[Plough]

problem fixed

[Colonel Kurtz]

Arggghhhhh!!!!!!!!!!

Liked your revies Mr Fish, checked it out online, thought, 'I'll have that!'

Go to DIP SHIT (Dick Smith) Electronics.....

Do they have a copy?

NEGATIVE!

FUCK

Will have to look elsewhere now....

[Colonel Kurtz]

Downloading trial version now.......

[Plough]

Hire it from video ezy and ...

[Grumblefish]

Piracy is illegal guys. :(

[Zan]

so is masturbation in indonesia.

I will find this game and play it.

[Plough]

anyone interested in a game tonight?

[Plough]

Is there a shortcut key that controlls the task manager thing, mini map ect. YOu know the 3 windows that run across the bottom of the screen.
The middle menu dissapeared after I hit a fandom key on the kb.
I can't work out how to get it back

[Grumblefish]

Ummm... not sure. It's never happened to me.

Unfortunately I'm busy so I can't play for the time being. :(

[druid]

Reading the online reviews and some comments in this thread I thought this would actually be a good hybrid of turn-based strategy and Age of Empires. Instead it's just realtime clicking all over again. :(

It's not bad if you're into that but I found myself micromanaging far too much. Why do I have to be the mayor of every city? Why can't the morons build enough farms if they are needed? Then there are the much touted resources that aren't nearly as critical as they could be. In the few games I played oil and metal were always a plenty and most other resources are just luxuries constituting some sort of bonus. Comparing to Civilization 3, not having these resources will probably ruin you in the end and being able to control them is a powerful weapon in itself. Perhaps the comparisons are out of place and I shouldn't have expected so much but I'm kind of glad I didn't buy this the other day.

I started playing with the moderate difficulty level and the computer wasn't much of an opponent or an ally. Does anyone know how the AI acts when you increase the difficulty? Does it get more "intelligent" or just resort to blatant cheating like fastened production and research? Playing against the computer was and is my only option, not having any sort of network connectivity where I'm staying.

The user interface is definitely an improvement over the previouse Age of Something games but this game didn't really offer anything new. Even the attrition was kind of used in Settlers 3 (your attack strength decreased on enemy territory.) The thing that makes it even moderately interesting for me is that you can advance up to modern ages which offers more variety.

If you feel my comments were unjust and details inaccurate please do point out the errors. As I said I didn't play against a human but I think I played enough to see how the game works.

[coreageek]

Ah, the Settlers games. . . I haven't played any of that series since Settlers 2 first came out. Maybe I should check out 3 as well - I really enjoyed those games.

As for Rise of Nations, I enjoy the features in place, because the game is played on many fronts. Maybe the features are nothing new, but the combination of them gives you more than one way to skin a cat. Trying to stay ahead in territory, wonder building, military, resources, and technology - while being able to injure your opponent in many ways as well. . . I think it takes more thought, planning and strategy than something that only offers combat. It also takes a little more 'realtime clicking' as you put it, which is unfortunate. The game would be a bit better if you could set budgets and have idle villagers build farms and such according to the resource budgets.
Unfortunately I haven't been able to play human players yet either, and I certainly agree about the AI. It's hard to agree with you or defend the game without playing human players, because it seems like that is where the game would show its real qualities.

Then again, this is all coming from a Flightsim geek who only has Starcraft as an alternative on their computer. Maybe I love this game so much because the last game I played like it was Age of Empires 1.

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by druid
It's not bad if you're into that but I found myself micromanaging far too much. Why do I have to be the mayor of every city? Why can't the morons build enough farms if they are needed? Then there are the much touted resources that aren't nearly as critical as they could be. In the few games I played oil and metal were always a plenty and most other resources are just luxuries constituting some sort of bonus. Comparing to Civilization 3, not having these resources will probably ruin you in the end and being able to control them is a powerful weapon in itself. Perhaps the comparisons are out of place and I shouldn't have expected so much but I'm kind of glad I didn't buy this the other day.

If building farms is seriously too taxing for you, then I think the problem is that you're useless at RTS games. Over the course of a game, at most you should have about 15 farms, which is about 3 cities worth. You can make do with less than that too, dependant on the age you intend to smash your opponent and the granary upgrades you get. Personally I can make do on 10 sometimes. It is not a hard process to build 10 farms, trust me.

Metal is usually a plenty, but requires a large investment of food to get started (I find myself enlisting between 15-20 men in long games), and can be easily denied if the mountains are on your borders. It is true that when you have 20 people on metal, it comes in very quickly, but why shouldn't it?

I don't, however, see how the hell you had "plentiful" oil, unless you completely ignored some tech trees. Nuclear technology costs a fortune in oil, and if you want giant tank brigades then you had better get the cheque book out because your oil plants aren't going to be churning out enough to cover the bill. Oil is hugely important, and I only find myself with plenty when I have a refinery in every city (by this point in the game, I've personally probably made 4 cities, although I may have taken some of my opponents), and made sure every single oil deposit in your territory is manned. Even then, if you want to be a serious nuclear power then you'll need money (which isn't too hard to get).

As for resources, are you talking of the type that merchants sit on? They are supposed to be bonuses, not things to base your empire on. The bonuses they give can be very helpful, but it is very easy to smash a merchant house to bits, and you can't have merchant houses in enemy territory. Merchant's should be a primary target, because they are an easy resource to deny.

Personally, I think the resource model works great, and once you have a proper economy running (10 or more on farms, 10 or so on wood, 15 or so on steel and lord knows how much on oil), you can really just focus on technology, money and army. It's great, and very user friendly. If you cannot keep up with the pace, then something is seriously wrong with your ability to play RTS games.

Does anyone know how the AI acts when you increase the difficulty?

On tough it gets a lot better, and can give me a good run for my money (or just plain destroy me, depends). I think how defensive/aggressive the computer is depends on the race you give it (it identifies Romans as agressive, for example).

Does it get more "intelligent" or just resort to blatant cheating like fastened production and research?

I'm pretty sure it cheats on toughest, but I've nothing to suggest that it cheats on tough. I don't even have anything other than hatred to go on for saying it cheats on toughest, as I was angry that it could beat me so easily on that setting.


Even the attrition was kind of used in Settlers 3 (your attack strength decreased on enemy territory.)

I think your units being damaged is much more sensible.



Also, as a side note, I think you'd get obliterated by an average opponent. If you think your resources are plentiful, then you're probably not using them properly. I generally find myself with 2 stables, 2 barracks, and 2 siege workshops right near my borders and just have them churning out man after man, horse after horse, and catapult after catapult. That drains your resources like crazy, and once you hit the industrial age you build another army structure of each type and go at it even harder. You also have to expand to bring in the airforce, perhaps plan for V2s or Nukes, and also think about anti-aircraft. Don't forget to have spies and generals of course.

Thankfully the interface is a lot better than AoE. I still seem to get beaten sometimes, but I haven't played in a week because of work. :(

[Colonel Kurtz]

Is there a *ahem* 'mod' for the demo.

OK, I admit it I'm hooked. First time I played I lost because I caused armageddon (geez those explosions and teh flash are cool), the rest i just nuke the computer with cruise missiles and tanks.

If there's no crack might have to lash out and buy it. :D

[druid]

Originally posted by Grumblefish
If building farms is seriously too taxing for you, then I think the problem is that you're useless at RTS games.
...
If you cannot keep up with the pace, then something is seriously wrong with your ability to play RTS games.


Perhaps I was a bit unclear there. I don't have a problem with the pace but the semantics. Think about it, when playing the game you have several cities and even several generals with vast armies under your control. Seems a bit odd that a statesman of that caliber should worry about the building of individual mines and farms. I know it's been part of the realtime clicking genre from pretty much its dawn and I used to enjoy it. That doesn't mean that things have to be like that in every game. That is the reason why the genre has gotten a bit uninteresting, not many new concepts in RTS anymore.

Q: What's wrong with the yesterday's shag?
A: Nothing but it's already done.

What I'd like to see in a game like this is even some intelligence from the little computer controlled men. Instead of overseeing the attack on a building it would be nice to just say "1st platoon, you will take out that building, return to positions and report." Then perhaps they wouldn't go the way the shortest-path algorithm tells them but a path that is reasonable tactically.


Also, as a side note, I think you'd get obliterated by an average opponent.
That is possible. Unfortunately we won't know for a few months. :(


I don't, however, see how the hell you had "plentiful" oil, unless you completely ignored some tech trees. Nuclear technology costs a fortune in oil, and if you want giant tank brigades then you had better get the cheque book out because your oil plants aren't going to be churning out enough to cover the bill.

Ok, here I admit being wrong or at least misinformed. I never got to getting nukes during the limited playtime (work and other duties just like you). I did have tanks and planes though but not in massive quantities. Rommel wouldn't even have farted in the direction of my tank "brigade." However, that didn't prevent me from getting territory victory.


I generally find myself with 2 stables, 2 barracks, and 2 siege workshops right near my borders and just have them churning out man after man, horse after horse, and catapult after catapult. Don't forget to have spies and generals of course..
Sounds pretty much like my setup. I don't always keep units comign from the infinite queue though, just when I think it's needed (like in major offensive moves.) Usually I'm able to arrange armies in a tactically favorable manner taking advantage of terrain and whatnot, then going to heal a few critically damaged units after the skirmish. The rocks terrain type is nice but genuine elevated pieces of land would be even nicer. Emperor - Battle for Dune had both: tanks couldn't just drive over infantry that was on rocks and units on cliffs had a longer range. Many cliff formations had nice potential for an old fashioned bottleneck ambush.


I think your units being damaged is much more sensible.

Especially when there's the historically connected Russian Winter. Little details like that amuse me. "Citrus - ships heal automatically at sea." My tone wasn't supposed to too negative in the last post, merely indicating that the game didn't deliver what the reviews and your captivating first post promised. I would however call Rise of Nations perhaps the first Realtime Strategy Game. Previous games from this genre were more or less tactics, not strategy. I'll give this one a few more gos but at the moment it doesn't look like it could remain interesting for too long.

[Grumblefish]

So your only real problem is with the AI, and the fact that you have to control your industry as well as your army? The path finding isn't anything to write home about, but the personalities you can prescribe your men are good. I like giving the "Raid" attitude to a bunch of horse archers, then putting waypoints in the opponent's territory. The horses just run on through, aiming only for civilians and merchants/caravans.

Your industry is dead easy compared to other games, because you don't have to keep constant attention to it. Just set up at least 10 or so people on each resource and you are done. If you're going to be giving the "it's been done before" argument, then the following should apply:

Q: What is wrong with video games?
A: Nothing, but it's been done before.

[Grumblefish]

Sweet dear lord, I am obliterating everyone at this game. I just demolished two guys at once with France, while my teammate did nothing but say "oh hey you're pretty good you know?"

[Dollputz]

I only have the trial version :(:(

[Colonel Kurtz]

GF. I never thought I'd say this to you, but .....

Thank you.

THIS GAME ROCKS!

Any game where I can go for global domination is good.

ph33r my le0p4rd t4nk5 !

:D

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by Dollputz
I only have the trial version :(:(

Can you use the trial version to host a game? If so, I can obliterate you online. Maybe Colonel Kurtz will team up and try to save you, but it'll be of no consequence, because I am unstoppable.

[MisterBishi]

I'd be interested in any multiplayer games going on, I've played about 4 or 5 invasions in the campaign, with the British, of course, but some human opposition would be cool.

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by MisterBishi
I'd be interested in any multiplayer games going on, I've played about 4 or 5 invasions in the campaign, with the British, of course, but some human opposition would be cool.



EDIT: I'm logging onto gamespy to kill some people, if anyone feels like a game some other time, just add "hardware_bob2000@homail.com" to your MSN instant message list. duh. I hop onto another plane on the 7th, and I don't know if there is a computer where I am landing.

[Dollputz]

Originally posted by Grumblefish
[B]Can you use the trial version to host a game?

I don't know, the trial version is on the computer I have at home so I'll have to check later.

If it is really as good as people say it is I might be able to goad Utop to get it for me and send it through the mail in exchange for me sending the letter that has been sitting on my desk for 2 weeks now.

Maybe Colonel Kurtz will team up and try to save you but it'll be of no consequence

Probably. I've never played it before.

[Grumblefish]

It gains most of its goodness by virtue of the fact that I can beat people at it.

[MisterBishi]

Anybody fancy a game...?

[Grumblefish]

Originally posted by MisterBishi
Anybody fancy a game...?

Yase, but I fancy a shower first and I need to read a few posts at SA because people think I'm a bad person for calling the founding fathers scumbags.

When shall we play? It is 8:50 here now, I reckon I'd be ready in less than an hour. Do you have MSN messenger? Just add me.

EDIT: errr, nevermind, it looks like my post is four hours after yours.

[MisterBishi]

I'm still around dude, I added hardwarebob2000 last night but you haven't appeared on my list, I'll try again, whether I'm here in an hour is 50/50, but if I am, I'll play.

[Grumblefish]

Yeh I get your contact on my list now, it said I was added by a Bishisomething-or-rather.

[Thyrd]

I've lost my RoN disk :(