Jump to content
Lightly_Salted

M110 - Awfully weak

Recommended Posts

Nope. I'm not saying it's bad.

 

Finally got hold of the Marksmen kit for myself yesterday, the US one. Now, I could be wrong, but it seems to take two hits to kill someone unless it's a headshot, obviously, but let's be real, hitting headshots on moving targets at 200+ meters isn't particularly easy if we take into account drop and weapon sway. The round the M110 fires is a 7.62x51mm NATO, doing a bit of research that round is travelling at almost 800 m/s, and it is a 175gr round. The M4, which also takes two rounds to kill someone in-game, fires a 5.56x45mm NATO round, of which is travelling at 910 m/s due to it being a much smaller and lighter round, indicated by the fact that it is only a mere 62gr. That's 113gr lighter than the 7.62 round the M110 fires, i'm not going to do the maths but you can imagine the difference in energy those rounds will have, the 7.62 clearly being much, much higher. And yet it still takes two hits to down someone, even when hitting them square in the chest... Don't forget the fact that some of the targets you fight don't even wear body armour, and those that do, the 7.62x51 would just punch straight through.

 

My point is, you want a game to be realistic in it's gunplay. You make muzzle control more player dependant, but you don't adjust the fact that if someone gets hit with a round as powerful as the one the M110 fires (Or any marksmen rifle for that matter), it's gonna put you on the floor no matter what. There is little punishment for taking a hit from any rifle in this game apart from a little screen blur, sure if you don't bandage you're pretty much dead, but there's no reduction to movement speed, or any kind of stumbling if you get hit in certain areas.

 

I don't want to stray too far from my main topic; Why does it take a Marksmen rifle (The m110 in particular) more than one round to the chest to drop a target? And for a game hailing realism in gunplay, why have we seen no major downsides to taking a hit? 

 

I can't seem to comprehend how I slam a round from my M110 into the chest of a man for him to scurry away like someone just stepped on his toe. Or are they all using space-age level 5 ballistic kevlar robes now? 

 

UPDATE: Okay. Seems that my original opinion was quite an unpopular one. Though I guess I can compromise. As I mentioned in my last comment, due to the M110 and SVD being very similar, why not bring them up to each other? So the M110 does the same or close to the same damage as the SVD, or bump the bleed-out time to 5 seconds so the enemy does have a chance to survive, while still having the weapons as quite effective tools. 

 

 

P.S; Went on a bit of a tangent so i've probably missed something important. Apologies.

Edited by Lightly_Salted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game play at the end of the day..

 

Rpg needing two on technical 

4 rpgs on striker.

3 hits with AK 

5 rounds from pistol

 

If we have one thing that one shots all the time we need others too. Sks, g3. All big rounds. It's balance. 

 

Your just have to headset more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you're saying, from a gameplay perspective yes. But when you have a dedicated role, using a rifle with much higher recoil than the rest, and a higher magnification sight, I would expect said dedicated role to be able to knock targets out quickly an efficiently due to the fact that they are a marksman. They're meant to engage at range, which makes hitting targets harder, so it should not take a second follow-up shot to do so.

 

The SKS, G3, AK, they are all preferably used for closer engagements, not 200-300-400 meters out, mainly because they have ironsights, but also because that's what they're meant to do in-game.

 

It just doesn't make sense. 

 

EDIT: I'll just add to this; the 7.62x51mm is actually a much more powerful round compared to those fired by the SKS, AK and G3. Take the SKS for example, the round it fires is actually smaller, lighter, and much, much slower due to the smaller cartridge size and powder charge. Same goes with many of the AK variants, and I believe some even fire a smaller round; The 5.45x39mm, which is lighter than the standard 5.56 round we see used by the M4s and has a lower muzzle velocity. The G3 is the only rifle that I can say matches the M110, because it fires the same round, but i'm sure there are still performance differences.

Edited by Lightly_Salted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with authentic ballistics in videogames is that 1: one bullet would usually be incapacitating or lethal in real life and 2: modern body armor is rated to take a lot of beating, meaning shots on the players torso would have a low chance of damaging anything, then that would put insurgents and militia at a huge disadvantage because they don't have plate carriers. It would be interesting to see a game that replicates that aspect of combat more realistically, but in terms of gameplay, I don't think it necessarily has a place in squad.

 

In terms of the "power" of marksman rifles, I think they're quite adequate. They do just enough damage to the torso that if you dont bandage right away, you bleed out. I think this is a decent compromise between guaranteed one-shot and multiple-shot kills. That combined with a high powered optic and binoculars makes any decent marksman a very deadly and useful asset. 

Edited by jellyswim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're assuming a direct correlation between muzzle energy and stopping power. Real world ballistics are not that simple. From the perspective of the military, they would say the full power round has longer effective range. Claims of stopping power are difficult to back up with hard science.

 

Quicker answer: the devs are on record hating snipers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Smee said:

Game play at the end of the day..

 

Rpg needing two on technical 

4 rpgs on striker.

3 hits with AK 

5 rounds from pistol

 

If we have one thing that one shots all the time we need others too. Sks, g3. All big rounds. It's balance. 

 

Your just have to headset more.

This game isn't going for" balance"  in firearms. Remember that the focus of the Devs is realism and accurate physics IRL ,there's battlefield  and cod for that. Devs  will probably go for body armor and the damage is would change a lot since modern plates used by conventional armies are able to stop 7.62 x39 ( ak round).

Edited by maze2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the M110 is fine as is. Two body shots is easy enough to get on a moving target and a headshot on a still target is easier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So think of it this way. In this video in Arma3 I used a DMR that can kill in a single center mass shot. Would you like this kind of gameplay in Squad?

I think engagements already end up being over too fast in Squad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never had issues dropping people with Marksman kit outside of terrible hit detection in v10. Two shot knock downs are for balance reasons. It would be too easy to use otherwise. 

 

If you want "one shot"  marksman class just play v10 scoped LMGs. They are better than marksman kit in almost every scenario. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavier round doesn't necessarily do much more damage, because it's not designed to tumble when hitting tissue like 5.56 or 5.45 are.
So the OP is incorrect from real-life perspective (as well as from game balance one).

PS. However, 7.62 penetrates cover a lot better, because the lighter tumbling rounds obviously tumble when hitting a twig. That's not fully represented ingame I don't think, you can still spray through undergrowth and hit someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tatzhit said:

Heavier round doesn't necessarily do much more damage, because it's not designed to tumble when hitting tissue like 5.56 or 5.45 are.
So the OP is incorrect from real-life perspective (as well as from game balance one).

PS. However, 7.62 penetrates cover a lot better, because the lighter tumbling rounds obviously tumble when hitting a twig. That's not fully represented ingame I don't think, you can still spray through undergrowth and hit someone.

 

The energy the round carries may not directly correlate to knock down power, and yes the 5.56 round is designed to tumble, but you're looking at an energy difference 1,500 joules, in favour of the 7.62 round of course. The 5.56 round is designed to create a wound channel, making the wound harder to treat and in-turn causing the person to come to an unfortunate fate due to said wounds. Simply obeying physics, the energy of either round has to be dispersed into the body of the person they find their way into, not all of the energy of course as some will be wasted and the rounds might even over-penetrate, the 7.62 more likely to do this. However, it is still more likely to do more internal damage if hitting the right area (I.E the chest) due to the sheer force of impact and the energy the round carries (3,300 J) transferring into the soft tissue inside the body.

 

The 5.56 is designed to wound and kill. The 7.62 is designed to punch through the barrier you're hiding behind and drop you there and then.

 

EDIT: I should add, the damage done by the 5.56 round CAN be worse. I do not disagree. But you are more likely to survive it than you are a 7.62 round.

Edited by Lightly_Salted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets break down the M110 in Squad. NOTE : These are v9 values and may have changed with v10.

Damage dealt to the chest = 87(2nd highest rifle damage in the game)
100 - 87 = 13
Bleed is 0.5 damage per second. So 2 seconds per 1 damage.
2 x 13 = 26
Pulling out a bandage and then going through the bandage animation takes 9 seconds total.
26 - 9 = 17
This gives the person shot in the chest with the M110, 17 seconds to bandage him self straight after being shot.

The SVD 

Damage dealt to the chest = 94(1st highest rifle damage in the game)
100 - 94 = 6
Bleed is 0.5 damage per second. So 2 seconds per 1 damage.
2 x 6 = 12
Pulling out a bandage and then going through the bandage animation takes 9 seconds total.
12 - 9 = 3
This gives the person shot in the chest with the SVD, 3 seconds to bandage him self straight after being shot.

Looking at the damage numbers and the variables that follow, the M110 could get a slight damage buff to make it slightly more deadly. But in saying that, most people in and around cap zones that are contested are below 85 hp due to grenades, being shot etc So 1 taps do happen a lot. If you're on some distant hill and shooting flanking people or people running from their rally points, then you're most likely shooting 100 hp targets.

The marksman rifles really shine and prove their worth if their use is being put towards targets in a contested zones.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lightly_Salted said:

The 5.56 is designed to wound and kill. The 7.62 is designed to punch through the barrier you're hiding behind and drop you there and then.

I disagree. The whole point of 5.56 is to have an intermediate round that slaps titties. It tumbles and fragments faster inside the body and kills you right then and there. These pictures different rounds but same principle.  

                                                           5.45x39  ak47expo19.jpg             Lets+get+this+straight+he+didnt+take+dir 7.62x39

 

 

ANYWAY 

I AGREE. The M110 is weak sauce.:(

Here's of some of my gameplay, I hit the guy 2 times if not more. 

https://imgur.com/a/0xcWG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr.Stone said:

I disagree. The whole point of 5.56 is to have an intermediate round that slaps titties. It tumbles and fragments faster inside the body and kills you right then and there. These pictures different rounds but same principle.  

                                                           5.45x39  ak47expo19.jpg             Lets+get+this+straight+he+didnt+take+dir 7.62x39

 

 

ANYWAY 

I AGREE. The M110 is weak sauce.:(

Here's of some of my gameplay, I hit the guy 2 times if not more. 

https://imgur.com/a/0xcWG

 

Gotta remember that the 7.62x39mm actually has less energy than a 5.56 NATO round, and only just slightly more energy than the 5.45. The 5.45 is also a lot lighter than the 5.56, and the 7.62x39mm is miles away from the 7.62 NATO in terms of velocity, weight, and the energy the round carries. This is likely why it takes 3 rounds to drop a target in-game using the AKs, because generally, their ballistics are much worse than the standard 5.56 and 7.62 NATO rounds.

 

The 5.45 and 7.62x39 actually have quite comparable energy characteristics, generally the lighter rounds (In this case, the 5.45, but also the 5.56 as mentioned earlier), are designed to tumble when they come into contact with the target. They can penetrate quite a fair amount, but they lose their speed much, much faster, which is why the wound channel (In my guess, anyway) expands closer to the point of entry than the point of exit. Whereas the 7.62x39 does similar damage, the channel extends towards the exit and penetrates further through when entering as it carries it's energy further due to its weight. 

 

I would suppose the same would be said for 5.56 and 7.62 NATO, but the 7.62 NATO carries such a huge amount of energy compared to the rest that I would say chances are it does more significant damage in terms of stopping an enemy dead in its tracks rather than simply wounding them. Something which I do not think is represented properly in-game.

 

EDIT: I want to comment on the round the SVD uses, but I don't know a huge amount about it. I'll have to do some research. I know it's rimfire, which is surprising. I didn't think rimfire rounds were still used apart from small calibres like .22

Edited by Lightly_Salted
Grammar, nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Done a bit of reading, and 7.62 Russian vs 7.62 NATO is... well... quite a hard one to distinguish. Ballistically, they are almost identical when using the same bullet weight, but the 7.62 NATO tends to produce the same results with a shorter barrel. The only reason I can see for the SVD having higher damage in-game is that there are very heavy 7.62x54mmR rounds available to use, however they are more regularly used as LMG rounds due to their effectiveness at range, or lack thereof, compared to their lighter rounds with penetrators or full metal jackets. Here's a snip from a website I was doing reading on, I'll add the link below as they've run the two rounds through a ballistic calculator as well.

OZokOIk.png

 

Link for the website; http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/20/modern-intermediate-full-power-calibers-018-7-62x54mmr-russian/

 

Point being - There shouldn't be a huge difference between the SVD and the M110 in-game, in my honest opinion (And from what I've researched) the M110 should be brought up to the standard of the SVD in-game, and definitely not the other way around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1-hit rifles would be terrible for Squad. It's the kind of a feature players want only up to the point when they actually get it and find out how it just doesn't work well within the game.

 

For a long time now I've held the opinion that the marksman kit is at its best when used to wound several enemies in quick succession, giving the rest of the squad space to move in and mop up, since the enemy soldiers either bandage or bleed out. Of course that would require the marksman to move with his squad instead of climbing on top of every hill he can find and trying to play like a weird sniper wannabe. 

 

The marksman kit is fine. The core of most problems are the marksmen players, 9 times out of 10.

Share this post


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

1-hit rifles would be terrible for Squad. It's the kind of a feature players want only up to the point when they actually get it and find out how it just doesn't work well within the game.

 

For a long time now I've held the opinion that the marksman kit is at its best when used to wound several enemies in quick succession, giving the rest of the squad space to move in and mop up, since the enemy soldiers either bandage or bleed out. Of course that would require the marksman to move with his squad instead of climbing on top of every hill he can find and trying to play like a weird sniper wannabe. 

 

The marksman kit is fine. The core of most problems are the marksmen players, 9 times out of 10.

 

Okay. Seems that my original opinion was quite an unpopular one. Though I guess I can compromise. As I mentioned in my last comment, due to the M110 and SVD being very similar, why not bring them up to each other? So the M110 does the same or close to the same damage as the SVD, or bump the bleed-out time to 5 seconds so the enemy does have a chance to survive, while still having the weapons as quite effective tools. 

 

I never stated I didn't enjoy it, the map size didn't help, I would like to try it on a larger map during a firefight to see it's true effectiveness. 

 

Just remember that this wasn't a rant, I wasn't stating it was a terrible rifle, I just thought I'd raise the idea. I'ma copy and paste my first paragraph into my original post so people see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the PSO-1 sight in-game is too far out from the user, making the reticule small as well as the sight picture. This is kind of what I would expect, though understandably you don't want to stick your eye too close to the sight for obvious reasons; 

 

ng1DL7c.jpg

 

One problem I see is that the PSO-1 is only a 4x magnification, whereas the sight the M110 has mounted is has a magnification of 6x, as stated by the devs. If they cleaned the PSO-1 reticle up a bit and made it larger for the user to actually see when lining up a shot, then it is still worthwhile. I still feel like the M110 warrants a slight damage buff closer to that of the SVD. 3 seconds to bleed out when hit with the SVD gives you very little time to bandage, chances are you're dead. Whereas as 17 seconds for the M110? They could have a coffee before worrying about bandaging themselves. I understand those figures are from V9, but it doesn't feel like much has changed. Just increase the damage, lower the bleed-out time so it's at least close to the SVD, and the targets you face actually have to bandage almost immediately after instead of going for a short jog before having to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SVD is a good sniper made for ranges less then 1 km but i always loved and always will love it.I will never forget sending two shots at the enemy at the almost same time.And in many games SVD is weak and thats the whole point how to play with this weapon to send two shots on the enemy in the same time.

For me SVD was always a lot of fun.

 

And i forgot the PSO-1 scope is amazing it helps you greatly in real world if you ever fired it for real.

The scope is actually not that far from your eyes especially if you use the rubber guard that you have on some of them it protects your eye from sunlight on the sides and makes like a tunnel to look tru so you could place your face even closer to it.

And not to mention that the ratcle can really get illuminated if you use it at night time.

Edited by Bahrein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if I have at Squad only 16hrs recorded by Steam (I'm not sure if its recording the time right....), for me as beginner and with the thought that we are in the moment still in the alpha, maybe not to say in the early alpha state, its maybe a bit to much to get up a whole discussion about the damage and balance of some weapons.

 

The reason why we should a bit carefully to offer what we may like to see in the game is, that at the moment in squad there is not realy any system with the apearrance of body armor or similar mechanics. At the moment we have only health and damage that directly remove a certain amount of healthpoints.

 

As far as I know we have at the moment not a detailed hitbox that makes a difference about helmet or not, or body armor or not and and and. So in thise case its also a bit difficult to bring up weapons in some roles they would fit in real and also in the game itself. For myself, the higher damage of the SVD is a good excuse compared to the lack of magnification compared to the 6x scope of the M110 and at the moment it fits from my view as beginner in squad realy well.

 

But on some point its maybe good to offer as community what "we" expect so Offworld got some feedback to think about, and here I want to write down my expierience with nearly one shot sniper rifles. Yeah I know, Battlefield 1, or at least the whole series of Battlefield, is something other than Squad, but at least both are first person shooters, both ar large scaled player vs player games and sometimes its maybe not so bad to get a look to a different game.

 

What I mean especialy in this case are the sweet-spot-mechanik at Battlefield 1 for bolt-action-rifles. this mechanic allowed people to get a one-shot on certain distances even if they do not hit the head. Like the Russian 1895 deals full 100 Damage to the upper body from 60m up to 100m. While at BF4 playing against sniper was a.... it was like there wasnt any sniper because everybody tries to hit the head and nobody hit it, we have now surprisly many many player they are wuite "good" with the sniper rifles because of the sweetspot mechanic so they can easily score a Kill or a "Help counts as Kill"-Kill.

And here I have to say, even in a realy realy fast paced shooter with an overload of casusal help, from the auto aim (even on PC!) up to the magic bullets it doesnt feels good. Its just to much even for a game like Battlefield. Even now in Squad its possible as sniper to deal alot of damage to the other team and we can be realy happy that squad isnt only about killing but also about buying for the own team time or distraction of the enemy and so on. A whole One-Shot-System beside a Headshot would maybe destroy much of this type of gameplay, at least the game becomes much more frustrating but nobody get realy a benifit.

 

And thats also a reason why I started realy to like Squad because it isnt only about the counting of kills, its also about teactics to stop the enemy, to distract them, to be smarter than him not to be the better sk1ll0r! So before we make a huge discussion about some damage, I would like to see a discussion to make the whole base of damage dealing and receiving, a bit more solved on intelligently way.

 

At the moment we have only damage but no stopping power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chest shots are actually a minority of hits, feels like 30% maybe? So the damage difference is far less dramatic than stated here. On the other hand, better scope and larger mags actually make the M110 a far better weapon.

 

As for IRL performance of rounds, yeah the sniper loads of 7.62*54R and 7.62*51 are basically the same, but game balance has to be observed. If you want to talk IRL balance, then every insurgent player should be Scout class, there should be civilian NPCs in every building, and every KIA American should be worth 20 tickets.

5 hours ago, Good-Try Greg said:

 

Yeah I know, I mean that foliage doesn't affect bullet flight as far as I know. Also bullets penetrate less cover than IRL (rifle-caliber military rounds are rated to penetrate something like 2 feet of brick, ingame they only go through plank fences and the like).

Edited by tatzhit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jesus there's a lot of misinformation in this thread, so let's get some things straight:
 
1) Modern body armor (NIJ III and IV, SAPI and ESAPI) will stop everything including 7.62x51mm and 7.62x54mm rounds. Don't even try to say that it'll crack your ribs anyway, because modern armor is tested to absorb blunt trauma. There is literally footage on youtube of real soldiers being hit in the armor multiple times from 7.62x54 PKM fire and continuing to fight (i.e: 1, 2, 3.
 
2) There are two types of rifle plates; steel and ceramic. The steel will absorb dozens of FMJ rounds before letting anything through, but modern AP like M995 will go straight through. Ceramic armor is more effective against AP rounds, rated to stop multiple 7.62x51 AP, but doesn't stand up to repeated hits of FMJ as well as the steel. That being said, don't believe the rumors that ceramic plates "shatter" after a few random hits; unless the bullets all hit within the same 1-2" circle it's going to take at least a dozen rounds to get through.
 
3) Against body armor, ammunition type makes a big difference in lethality. Obviously AP rounds are best at getting through the armor, but loads which fragment at extremely shallow depth in flesh can be effective in turning limb shots into immediately incapacitating wounds.
 
4) Incapacitation is not a simple function of caliber or energy. To say that "tumbling" is important is a half truth. A bullet which yaws in flesh is generally more effective than one which travels straight through the target, but the large cavities caused by tumbling are only temporary stretch cavity which are unlikely to cause any permanent damage. The most devastating bullets are those which yaw and then fragment, shredding the stretched tissue into a large permanent cavity which destroys organs and causes massive bleeding.
 
Also important is the depth at which such terminal effects are produced. Depending on the bullet type and its velocity upon hitting the target, it can start to yaw or fragment sooner or later in its path through the body. Depending on the person's size and the body part being hit, the yawing and fragmentation may not start will after the bullet has exited the body - rending it useless.
 
For example, the standard 7.62x39mm FMJ bullet has an extremely late yaw which almost never affects anyone. 7.62x51mm and 7.62x54mm have a medium-late yaw which won't affect limb shots at all, but slightly improve the damage of chest and stomach shots as long as the victim isn't too thin. 5.45x39 FMJ yaws extremely early, and while the temporary cavity doesn't mean much, its permanent cavity is widened enough to cause equal tissue damage to a 7.62 that didn't yaw at all (you're getting a 7.62x39 wound channel with a fraction of the recoil).
 
There are a lot of misconceptions surrounded bullet fragmentation, because it started as a "happy accident" of the 5.56 NATO round's weak construction. It would have contradicted the Hague convention (NOT the Geneva) to intentionally design a fragmenting bullet, and the fragmenting affects weren't widely known until a few decades after its adoption. Some NATO countries like Great Britain redesigned their 5.56 to comply with the Hague convention and avoid fragmentation, while the US has ignored this concern (they never signed Hague anyway) and have continued to adopt new bullet designs which fragment.
 
Early 5.56 FMJ fragmentation performs extremely inconsistently. Original Vietnam-era M193 was estimated to only tumble and fragment 75% of the time at most. M855 was even more inconsistent, requiring higher velocities to fragment at all, and failing to fragment more often even within those ideal velocities. Even in the best cases, common 5.56 FMJ fragments at a medium depth which is effective in torso shots, but has no added effects in limb shots.
 
Outside of 5.56mm, there are few military loads which fragment. The Soviet Union had a 7.62x54 match round for snipers which fragmented pretty well some of the time, but I doubt Russia is still using the exact same load. West Germany's standard 7.62x51 FMJ during the Cold War era fragmented very well in torso shots, but they got rid of it to comply with the Hague. The US's 7.62x51 HPBT sniper round (M118LR) can fragment, but the depth at which it does so varies greatly and frequently the bullet exits before any fragmentation occurs.
 
Most recently the US has adopted two "barrier blind" loads for special forces (5.56 mk316 and 7.62 mk318) which fragment extremely early and are devastating in almost any hit to the body. Prior to the full adoption of M855A1, mk262 was being issued to regular troops as a temporary solution to the M855's problems, and it was rumored the USMC would permanently adopt Mk262 as their standard round over M855A1.
 
5) Per the above, it's entirely plausible that M110 users could be issued Mk318 rounds which fragment even in limb shots - causing 1 shot drops, or M993 AP rounds which pierce NIJ III-equivalent rifle plates. However, IRL this is normally a situational thing, with the standard round for M110 being M118LR (which for the most part is like highly accurate FMJ).
 
This still leaves Insurgent and Russian marksmen at a disadvantage. It's possible (but not guaranteed) that the modern Russian military has equivalent loads, as there's not much info out there. It's also possible that certain upscale ISIS marksmen would know how to find commercial fragmenting loads, but your average Taliban guy with surplus stuff isn't going to be up there. It gets pretty hypothetical.
Edited by Gnalvl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×