criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube

Changes On How Capture Areas Work In Galactic Assault

I noticed they changed certain objectives like the one where a player has to hold the X button down now saves progress so you don't have to start all over if the player dies as that made it extremely annoying and difficult for those objectives. They also need to change how capture areas work. The problem is its harder work for offense but easy work for defense. All defense has to do is have one person hide in a corner of a large room and by the time the offense finds that 1 player, the rest of defense will show up. What I propose is changing defense to where it capturing is more team based and requires defense to actually DEFEND a location.

What I mean by this is the capture time for an area is based on how many attackers are in the location. 1 or 2 is going to be slow vs 10-12 will be fast. Having one or more defensive players in the capture area does not stop the offense from capturing. To actually stop the offense from capturing, defense has to clear the offense team out. The only thing that the defensive players do just by being in the capture area is that it slows does the capture time. so if there are 10 offense, the capture will go by faster, but if 5 defenders enter the capture area the speed will go by slower. But regardless, as long as there is even 1 attacker in the capture area, they will continue to make progress. Requiring the defending team to actually play defense and have to clear out the enemy.

This makes capturing more balanced as it requires more attackers to capture quicker and less attackers will capture slower than usual. So say capture speed now would be like if 3-5 players were in the capture area. This is just a rough estimate. And that if defenders want to stop the offense from capturing, they have to clear them out, just being there only slows the capture, doesn't stop it entirely. This will help with lots of GA maps but especially the problem with Yavin and Kamino which are the hardest, where I and 3 others attackers were holding off the entire enemy defending team from reinforcing the capture areas but the rest of my team of 10-11 couldn't capture because this one player was so well hidden inside the area that we were running around trying to find this guy in all the different spots just to find him and it wasted a good amount of tickets that later hindered the rest of the game when trying to capture the next area. by removing this, that player has no affect to the game so unless he wants to stop us from capping, he needs to kill the attackers. it's too cheap and too easy for just 1 player to just find a place to hide long enough to waste the attackers tickets which i believe is the biggest reason why these maps feel so unbalanced. Kamino has 2 sets of 2 capture areas and this becomes a problem. By making this change, it balances it out so defenders actually have to defend and attackers need to get more players in the capture area to capture. And also by doing this, it makes capturing more suspenseful.

Replies

  • what r u scared to roam around and find the defending camper or do you u want the defenders to run into yoyr camp spots
  • Sounds to me like it will be the same problem just reverse with one attacker hiding in the zone to keep the progress going. Also, the current setup has capture speeds already adjusted based on how many active players are in the capture zone. One tip for finding hidden contestors/capturers is to use Rey and/or Bossk or Boba on maps you know there will be a capture component.
  • Sgt_Fergus
    2118 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    what r u scared to roam around and find the defending camper or do you u want the defenders to run into yoyr camp spots

    i guess you didn't read.

    21aqbc.jpg
    Sounds to me like it will be the same problem just reverse with one attacker hiding in the zone to keep the progress going. Also, the current setup has capture speeds already adjusted based on how many active players are in the capture zone. One tip for finding hidden contestors/capturers is to use Rey and/or Bossk or Boba on maps you know there will be a capture component.

    And like wise to you as well.

    As i explained, it doesn't change sides to benefit attackers. If defenders want to stop the capture, they have to kill the attackers, if attackers want to capture faster, they need to kill the defenders. The point of defending is to keep people out, not to hide. even if 1 attacker gets in but there are 10 defenders, the progress is so minute but its allows for defenders to do their job. to sit there and do nothing is not defending. as for "use a hero" that is too many variables. you have to first, hope you are on a map where they are 6000 and not 8000 as that is 2000 more points. so if you are bossk on kamino it costs more than rey on takadona. 2nd, you have to hope no one else has that character and isn't off ****ing around somewhere else getting milestones, if you don't know, that's a huge problem in SWBF2 at the moment due to bad milestone designs to be anti-team based with rewards. And 3rd of all, that is depending on 1 character. as my resolution requires both teams to have to play objectively together, your resolution is to rely on 1 player. see the problem? And no one can say that Kamino and Yavin are balanced maps as they are heavily in favor of the defenders unlike other maps. And this mostly plays into the factor that the capture areas are too easy for defenders to just sit and wait, requiring more work for attackers, and less work for defenders. Fact is, that is not balanced. One side has to do more work than the other, that is an unfair advantage, that's not up for debate.

    Lets take the tree for example, it's easily exploitable on Yavin phase 2. It is so easy to defend, that's why most hide there. because even though you know he is there, you can't get to him easily. because there are snipers that will always be waiting in the back. Some noob attacker against my idea will be like "well like i totally like see him hiding on the other side of the try so I would take out a grenade and toss it at his location and then it woul...." wrong you die because you got sniped in the face once you pop up your face to attempt to throw the grenade. try again. "well I would do some cool parkour move and sneak around and flank him an..." and get blown up to bits by the AT-RT rebel waiting for you. "well then i will magically give myself battlepoints and by an AT-ST, because no one else will be using it and it will just be waiting for me to use and i while charge in and get..." blown up by explosive and supercharged sentry way back behind the capture area sitting nice and cozzy. Lets try the other area, the temple with 4 ways in and the defenders have a huge crate that can protect from any grenade explosions. "well i would like charge in with a vanguard ability and then lik...." mowed down by enemy heavy sentry... next. "well i would use stealth to sneak around and the..." get killed by the enemy specialist also using sentry.

    Let's skip the "in hindsight" fallacy of what you think you would have done when you were not really in that moment. the fact is no way should attackers be delayed capping a huge area like Kamino holding +90%% of the map with half their team on it, while all it takes is 1 defender with their foot through the door. That makes no logical sense unless you are noob who thinks that is considered skill and you are probably one of those scrubby players that does that because you can't get a kill but know that as long as you hide like a coward, you don't have to contribute in defending.
  • I agree the Kamino map setup is flawed and on a previous thread I was told by a moderator it is being changed. I haven’t had issues with clearing out the camp on Yavin 4. As long as you push the enemy back and forward defend they can’t get in there to hide in the first place. Kamino they can hide underneath where you have to actually expose yourself to sniper and LAAT fire to find them. Also, I don’t know why people stay in lobbies with players who play heroes and don’t go to the objective. Myself and friends will not stay in a lobby with **** on our team.
  • Grey_B
    188 posts Member
    I agree with the general idea, but not exactly in the way you're suggesting.
    If just 1 attacker can keep progress going, it's still the reverse of the current situation (one **** hiding somewhere, cancelling out a large group).

    I'd rather see it changed to the superior number being the decider, with the advantage given to the attackers.
    So 1 attacker can't capture against 2 defenders, and 1 defender can't stop the capture against 2 attackers.
    But equal numbers should favour the attacker.
    And the more attackers on point, the faster the cap.

    Then it's in both teams best interest to get as many on point as possible, and clear out as many enemies as possible.
  • gzcnr
    290 posts Member
    No. It is fine. As an attacker you have to clear the sector. Clear. Not overpopulate.
  • gzcnr wrote: »
    No. It is fine. As an attacker you have to clear the sector. Clear. Not overpopulate.

    and as a defender, you have to actually defend, not hide
  • The OP's suggestion is a bad idea. I think so, and so does Cassian.
  • Most games that I've played just require you have a majority on the Control Point to start taking it. The presence of enemy troops will, however, make it go slower until you clear them.
  • Most games that I've played just require you have a majority on the Control Point to start taking it. The presence of enemy troops will, however, make it go slower until you clear them.

    exactly as suggested. ya most games realized its a bad function to have 1 player who can find a place to hide or exploit and make the capture impossible.

    Most games learn from there mistakes. Halo did when people found out about this.



    the thing is they had to make the cap areas so barebones even after patch that it no longer has places for cover so you kinda are out in the wind. with SWBFEA2 there are too many places to hide that, like the video shown before, you can be impossible to find unless someone knows that spot you otherwise can hold the objective forever.
    The OP's suggestion is a bad idea. I think so, and so does Cassian.

    Well that's your opinions, and problem is for you is your opinion doesn't matter.

    Fact, GA Kamino Phase 2

    Defense Pros

    Has +1 vehicle more
    Doesn't have limited lives
    Just has to have 1 player in objective to hold
    Has fallback prior (gives defense time to eat away tickets before getting to base)

    Defense Cons

    Limited time in LAAT

    Offense Cons

    Has -1 vehicle
    Has limited lives
    Has to keep all 20 players out while having at least 1 player in
    Loses tickets having to push up before getting to objective due to fallback

    Offensive Pros

    Gets 50 tickets

    Defense has a 4-1 advantage making it severely unbalanced. If attackers focus on ground, LAAT takes them out, if they focus on LAAT, ground defense takes them out. That alone gives defense a stronger advantage. Kashyyyk has AAT which gives it the advantage, though is OP in it's own way that needs to be fixed. but balances odds. Defenders in Phase 1 actually have to do work, they have to lock on with ion rockets and do damage, attackers, if they don't do anything will lose. That's how we determine that this type of capture area is unbalanced thus due to the fact they have better advantages and have to do far less work, which is why most rounds on Kamino GA end at phase 2.
  • As long as more defenders back off the progress like more attackers advance it then I support this idea.
  • ThirdDegreePun
    1992 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    I'd be tempted to make one of several possible changes;
    1. Make it so you need equal or more defenders to halt taking a point, otherwise attackers will progress (except for final phase)
    2. on maps with two or more places that need to be captured (except for final phase) attacking team only needs to get ONE of them to progress (lookin' at you Tattooine)
    3. Alter the boundaries of early capture objectives to make it easier for the attacking team to hold it, such as moving the boundary of the Takodana one so it's all within that courtyard instead of allowing defenders to go on the other side of the wall.
    4. Award a small reinforcement boost when capturing one of multiple objectives (would really help in games where you're in overtime for one objective then immediately lose after taking it).

    All in all this is only a problem on maps where there's more objectives afterwards. I've only seen the final phase of Kamino ONCE and our team was significantly better than theirs. Maps like Kamino and Tattoine end far too frequently in the first or second phases, when ideally at least 80% of matches should go to the final phase unless the defending team has really done an exceptional job.

    I think just trying out one of those suggestions could potentially solve the problem, or perhaps a hybrid if needed.
  • Sgt_Fergus
    2118 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    I'd be tempted to make one of several possible changes;
    1. Make it so you need equal or more defenders to halt taking a point, otherwise attackers will progress (except for final phase)
    2. on maps with two or more places that need to be captured (except for final phase) attacking team only needs to get ONE of them to progress (lookin' at you Tattooine)
    3. Alter the boundaries of early capture objectives to make it easier for the attacking team to hold it, such as moving the boundary of the Takodana one so it's all within that courtyard instead of allowing defenders to go on the other side of the wall.
    4. Award a small reinforcement boost when capturing one of multiple objectives (would really help in games where you're in overtime for one objective then immediately lose after taking it).

    All in all this is only a problem on maps where there's more objectives afterwards. I've only seen the final phase of Kamino ONCE and our team was significantly better than theirs. Maps like Kamino and Tattoine end far too frequently in the first or second phases, when ideally at least 80% of matches should go to the final phase unless the defending team has really done an exceptional job.

    I think just trying out one of those suggestions could potentially solve the problem, or perhaps a hybrid if needed.

    I actually looked even closer at this recently and I did notice, capture areas are the worse. I decided to keep track of this the last couple of days when gaming for hours on end and noticed most matches actually end on capture zones. with some of the most broken maps like kamino and yavin they usually have offense lose at capture areas. Yavin, phase 2, Kamino, mostly phase 2 or phase 3, Tatooine, phase 1 or 2, etc. Takadona had a problem but I checked and the map looks to be updated on Xbox where the capture zone in now no longer past the wall and fixed to be in the wall's confinement so that's why i notice there has been an increase in offense winning the game. Ya most liars on here keep trying to say "git gud" even though I have been in full party lobbies with a pro team and we would basically steam roll the other team and even playing against the same people for the most part on the other team, these maps that were the ones in issue, they were way more difficult to cap because the defense has to do very little to hold them, and required way more work then it should for the offense if they were clearly better but all it takes is 1 person to hide and all progress is halted. you find the camper and kill him, make some progress and then another enemy would sneak in and camp. all you have to do is just that and even if they lose they will have eaten though a good portion of your ticket count that on kamino or yavin you can't take the other objectives as well as you could because of the phase prior.

    I think your suggestions for 1 and 4 i like. personally the OVERTIME is **** it's not enough. i tried and with no resistance it still was not enough time to run from 1 objective to another. especially kamino phase 2 where you have to pretty much back track or drop down and run across the lower platform which neither get you close enough. i heard someone say they should add 10 tickets back because that would be fair instead of OT after capping a objective and going to another. OT should just be for when there is no one in the circle that is being capped and the progress bar goes down.

  • Sgt_Fergus wrote: »
    I'd be tempted to make one of several possible changes;
    1. Make it so you need equal or more defenders to halt taking a point, otherwise attackers will progress (except for final phase)
    2. on maps with two or more places that need to be captured (except for final phase) attacking team only needs to get ONE of them to progress (lookin' at you Tattooine)
    3. Alter the boundaries of early capture objectives to make it easier for the attacking team to hold it, such as moving the boundary of the Takodana one so it's all within that courtyard instead of allowing defenders to go on the other side of the wall.
    4. Award a small reinforcement boost when capturing one of multiple objectives (would really help in games where you're in overtime for one objective then immediately lose after taking it).

    All in all this is only a problem on maps where there's more objectives afterwards. I've only seen the final phase of Kamino ONCE and our team was significantly better than theirs. Maps like Kamino and Tattoine end far too frequently in the first or second phases, when ideally at least 80% of matches should go to the final phase unless the defending team has really done an exceptional job.

    I think just trying out one of those suggestions could potentially solve the problem, or perhaps a hybrid if needed.

    I actually looked even closer at this recently and I did notice, capture areas are the worse. I decided to keep track of this the last couple of days when gaming for hours on end and noticed most matches actually end on capture zones. with some of the most broken maps like kamino and yavin they usually have offense lose at capture areas. Yavin, phase 2, Kamino, mostly phase 2 or phase 3, Tatooine, phase 1 or 2, etc. Takadona had a problem but I checked and the map looks to be updated on Xbox where the capture zone in now no longer past the wall and fixed to be in the wall's confinement so that's why i notice there has been an increase in offense winning the game. Ya most liars on here keep trying to say "git gud" even though I have been in full party lobbies with a pro team and we would basically steam roll the other team and even playing against the same people for the most part on the other team, these maps that were the ones in issue, they were way more difficult to cap because the defense has to do very little to hold them, and required way more work then it should for the offense if they were clearly better but all it takes is 1 person to hide and all progress is halted. you find the camper and kill him, make some progress and then another enemy would sneak in and camp. all you have to do is just that and even if they lose they will have eaten though a good portion of your ticket count that on kamino or yavin you can't take the other objectives as well as you could because of the phase prior.

    I think your suggestions for 1 and 4 i like. personally the OVERTIME is **** it's not enough. i tried and with no resistance it still was not enough time to run from 1 objective to another. especially kamino phase 2 where you have to pretty much back track or drop down and run across the lower platform which neither get you close enough. i heard someone say they should add 10 tickets back because that would be fair instead of OT after capping a objective and going to another. OT should just be for when there is no one in the circle that is being capped and the progress bar goes down.

    Nailed it! Here's hoping we see improvements to it soon.
  • To an extent it already works this way. It's being captured until nobody is capturing. It's defended until nobody is defending. It's contested when both sides are in there. I prefer it the way it is. It's contested until there isn't someone of the opposing faction in there.

    The problem with the capture time increase is that, right now, due to the bad match making algorithm, or whatever is causing the awful teams, the matches would end faster and be more frustrating than they are now. The way it is now, the players with the massive disadvantage feel they can at least try to win. If your proposed change is made, nobody will want to try because there will be no point. No chance to make a come back. It will be nothing more than a one-sided match every single time. Right now, there's always a chance.

    What does need to be adjusted is the area so that someone can't hide in a corner. But even that is being strategic.

    There are problem areas, however. If those areas had an adjustment made to them, of whatever kind, those areas wouldn't be problematic. However, I must point out that the times where the team that is bad is defending, those areas are invigorating when you are able to hold it and get a victory, rather than the total loss that all other places have been.

    "So long as you continue to be so predictable I need not face you at all. You are your own worst enemy".- Tassadar

    Did someone beat you in the game fairly and you're upset? Was it not bugged or due to lag or a hack and it made you cry? Then please fill out this form and follow it's instructions for sending to the appropriate people.
  • Sgt_Fergus wrote: »
    I'd be tempted to make one of several possible changes;
    1. Make it so you need equal or more defenders to halt taking a point, otherwise attackers will progress (except for final phase)
    2. on maps with two or more places that need to be captured (except for final phase) attacking team only needs to get ONE of them to progress (lookin' at you Tattooine)
    3. Alter the boundaries of early capture objectives to make it easier for the attacking team to hold it, such as moving the boundary of the Takodana one so it's all within that courtyard instead of allowing defenders to go on the other side of the wall.
    4. Award a small reinforcement boost when capturing one of multiple objectives (would really help in games where you're in overtime for one objective then immediately lose after taking it).

    All in all this is only a problem on maps where there's more objectives afterwards. I've only seen the final phase of Kamino ONCE and our team was significantly better than theirs. Maps like Kamino and Tattoine end far too frequently in the first or second phases, when ideally at least 80% of matches should go to the final phase unless the defending team has really done an exceptional job.

    I think just trying out one of those suggestions could potentially solve the problem, or perhaps a hybrid if needed.

    I actually looked even closer at this recently and I did notice, capture areas are the worse. I decided to keep track of this the last couple of days when gaming for hours on end and noticed most matches actually end on capture zones. with some of the most broken maps like kamino and yavin they usually have offense lose at capture areas. Yavin, phase 2, Kamino, mostly phase 2 or phase 3, Tatooine, phase 1 or 2, etc. Takadona had a problem but I checked and the map looks to be updated on Xbox where the capture zone in now no longer past the wall and fixed to be in the wall's confinement so that's why i notice there has been an increase in offense winning the game. Ya most liars on here keep trying to say "git gud" even though I have been in full party lobbies with a pro team and we would basically steam roll the other team and even playing against the same people for the most part on the other team, these maps that were the ones in issue, they were way more difficult to cap because the defense has to do very little to hold them, and required way more work then it should for the offense if they were clearly better but all it takes is 1 person to hide and all progress is halted. you find the camper and kill him, make some progress and then another enemy would sneak in and camp. all you have to do is just that and even if they lose they will have eaten though a good portion of your ticket count that on kamino or yavin you can't take the other objectives as well as you could because of the phase prior.

    I think your suggestions for 1 and 4 i like. personally the OVERTIME is **** it's not enough. i tried and with no resistance it still was not enough time to run from 1 objective to another. especially kamino phase 2 where you have to pretty much back track or drop down and run across the lower platform which neither get you close enough. i heard someone say they should add 10 tickets back because that would be fair instead of OT after capping a objective and going to another. OT should just be for when there is no one in the circle that is being capped and the progress bar goes down.

    Nailed it! Here's hoping we see improvements to it soon.

    I hope so. either that or maybe go back to 30 tickets reinforcement, and assault team can only lose tickets if no one is in the objective. requiring defense to do some work other than their job is to just stand in the objective.
    To an extent it already works this way. It's being captured until nobody is capturing. It's defended until nobody is defending. It's contested when both sides are in there. I prefer it the way it is. It's contested until there isn't someone of the opposing faction in there.

    The problem with the capture time increase is that, right now, due to the bad match making algorithm, or whatever is causing the awful teams, the matches would end faster and be more frustrating than they are now. The way it is now, the players with the massive disadvantage feel they can at least try to win. If your proposed change is made, nobody will want to try because there will be no point. No chance to make a come back. It will be nothing more than a one-sided match every single time. Right now, there's always a chance.

    What does need to be adjusted is the area so that someone can't hide in a corner. But even that is being strategic.

    There are problem areas, however. If those areas had an adjustment made to them, of whatever kind, those areas wouldn't be problematic. However, I must point out that the times where the team that is bad is defending, those areas are invigorating when you are able to hold it and get a victory, rather than the total loss that all other places have been.

    its not capping if an entire team is in but a single player finds a good hiding spot. like phase 2 of hoth i know of one you can stay in and even though the assault team was powering the objective, they could never find me. I hid and the match went on for about half an hour before they lost because they could never find me. The spot is so well hidden they would have never found me. And there are many others like it on other GA maps. So an awful team can already beat a good team and it only requires 1 player to hide. so i can't see your justification of bad algorithm. I feel the better team should win. Unless you are going to put a red outline on all players inside an objective area so no one can hide.
  • To an extent it already works this way. It's being captured until nobody is capturing. It's defended until nobody is defending. It's contested when both sides are in there. I prefer it the way it is. It's contested until there isn't someone of the opposing faction in there.

    The problem with the capture time increase is that, right now, due to the bad match making algorithm, or whatever is causing the awful teams, the matches would end faster and be more frustrating than they are now. The way it is now, the players with the massive disadvantage feel they can at least try to win. If your proposed change is made, nobody will want to try because there will be no point. No chance to make a come back. It will be nothing more than a one-sided match every single time. Right now, there's always a chance.

    What does need to be adjusted is the area so that someone can't hide in a corner. But even that is being strategic.

    There are problem areas, however. If those areas had an adjustment made to them, of whatever kind, those areas wouldn't be problematic. However, I must point out that the times where the team that is bad is defending, those areas are invigorating when you are able to hold it and get a victory, rather than the total loss that all other places have been.

    The main issue here is the numbers. In overwatch where it's 6v6 if one person contests it's pretty fair. When there's 20v20 on the other hand you could theoretically have a 20 on 1 situation constantly until one team loses all their reinforcement tickets. Because it's got to do with deaths of the attackers instead of time, and that you can trickle in one of twenty total defenders into a point at a given moment makes it pretty hard to progress through certain points, and when you do you often take massive losses. I think it would be fairer if there was a system in place which required defenders equal or greater than attackers to halt progress on points, but it'd tick up at a much slower rate unless the point is clear. The exception should be if it's the final phase in a match, but if it's at earlier phases, especially if it's phase 1 or 2 of 4, the attackers should have the edge in pressing through and it should be instead about stalling/inflicting some damage.
  • To an extent it already works this way. It's being captured until nobody is capturing. It's defended until nobody is defending. It's contested when both sides are in there. I prefer it the way it is. It's contested until there isn't someone of the opposing faction in there.

    The problem with the capture time increase is that, right now, due to the bad match making algorithm, or whatever is causing the awful teams, the matches would end faster and be more frustrating than they are now. The way it is now, the players with the massive disadvantage feel they can at least try to win. If your proposed change is made, nobody will want to try because there will be no point. No chance to make a come back. It will be nothing more than a one-sided match every single time. Right now, there's always a chance.

    What does need to be adjusted is the area so that someone can't hide in a corner. But even that is being strategic.

    There are problem areas, however. If those areas had an adjustment made to them, of whatever kind, those areas wouldn't be problematic. However, I must point out that the times where the team that is bad is defending, those areas are invigorating when you are able to hold it and get a victory, rather than the total loss that all other places have been.

    The main issue here is the numbers. In overwatch where it's 6v6 if one person contests it's pretty fair. When there's 20v20 on the other hand you could theoretically have a 20 on 1 situation constantly until one team loses all their reinforcement tickets. Because it's got to do with deaths of the attackers instead of time, and that you can trickle in one of twenty total defenders into a point at a given moment makes it pretty hard to progress through certain points, and when you do you often take massive losses. I think it would be fairer if there was a system in place which required defenders equal or greater than attackers to halt progress on points, but it'd tick up at a much slower rate unless the point is clear. The exception should be if it's the final phase in a match, but if it's at earlier phases, especially if it's phase 1 or 2 of 4, the attackers should have the edge in pressing through and it should be instead about stalling/inflicting some damage.

    basically what you described is like what i described is on par to battlefield conquest capturing where it depends on who has the most in the area. Therefore, as elite shipmaster would say it, "then it is an even fight"
  • I've always thought the GA capture system is nuts. Pretty much every other game with point captures make it depend on having a majority in the circle, not killing every single one of the enemy troopers, especially when the points sometimes have borders with things to hide around at the very edges. Like so much in this game the design is genuinely perplexing, making you wonder if the devs really play FPS games at all.
  • I've always thought the GA capture system is nuts. Pretty much every other game with point captures make it depend on having a majority in the circle, not killing every single one of the enemy troopers, especially when the points sometimes have borders with things to hide around at the very edges. Like so much in this game the design is genuinely perplexing, making you wonder if the devs really play FPS games at all.

    Exactly!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!