Poll

Quick Reference to the Pros and Cons of the bf2 vehicles+ Your Faves?

Armoured or unarmoured cars are for me!0%0% - 0
I heart tanks4%4% - 1
Infantry FTW!8%8% - 2
Can't live without my scout or transport heli8%8% - 2
Attack Helicopters Are my vice30%30% - 7
I'm a fighter pilot26%26% - 6
I just bomb with fighters, or use bombers + attack jets13%13% - 3
My favourites are APC's or mobile AA4%4% - 1
RIB's and Jetski's are the most useful to me4%4% - 1
Total: 23
pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario
Wed. June 23/10                                Pace51

A Quick Reference to the Pros and Cons of the bf2 vehicles

Unlike my guides in the past, I’m just gonna put the vehicles, what’s good about them, what’s bad about them, and a poll. No useless walls of text this time. This can be used as a quick reference when playing bf2, or, you can use it to refresh your memory about which vehicle you liked the best and why, so that you can vote in the above poll. After voting in the above poll, please put why you liked the vehicle in the comments.

https://bfita.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bf2-logo.jpg

Index

Each vehicle will be described like this:

Vehicle
Pros:
Cons:

Unarmoured cars
Armoured Cars
APC’s
Anti-Air
Tanks
Water crafts
Scout/Reconnaissance Helicopters
Attack helicopters
https://www.gameogre.com/battlefield2.jpg
Utility/Transport Helicopters
Fighter Aircraft
Multi-Role/Bomber Aircraft
Attack/Close air support


Unarmoured cars[b/]: For getting across the map quickly

DPV

Pros: Faster than the FAV, has an M249 for close range combat and a Browning for long range.
Cons: Both guns only point forward and swiveled about 45 degrees on either side. Can be destroyed by tanks in one shot.

FAV

Pros: Kord HMG may be swiveled 360 degrees.
Cons: Slower than a DPV, it can be destroyed easily.

Desert Raider

Pros: 3 SAW’s
Cons: Very weakly armoured

Muscle Car:

Pros: Fast transportation for two
Cons: No armament, no armour.

Pickup Truck:

Pros: Kord HMG may be swiveled 360 degrees
Cons: Little armour, and drivers 1st person view is worse than an FAV drivers view.

Muscle Cab:

Pros: Durable, can survive direct hits with AT or high powered weaponry.
Cons: No armament, slow.

Forklift:

Pros: A small easily overlooked target, and quick.
Cons: No armament, no armour.

Civilian Car:

Pros: Can transport two people fairly quickly.
Cons: Very vulnerable to direct hits from small arms fire, or worse.

[b]Armoured Cars
Their guns fire tracer rounds in addition to full metal jacketed rounds, making them easy to locate.

HMMWV

Pros: Passengers get a good view, and at full health, it can give it’s crew enough time to escape after being struck by rocket’s or shells.
Cons: It is a slow, big target, and easy to spot and hit.

Vodnik

Pros: Generally immune to small arms fire, and can survive decent amounts of damage.
Cons: Passengers have a terrible view, and it is slow and cannot turn quickly.

NJ2046

Pros: Passengers have an excellent view, it’s armour can survive decent amounts of damage.
Cons: Passengers can easily be shot out of the back, it is also a large target.

APC’s All are immune to small arms fire.

LAV-25

Pros: Carries 6, gun fires quick and kills in 1-2 hits.
Cons: It has no faults the other APC’s do not have.

WZ551

Pros: Powerful gun kills in one hit
Cons: Slower fire rate and faster overheat times than other APC’s

BTR-90

Pros: Fast firing gun.
Cons: It’s very large and easy to hit. Gun takes two hits to kill uninjured infantry

BMP-7

Pros: It has a 100mm gun and a coaxial. It is amphibious, and carries passengers.
Cons: No high powered ML-5, TOW, or HJ-8 missiles, and passengers cannot shoot.

Anti-Air Moderate armour and powerful SAM’s. Can carry a passenger.

PGZ-95

Pros: Fast firing cannons can easily hit aircraft and infantry alike, they have a large spread.
Cons: Aiming at infantry is tricky, as you must guess where your projectiles will hit.

Tunguska

Pros: Fast firing cannons can easily hit aircraft and infantry alike, they have a large spread.
Cons: Aiming at infantry is tricky, as you must guess where your projectiles will hit.

M6 Bradley Linebacker

Pros: Powerful cannon does major damage to aircraft, and easily hits infantry, and takes a while to overheat.
Cons: Cannot “spray”, as the cannon fires slowly.

Tanks  Heavy armour, immune to small-arms fire, with some weak spots. Very slow, with one exception.

M1A2 Abrams MBT

Pros: Heavy armour, gun does heavy damage.
Cons: Slow.

Type 98 MBT

Pros: Heavy armour, gun does heavy damage.
Cons: Slow.

T-90 MBT

Pros: Heavy armour, gun does heavy damage. Smaller and slightly faster than the other tanks. Firing the main gun doesn’t cause the tank to sway as much as others.
Cons: The weak spot between the turret and the tank is much easier to hit. Armour is slightly weaker than other tanks.

Challenger 2

Pros: Heavy armour, gun does heavy damage.
Cons: Slow. And, it’s a British tank.

Leopard 2A6

Pros: Heavy armour, powerful gun. Also, It’s a German tank.
Cons: Slow.

Water crafts Low armour, but great for transportation.

RIB

Pros: Has light armament, is fairly quick, and carries lots of passengers.
Cons: Very low armour, slow enough and large enough to easily hit.

Jet Ski

Pros: Very fast and carries two people.
Cons: Easily destroyed.

Scout/Reconnaissance Helicopters Low health, but not easy to hit. Has two miniguns and passengers may spot enemies to earn points. Acts as a manned UAV

MH-6 Littlebird

Pros: Maneuvers and turns superbly.
Cons: It has no faults that other scout heli’s do not share.

Eurocopter

Pros: Can easily tail light vehicles.
Cons: Pitching and rolling is fine, but its turning is terrible.

WZ-11

Pros: Maneuvers and turns superbly.
Cons: It has no faults that other scout heli’s do not share.

Attack helicopters Some are low level armour killers, others are high altitude gunships.

AH-1Z Cobra

Pros: Powerful rotary cannon, speed, maneuvers very well.
Cons: Lost much of it’s anti-armour capabilities after the 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 patches.

AH-64D Apache Longbow

Pros: Quick and has a good rotary cannon. One of the only two heli’s that’s rockets have a higher blast radius and more splash damage.
Cons: It’s cannon and rockets are slightly inferior to the those of the Mi-35, which is the only helicopter it faces.

Mi-28 HAVOC

Pros: Very powerful cannon with enormous splash damage can destroy any vehicle.
Cons: Very bad turning and pitching, and it is very large. It’s rolling is bad, too.

Mi-35 Hind

Pros: Fully automatic rocket barrages, and a slightly better cannon then the Apache’s.
Cons: It maneuver’s like a transport helicopter.

Z-10

Pros: Powerful rotary cannon, speed, maneuvers very well. Many people who play multiplayer prefer this to the AH-1Z, for aesthetic reasons only.
Cons: Lost much of its anti-armour capabilities after the 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 patches.

Eurocopter Tigre HAP

Pros: It is the fastest helicopter in the game, and can reach speeds of 400 kmH. Has the same cannon as the Mi-28.
Cons: It has less armour than other helis, and its cannon can only engage targets that the helicopter is directly pointed towards.

Utility/Transport Helicopters Heavily armoured, large passenger loads, but slow.

UH-60 Blackhawk

Pros: Has two miniguns in place of two MG’s.
Cons: No faults that other transport helicopters do not share.

Mi-17

Pros: Heavily armoured.
Cons: It has HMG’s instead of miniguns, giving it less attack power.

Z-8

Pros: Heavily armoured.
Cons: It has HMG’s instead of miniguns, giving it less attack power.

Fighter Aircraft Some have faster rolling, some have better pitching. The two dumb bombs are powerful, but require direct or frequent hits to eradicate armour.

J-10

Pros: Rolls very fast, and oddly enough, seems harder to hit with AA missiles than most aircraft, even after the 1.5 patch.
Cons: Cannot pitch (Go up or down) very fast. Has a poor AG HUD.

F-18 Hornet

Pros: It can pitch quite quickly, and outturn many enemies in a dogfight.
Cons: It cannot roll as well as certain aircraft.

F-35B JSF

Pros: Can roll very quickly. Also, can hover, allowing it to bomb super accurately
Cons: Cannot pitch as quickly as most other aircraft.

Mig-29 Fulcrum

Pros: It can pitch quite quickly, and outturn many enemies in a dogfight.
Cons: It cannot roll too quickly.

Eurofighter Typhoon

Pros: It can pitch quite quickly, and outturn many enemies in a dogfight.
Cons: Cannot roll very quickly.

Multi-Role/Bomber Aircraft Smart bombs do extra damage against armour. Laser guided missiles destroy anything within range.

F-15 Eagle

Pros: It has decent pitch but a slow roll.
Cons: None that other bombers do not share.

Su-30

Pros: It cannot roll as well as fighters, but rolls slightly better than the F-15. Also, it pitches like the F-15.
Cons: None that other bombers do not share, other than a poor Air-To-Ground HUD.

Su-34

Pros: Pitches like an F-15 or Su-30.
Cons: Rolls very slowly.

Attack/Close air support Four dumb bombs can be dropped in packs of two.

A-10 Thunderbolt II (“Warthog”)

Pros: Very powerful fast firing cannon.
Cons: Standard attack jet faults. Also, the cannon, while it doesn’t unstabilize the warthog as badly as other attack jet cannons, it slows the A-10 down.

Q-5 Fantan

Pros: It has a slow firing but high damage cannon.
Cons: Standard attack jet faults, and also, firing the cannon really unstabilizes the aircraft.

Su-29 (NATO designation “Frogfoot” after its similar predecessor, the su-25 frogfoot.)

Pros: It has a slow firing but high damage cannon.
Cons: Standard attack jet faults, and also, firing the cannon really unstabilizes the aircraft.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6785|PNW

I used everything. Just check my stats.

report wrote:

why the fuck has bf2s' worst troll not been banned for this useless shit called spam?
A BF2 thread on an originally BF2 forum in a BF2 section about BF2 vehicles is hardly what I would call spam.
Stubbee
Religions Hate Facts, Questions and Doubts
+223|6757|Reality
when said thread is 5 years too late
i applaud the effort, he is just doing it for the wrong game.
The US economy is a giant Ponzi scheme. And 'to big to fail' is code speak for 'niahnahniahniahnah 99 percenters'
pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario

Stubbee wrote:

when said thread is 5 years too late
i applaud the effort, he is just doing it for the wrong game.
the most recent game I have is cod5 and spore.
steelie34
pub hero!
+603|6395|the land of bourbon

pace51 wrote:

Mi-35 Hind

Pros: Fully automatic rocket barrages, and a slightly better cannon then the Apache’s.
Cons: It maneuver’s like a transport helicopter.
the hind's circle of death is unmatched.  it maneuvers just fine
https://bf3s.com/sigs/36e1d9e36ae924048a933db90fb05bb247fe315e.png
pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario

steelie34 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Mi-35 Hind

Pros: Fully automatic rocket barrages, and a slightly better cannon then the Apache’s.
Cons: It maneuver’s like a transport helicopter.
the hind's circle of death is unmatched.  it maneuvers just fine
Alright, in my opinion, it's a brick with rotors. A deadly brick. An airtank.
Stubbee
Religions Hate Facts, Questions and Doubts
+223|6757|Reality

steelie34 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Mi-35 Hind

Pros: Fully automatic rocket barrages, and a slightly better cannon then the Apache’s.
Cons: It maneuver’s like a transport helicopter.
the hind's circle of death is unmatched.  it maneuvers just fine
QFE and QFT
The US economy is a giant Ponzi scheme. And 'to big to fail' is code speak for 'niahnahniahniahnah 99 percenters'
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6629|do not disturb

From my gameplay experience, and not from actual game file values, the tanks have the same amount of armor, and do the same amount of damage. If there are any pros and cons, it would be based on size. A smaller profile means it is less likely the get hit. The T-90 and Type 56 have this advantage. The Challenger 2, on the other hand, is quite large and easy to hit. I have never been deceived by the camo on the tanks, but I find the L2A6 to have the best, when the shaders work properly.

This was based on normal gameplay. If you consider weak spots that could severely damage an enemy tank, that is another story. I could never replicate that 'glitch' intentionally, only accidentally.

The Tiger HAP, is by far the worst attack helicopter in regular BF2. Turning or twisting upon lift-off can result in the Tiger tipping and being destroyed because the wheels stick to the ground. The suspension is also broken. A soft landing can result in some damage, and a hard landing will almost certainly crash the Tiger, as opposed to other helicopters which can easily survive a hard landing.

The flight characteristics are undesirable for the Tiger. The front nose pulls down somewhat, and has a difficult time pulling up from dives. It is advised not to take steep dives unless there is sufficient altitude available to safely recover. A warning for those soloing in the Tiger is to switch to the gunner seat when the Tiger is facing somewhat upwards or parallel with the ground. Doing so while aimed down will result in the Tiger falling nose first in a unrecoverable flight. You will also have less time to solo in the Tiger, even if you take safe precautions.

Combat effectiveness is mixed. The Tiger overall shows greater effectiveness against the Havok. Having a very silm profile, it is more difficult to hit with a tv-guided missile. From gameplay experience, the Tiger HAP's gun seems to either do more damage or register more effectively against the Havok, killing the Havok in only a matter of seconds. However, the Tiger makes a poor agile fighter in closer combats, and the gunner's limited axis on the turret leaves a limited cone to attack within. Air-to-ground attack is below average, though the Tiger has a 30mm auto-cannon like the Havok, having effective splash damage.

Overall, the Tiger is a somewhat broken, unfinished, poor excuse for a job by DICE as a new attack helicopter. However, a skilled pilot and gunner can still be very effective with the Tiger HAP. Users most be more careful and precise with their controls. I still find the Tiger to be enjoyable to be in, though inexperienced players will surely find the Tiger to be frustrating and difficult to use.

Now this is how you write a guide pace.

Last edited by Phrozenbot (2010-06-23 10:57:41)

Axatar
Member
+29|6475|France

Phrozenbot wrote:

Now this is how you write a guide pace.

pace51 wrote:

A Quick Reference
As stated before, your guide is a little too late especially when nearly everyone here that has played BF2 has either moved on to other games or stopped playing.   
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6514|so randum
last time your stats were linked, you had less than 100 points and you think you can make a guide about bf2? fuck off.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario

Phrozenbot wrote:

From my gameplay experience, and not from actual game file values, the tanks have the same amount of armor, and do the same amount of damage. If there are any pros and cons, it would be based on size. A smaller profile means it is less likely the get hit. The T-90 and Type 56 have this advantage. The Challenger 2, on the other hand, is quite large and easy to hit. I have never been deceived by the camo on the tanks, but I find the L2A6 to have the best, when the shaders work properly.

This was based on normal gameplay. If you consider weak spots that could severely damage an enemy tank, that is another story. I could never replicate that 'glitch' intentionally, only accidentally.

The Tiger HAP, is by far the worst attack helicopter in regular BF2. Turning or twisting upon lift-off can result in the Tiger tipping and being destroyed because the wheels stick to the ground. The suspension is also broken. A soft landing can result in some damage, and a hard landing will almost certainly crash the Tiger, as opposed to other helicopters which can easily survive a hard landing.

The flight characteristics are undesirable for the Tiger. The front nose pulls down somewhat, and has a difficult time pulling up from dives. It is advised not to take steep dives unless there is sufficient altitude available to safely recover. A warning for those soloing in the Tiger is to switch to the gunner seat when the Tiger is facing somewhat upwards or parallel with the ground. Doing so while aimed down will result in the Tiger falling nose first in a unrecoverable flight. You will also have less time to solo in the Tiger, even if you take safe precautions.

Combat effectiveness is mixed. The Tiger overall shows greater effectiveness against the Havok. Having a very silm profile, it is more difficult to hit with a tv-guided missile. From gameplay experience, the Tiger HAP's gun seems to either do more damage or register more effectively against the Havok, killing the Havok in only a matter of seconds. However, the Tiger makes a poor agile fighter in closer combats, and the gunner's limited axis on the turret leaves a limited cone to attack within. Air-to-ground attack is below average, though the Tiger has a 30mm auto-cannon like the Havok, having effective splash damage.

Overall, the Tiger is a somewhat broken, unfinished, poor excuse for a job by DICE as a new attack helicopter. However, a skilled pilot and gunner can still be very effective with the Tiger HAP. Users most be more careful and precise with their controls. I still find the Tiger to be enjoyable to be in, though inexperienced players will surely find the Tiger to be frustrating and difficult to use.

Now this is how you write a guide pace.
Heh. I stopped doing walls of text, remember? even useful ones.
alexb
<3
+590|5953|Kentucky, USA

Thanks for informing me useless shit about a 5 year old game with shit that I already knew.

10/10 would read again


unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I used everything. Just check my stats.

report wrote:

why the fuck has bf2s' worst troll not been banned for this useless shit called spam?
A BF2 thread on an originally BF2 forum in a BF2 section about BF2 vehicles is hardly what I would call spam.
Keep feeding the troll.

Last edited by alexb (2010-06-23 12:16:30)

pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario

Phrozenbot wrote:

From my gameplay experience, and not from actual game file values, the tanks have the same amount of armor, and do the same amount of damage. If there are any pros and cons, it would be based on size. A smaller profile means it is less likely the get hit. The T-90 and Type 56 have this advantage. The Challenger 2, on the other hand, is quite large and easy to hit. I have never been deceived by the camo on the tanks, but I find the L2A6 to have the best, when the shaders work properly.

This was based on normal gameplay. If you consider weak spots that could severely damage an enemy tank, that is another story. I could never replicate that 'glitch' intentionally, only accidentally.

The Tiger HAP, is by far the worst attack helicopter in regular BF2. Turning or twisting upon lift-off can result in the Tiger tipping and being destroyed because the wheels stick to the ground. The suspension is also broken. A soft landing can result in some damage, and a hard landing will almost certainly crash the Tiger, as opposed to other helicopters which can easily survive a hard landing.

The flight characteristics are undesirable for the Tiger. The front nose pulls down somewhat, and has a difficult time pulling up from dives. It is advised not to take steep dives unless there is sufficient altitude available to safely recover. A warning for those soloing in the Tiger is to switch to the gunner seat when the Tiger is facing somewhat upwards or parallel with the ground. Doing so while aimed down will result in the Tiger falling nose first in a unrecoverable flight. You will also have less time to solo in the Tiger, even if you take safe precautions.

Combat effectiveness is mixed. The Tiger overall shows greater effectiveness against the Havok. Having a very silm profile, it is more difficult to hit with a tv-guided missile. From gameplay experience, the Tiger HAP's gun seems to either do more damage or register more effectively against the Havok, killing the Havok in only a matter of seconds. However, the Tiger makes a poor agile fighter in closer combats, and the gunner's limited axis on the turret leaves a limited cone to attack within. Air-to-ground attack is below average, though the Tiger has a 30mm auto-cannon like the Havok, having effective splash damage.

Overall, the Tiger is a somewhat broken, unfinished, poor excuse for a job by DICE as a new attack helicopter. However, a skilled pilot and gunner can still be very effective with the Tiger HAP. Users most be more careful and precise with their controls. I still find the Tiger to be enjoyable to be in, though inexperienced players will surely find the Tiger to be frustrating and difficult to use.

Now this is how you write a guide pace.
Sorry, type 56? err, did you mean the type 98?
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6511

alexb wrote:

Keep feeding the troll.
careful, any opinion of this particular member will have you labeled a "bandwagon jumping malcontent". . .
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6629|do not disturb

pace51 wrote:

Sorry, type 56? err, did you mean the type 98?
You're right, my mistake.

You may possibly have a point, but what do you people even care? Most of you post in EE, which is just utter garbage that I don't know how the mods even tolerate. If Pace wants to waste his time in this section that hardly garners much attention, just look at Trotskyfail's Car Chase thread, why not.
alexb
<3
+590|5953|Kentucky, USA

Phrozenbot wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Sorry, type 56? err, did you mean the type 98?
You're right, my mistake.

You may possibly have a point, but what do you people even care? Most of you post in EE, which is just utter garbage that I don't know how the mods even tolerate. If Pace wants to waste his time in this section that hardly garners much attention, just look at Trotskyfail's Car Chase thread, why not.
Wrong, please try again.
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6629|do not disturb

alexb wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Sorry, type 56? err, did you mean the type 98?
You're right, my mistake.

You may possibly have a point, but what do you people even care? Most of you post in EE, which is just utter garbage that I don't know how the mods even tolerate. If Pace wants to waste his time in this section that hardly garners much attention, just look at Trotskyfail's Car Chase thread, why not.
Wrong, please try again.
tech

Last edited by Phrozenbot (2010-06-23 13:04:31)

Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6755|FUCK UBISOFT

Phrozenbot wrote:

alexb wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:


You're right, my mistake.

You may possibly have a point, but what do you people even care? Most of you post in EE, which is just utter garbage that I don't know how the mods even tolerate. If Pace wants to waste his time in this section that hardly garners much attention, just look at Trotskyfail's Car Chase thread, why not.
Wrong, please try again.
tech
idk about you, but I spend most of my time in other games.
https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6511

Phrozenbot wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Sorry, type 56? err, did you mean the type 98?
You're right, my mistake.

You may possibly have a point, but what do you people even care? Most of you post in EE, which is just utter garbage that I don't know how the mods even tolerate. If Pace wants to waste his time in this section that hardly garners much attention, just look at Trotskyfail's Car Chase thread, why not.
are you telling me i can't post in this sub-forum?
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6629|do not disturb

No, I was just wondering why some of you care so much about Pace's waste of time and stupidity. Obviously, I failed to make myself clear in that regards. Has he even been banned yet? If the consensus amongst the user-base here is that he is a troll, why hasn't he been permanently banned?
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6511

Phrozenbot wrote:

No, I was just wondering why some of you care so much about Pace's waste of time and stupidity. Obviously, I failed to make myself clear in that regards. Has he even been banned yet? If the consensus amongst the user-base here is that he is a troll, why hasn't he been permanently banned?
my only post was to be aware that saying anything negative about this particular member will get one labeled a 'malcontent'.

as far as posting in the battlefield sub-forum? it's all i did for three years, and then moved on to EE. i had a name change when i did.

just because members don't post here, please don't think we don't read what's going on. this section was 'home' for a long time . . .
pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario
What was your previous name, out of curiosity? Not that I'd recognize it.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6511

it was, 'fuck off'. that's why i sign my PM's to you that way . . .
pace51
Boom?
+194|5187|Markham, Ontario

burnzz wrote:

it was, 'fuck off'. that's why i sign my PM's to you that way . . .
https://culturalpolicyreform.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/jet_crash_eject.jpg

Pictured above. How a typical conversation with Pace and Burnzz goes.
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6629|do not disturb

burnzz wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

No, I was just wondering why some of you care so much about Pace's waste of time and stupidity. Obviously, I failed to make myself clear in that regards. Has he even been banned yet? If the consensus amongst the user-base here is that he is a troll, why hasn't he been permanently banned?
my only post was to be aware that saying anything negative about this particular member will get one labeled a 'malcontent'.

as far as posting in the battlefield sub-forum? it's all i did for three years, and then moved on to EE. i had a name change when i did.

just because members don't post here, please don't think we don't read what's going on. this section was 'home' for a long time . . .
They don't post here because there is nothing left to discuss. It has become trite, and pace is a living example of it. His guides are beyond sync with time and provide little substance, despite being lengthy sometimes.

I had my niche in the EF forums, back in my "mis-spent" youth as I like to call it.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard