Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Granitehewer » Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:26 pm

I'm busily writing up a modification of the Full Thrust Sci Fi fleet battle wargame rules and am wondering if I should put the Mon Calamari cruisers (MC80 Liberty type Star Cruiser and The MC80 Home One type Star Cruiser) on an even par with Star Destroyers (The Imperial II-class Star Destroyer)...
Robert Peter Brayshay PTLLS (Tees Achieve), DipHE App Bio (Northumbria), BSc Psychology (Teesside), CPD Comparative Planetology/Planets of the Solar System (John Moores, Liverpool), High Energy Astrophysics (John Moores, Liverpool)
User avatar
Granitehewer
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 2233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:03 am
Location: Teesside, England

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Deepcrush » Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:28 am

A, send me a copy when you're done I'd love to read them. What is the time frame for the game if I may ask?

B, the MC80 is about level with ISD mk1 though I doubt know about ISD mk2. The MC80s had better shields but less firepower then an ISD1. Since the ISD2 is a beefed up model for ship to ship fighting I would put the MC80 below that.

C, Home One is a step up from the normal MC80 as as such I'd expect she'd match the ISD2.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Jim » Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:17 am

oooooooooooooo.....
Ugh... do not thump the Book of G'Quan...
User avatar
Jim
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 1410
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:32 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Captain Seafort » Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:48 pm

*grumbles* Next time start a new topic rather than dredge up a two year old one.

As for the actual question, I'd put the Liberty-type a bit below the ISDs - they were clearly an approximate match for them at Endor, but Ackbar's comment about not lasting long suggests that the ISD is considered the better ship.

Deepcrush wrote: Since the ISD2 is a beefed up model for ship to ship fighting I would put the MC80 below that.


Where do you get that from? If anything the ISD2's speciality would be to engage flotillas of smaller ships, while the ISD1 is better suited for ship-to-ship combat against equals, given the much heavier guns of their main battery.

C, Home One is a step up from the normal MC80 as as such I'd expect she'd match the ISD2.


Home One would have any ISD for breakfast - she's got over five times their volume and, assuming her guns are equal to their heavies, eight times their firepower.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Granitehewer » Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:02 pm

I discussed the whole 'necrothreads' issue with Graham a few days ago and he was fine with it.

Perhaps Ackbar's comment about not lasting long was due to the Star Destroyers outnumbering the Mon Cal contingent, and so was based on a quantitative asymmetry not a qualitative asymmetry...
Robert Peter Brayshay PTLLS (Tees Achieve), DipHE App Bio (Northumbria), BSc Psychology (Teesside), CPD Comparative Planetology/Planets of the Solar System (John Moores, Liverpool), High Energy Astrophysics (John Moores, Liverpool)
User avatar
Granitehewer
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 2233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:03 am
Location: Teesside, England

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Captain Seafort » Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:36 pm

Granitehewer wrote:Perhaps Ackbar's comment about not lasting long was due to the Star Destroyers outnumbering the Mon Cal contingent, and so was based on a quantitative asymmetry not a qualitative asymmetry...


It was in response to Lando's suggestion that they get in close - at that sort of range the angles would be too tight to engage more than one or two on one, so the Imps numerical superiority would be neutralised. Moreover, with the Imperial fleet spread across the whole arc to block their retreat, the rebels might even have had local superiority. The only way the comment makes sense is if an ISD is individually superior to a Liberty.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Deepcrush » Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:31 am

Captain Seafort wrote:The only way the comment makes sense is if an ISD is individually superior to a Liberty.


Surrounded and outnumbered 4:1 and you think thats the only way that comment makes sense? Not that they were surrounded and outnumbered by 4:1 at point blank range? Considering that the Rebs managed to destroy even a single ship let alone multiple without any losses in return makes that statement just silly at best.

Granitehewer wrote:Perhaps Ackbar's comment about not lasting long was due to the Star Destroyers outnumbering the Mon Cal contingent, and so was based on a quantitative asymmetry not a qualitative asymmetry...


Crushed between your enemy, even with superior shielding the pure number of guns will take its toll. Numbers vs equal ships seems to apply pretty easily.

Captain Seafort wrote:Where do you get that from? If anything the ISD2's speciality would be to engage flotillas of smaller ships, while the ISD1 is better suited for ship-to-ship combat against equals, given the much heavier guns of their main battery.


ISD1 had 6 heavy per flank. ISD2 had two stacks of 8 per flank. The focus on the broadside and not the all round coverage of the ISD1 shows rather the reverse. That the ISD1 was better for engagements against smaller targets and the ISD2 was a likely result of the RA fielding cruisers for the first time.

Captain Seafort wrote:Home One would have any ISD for breakfast - she's got over five times their volume and, assuming her guns are equal to their heavies, eight times their firepower.


IIRC, Home One used to be listed at 2200m to 4500m depending on who you asked at one point. However, the latest SW fact file lists it at only 1600m and Starwars Encyclopedia remarks her as an MC80 so she's in no way 5x the size of the ISD. Of course this is part of a recon... so where it goes from here is in the air. But for now, she's not really much different then an ISD in size.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Captain Seafort » Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:29 am

Deepcrush wrote:Surrounded and outnumbered 4:1 and you think thats the only way that comment makes sense? Not that they were surrounded and outnumbered by 4:1 at point blank range? Considering that the Rebs managed to destroy even a single ship let alone multiple without any losses in return makes that statement just silly at best.


Given that we a) don't have firm numbers on the size of either fleet at Endor, b) the rebels were concentrating their effort against the Ex and her battle group rather than trying to engage the entire shell and c) closing to point blank range greatly reduced the effect of the Imps numerical superiority, you're talking out of your arse.

ISD1 had 6 heavy per flank. ISD2 had two stacks of 8 per flank. The focus on the broadside and not the all round coverage of the ISD1 shows rather the reverse. That the ISD1 was better for engagements against smaller targets and the ISD2 was a likely result of the RA fielding cruisers for the first time.


Huh? :? The firing angles of the two ships' main guns were identical - four heavy turrets either side of the superstructure, all of which could fire either on the broadside or directly ahead. The only difference is that the ISD2 had a large number of relatively tiny guns rather than a few big ones.

IIRC, Home One used to be listed at 2200m to 4500m depending on who you asked at one point. However, the latest SW fact file lists it at only 1600m and Starwars Encyclopedia remarks her as an MC80 so she's in no way 5x the size of the ISD. Of course this is part of a recon... so where it goes from here is in the air. But for now, she's not really much different then an ISD in size.


Fuck what's written, look her - she's almost 4 km long, demonstrated by numerous methods.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Deepcrush » Sat Sep 15, 2012 2:25 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:Given that we a) don't have firm numbers on the size of either fleet at Endor,


We see both fleets in full view, so yes we can count the numbers.

Captain Seafort wrote:b) the rebels were concentrating their effort against the Ex and her battle group rather than trying to engage the entire shell


Has no effect on the response of the Imperials in their focus of return fire.

Captain Seafort wrote:c) closing to point blank range greatly reduced the effect of the Imps numerical superiority, you're talking out of your arse.


I've been in firefights, I've had to disarm a person by hand because we were close enough that he couldn't turn around fast enough to shoot me. Being ten feet away or a hundred, when you're outnumbered in a gun battle by an enemy surrounding you there is no such thing as "reducing the effect" because you got close. They don't halt fire because they can rather shake hands with you. Being up close does one thing, makes you easier to hit. Being up close while being outnumbered is in fact bad thing since it means you and pick a single target while five targets get to pick you.

I've been in it, you haven't. You want to see the person talking out of his ass, go stand in front of a mirror. When it comes to issues of real combat, don't ever make the mistake that your wiki-based education means anything when compared to real experience. As a side note, don't ever regret your ignorance in that subject as its not an experience anyone should ever be thankful for.

Captain Seafort wrote:Huh? The firing angles of the two ships' main guns were identical - four heavy turrets either side of the superstructure, all of which could fire either on the broadside or directly ahead. The only difference is that the ISD2 had a large number of relatively tiny guns rather than a few big ones.


The ISD1 has three dual heavy TL turrets per flank. The ISD2 has two eight (8!) gun barbettes of the same rating. ISD1 (6HTLs) vs the ISD2 (16HTLS) meaning even on a broadside the ISD2 can out shoot an ISD1 on a full forward salvo and the ISD2 can do this on both flanks. That is a clearest example of a broadside system you can have without just building a ship of sail in space.

Captain Seafort wrote:Fuck what's written, look her - she's almost 4 km long, demonstrated by numerous methods.


You know full well my support of the 4.5km Battlecruiser Home One. However this is the right of canon, being allowed to change its mind. Wikipedia or private sites are still just fandom and not Canon. If canon states 1600 then thats what we have to go with and then for the sake of our debates to find a way to explain why it is such.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Captain Seafort » Sat Sep 22, 2012 5:17 pm

Deepcrush wrote:We see both fleets in full view, so yes we can count the numbers.


No, we don't - we see bits of both fleets, but we never get an accurate ship-count.

Has no effect on the response of the Imperials in their focus of return fire.


Yes it did - it prevented the ships on the far side of the shell from engaging without hitting their own ships.

I've been in it, you haven't.


Neither of us have been in it - we're talking about naval combat here, not infantry. If it was the latter I'd defer to your experience, but given the issue in question we're both restricted to academic knowledge.

It's the same principle as Trafalgar - during the approach the British van suffered heavily because every ship in the allied fleet could target them, but once they got in close only the two or three ships immediately surrounding them could engage. Still not good odds, but better than having a dozen-plus ships shooting at you.

The ISD1 has three dual heavy TL turrets per flank.


Yes

The ISD2 has two eight (8!) gun barbettes of the same rating.


No. The ISD2 has eight barbette mountings in the same positions as the ISD1's HTLs and HICs, but the individual weapons are much smaller.

However this is the right of canon, being allowed to change its mind. Wikipedia or private sites are still just fandom and not Canon. If canon states 1600 then thats what we have to go with and then for the sake of our debates to find a way to explain why it is such.


Written canon is always overridden by the films if there's a direct contradiction. RotJ shows a 4km Home One, ergo Home One is 4km long - anything that says otherwise is in direct contradiction of the highest canon and is therefore wrong.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Deepcrush » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:50 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:No, we don't - we see bits of both fleets, but we never get an accurate ship-count.


We see the Imperial fleet sitting on screen and the Rebel fleet out of hyperspace. Not to hard to get a count, even if we assume its only a rough count.

Captain Seafort wrote:Yes it did - it prevented the ships on the far side of the shell from engaging without hitting their own ships.


Wrong, the Imperials were in a vertical checker pattern in a 3D combat environment. Which means that hiding from one enemy does nothing since it would require you to sit right between up to seven others.

Captain Seafort wrote:Neither of us have been in it - we're talking about naval combat here, not infantry. If it was the latter I'd defer to your experience, but given the issue in question we're both restricted to academic knowledge.

It's the same principle as Trafalgar - during the approach the British van suffered heavily because every ship in the allied fleet could target them, but once they got in close only the two or three ships immediately surrounding them could engage. Still not good odds, but better than having a dozen-plus ships shooting at you.


Again incorrect. Space is more like aerial combat rather then naval. Even more like to bombers and fighters of WWII. Slower moving large targets with faster moving smaller targets zipping through. Also, in infantry combat, hiding next to a wall of similar mass to yourself is useless if my enemy is also firing on me from above, below, beside, behind and in front. All thats happened is the one guy who couldn't hit me, is now firing on someone else. The with naval combat, you can only fire by a line of sight, even on an arc due to range and level issues. The same isn't true in the air or in space or even in ground combat. This is why a ground commander can also be effective with air combat but hardly ever useful in naval. The concepts between the two are harsh but very different.

Captain Seafort wrote:No. The ISD2 has eight barbette mountings in the same positions as the ISD1's HTLs and HICs, but the individual weapons are much smaller.


When I last looked at the model, there where two sections with 4*2 rows of cannon. That's 16 in all for a flank. Unless I was mistaken and those were something other then cannon below however I've seen nothing to counter.

Captain Seafort wrote:Written canon is always overridden by the films if there's a direct contradiction. RotJ shows a 4km Home One, ergo Home One is 4km long - anything that says otherwise is in direct contradiction of the highest canon and is therefore wrong.


True on film canon, but funny since before you've tried to claim otherwise, but also aside the fact. However you haven't quoted the film, you quoted a fan from a fan page who did estimates on his own for his own fan use. The problem for that fan is that every image he has used seems to be sectional and not a single side by side to be found. Since no one in the film said the ship is 4.5km long then the writers of canon and datafiles aren't bound to anything and if they decide to say the Homeone is now only 1600m then they can do so. Its their universe after all.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Captain Seafort » Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:07 pm

Deepcrush wrote:We see the Imperial fleet sitting on screen and the Rebel fleet out of hyperspace. Not to hard to get a count, even if we assume its only a rough count.


All the Imp ships we see are the Ex and ISDs. No comm ship, which we saw from the throne room, no Interdictors, which we know were present from the EGVV. As for the rebel fleet coming out of hyperspace, we only saw one Home One type - we saw two engaging the Ex, and a possible third destroyed by the DS2. Ergo, the shots of the fleet emerging and of the Imp fleet were not the entirety of those forces.

Wrong, the Imperials were in a vertical checker pattern in a 3D combat environment. Which means that hiding from one enemy does nothing since it would require you to sit right between up to seven others.


I'm talking about the Imp ships on the far side of the entire hemisphere, not those in the immediate vicinity.

Again incorrect. Space is more like aerial combat rather then naval.


Wrong. Look at the Neb-B exchanging broadsides with the Ex's trench guns - that's clearly naval-style combat.

The with naval combat, you can only fire by a line of sight, even on an arc due to range and level issues. The same isn't true in the air or in space or even in ground combat.


More evidence that space combat is analogous to naval combat - TLs are clearly LOS weapons.

When I last looked at the model, there where two sections with 4*2 rows of cannon. That's 16 in all for a flank. Unless I was mistaken and those were something other then cannon below however I've seen nothing to counter.


ISD1, not too clear but shows the number of heavy turrets

ISD1 close up, aft three turrets

ISD2 heavies

True on film canon, but funny since before you've tried to claim otherwise


I've never done anything of the sort. Note the key phrase "if there's a direct contradiction".

However you haven't quoted the film, you quoted a fan from a fan page who did estimates on his own for his own fan use. The problem for that fan is that every image he has used seems to be sectional and not a single side by side to be found.


What do you call the image of the corvette alongside the stern then? Or the Lambada passing through the hangar entrance?

Since no one in the film said the ship is 4.5km long then the writers of canon


They don't have to. The length of the ship is shown, by comparison to the Lambda and the corvette.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Deepcrush » Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:39 am

Captain Seafort wrote:All the Imp ships we see are the Ex and ISDs. No comm ship, which we saw from the throne room, no Interdictors, which we know were present from the EGVV. As for the rebel fleet coming out of hyperspace, we only saw one Home One type - we saw two engaging the Ex, and a possible third destroyed by the DS2. Ergo, the shots of the fleet emerging and of the Imp fleet were not the entirety of those forces.


I don't recall ever seeing a comship, just the SSD from the Deathstar. We saw two MC80s and one of those were destroyed by DS2. So your statement is meaningless.

Captain Seafort wrote:I'm talking about the Imp ships on the far side of the entire hemisphere, not those in the immediate vicinity.


A, I never saw or heard the film talk about any Imperial ships on the opposite side of the planet. Even if they were there, they are already blocked by the planet so sitting next to an enemy ship isn't doing anything but allowing that enemy to hit you with greater ease.

Captain Seafort wrote:Wrong. Look at the Neb-B exchanging broadsides with the Ex's trench guns - that's clearly naval-style combat.


Tanks do the same thing, so do APCs and IFVs. So does a combat recon jeep for that matter. Someone shooting someone next to them does not equal naval battle. It means they are shooting at someone next to them.

Captain Seafort wrote:More evidence that space combat is analogous to naval combat - TLs are clearly LOS weapons.


So you're saying that LOS is the same as naval? So a rifle is only naval? Or maybe missiles are never used in naval because as you stated LOS is what makes naval. Of course ships use cannons, so you could next say that tanks don't use cannons because then they would be naval.

Even your wiki based education should have been able to tell you that Space combat is analogous to SPACE combat.

Captain Seafort wrote:ISD1, not too clear but shows the number of heavy turrets

ISD1 close up, aft three turrets

ISD2 heavies


So by the ISD2 model it has four twin 4-cannon sets. So it has 32 guns per flank. Now thats impressive firepower.

Captain Seafort wrote:I've never done anything of the sort. Note the key phrase "if there's a direct contradiction".


Really? Because in the ISD threads you've commented several times that the Wikipedia over rides what Han Solo, Vader, Databank and the creator of the Universe declared. In another thread you stated that the Dominion fighters attacking the Odessey were able to avoid fire. When GK posted a picture of one getting hit you stated that the picture of a ship getting hit proved that the same ship wasn't hit. You have a rather common habit of lying.

Captain Seafort wrote:What do you call the image of the corvette alongside the stern then? Or the Lambada passing through the hangar entrance?


Those, would be images of a corvette and a Lambada. However we aren't talking about either of them.

Captain Seafort wrote:They don't have to. The length of the ship is shown, by comparison to the Lambda and the corvette.


Since you only have a partial view from an unsure angle without a follow up to support it, its nothing but a fans idea. Not canon, the creators of the universe take first rights to canon not just you and some other kid with a thought. As I stated before, I support the idea of the 4.5km however what I support doesn't matter if the writers of canon make a direct statement to something else.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Captain Seafort » Sun Sep 30, 2012 11:57 am

Deepcrush wrote:I don't recall ever seeing a comship, just the SSD from the Deathstar.


There's also another ship, intermediate in size between the Ex and the ISDs.

We saw two MC80s and one of those were destroyed by DS2. So your statement is meaningless.


What are you talking about here? Given that there were three distinct types of MonCal at Endor (Home One-type, Liberty-type, and the wingless Liberty-type), all of which have been described as MC80, you'll have to be more specific.

A, I never saw or heard the film talk about any Imperial ships on the opposite side of the planet. Even if they were there, they are already blocked by the planet


Not the far side of the planet, but on the opposite side of a hemispherical shell with the Death Star at its centre. How else do you expect the Imp fleet to perform its role of cutting off the rebels' retreat?

So you're saying that LOS is the same as naval?


You did.

So by the ISD2 model it has four twin 4-cannon sets. So it has 32 guns per flank. Now thats impressive firepower.


Indeed, but the individual weapons are far smaller than an ISD1's. It's the difference between being hit by a single tank shell and a lot of of MG rounds.

Really? Because in the ISD threads you've commented several times that the Wikipedia over rides what Han Solo, Vader, Databank and the creator of the Universe declared.


Note the term "directly contradicts". I've repeatedly pointed out the difference between the ships' formal designation and generic slang used to describe them.

In another thread you stated that the Dominion fighters attacking the Odessey were able to avoid fire. When GK posted a picture of one getting hit you stated that the picture of a ship getting hit proved that the same ship wasn't hit.


I did nothing of the sort. I acknowledged that the image showed the bug getting hit. I theorised that the hit was less solid than it appeared, given that the discussion at hand was the relative strength of the GCS and Defiant, and I was sceptical of claims that the GCS was significantly weaker.

Those, would be images of a corvette and a Lambada.


Next to Home One. We can therefore use them to determine the length of Home One.

Since you only have a partial view from an unsure angle without a follow up to support it, its nothing but a fans idea.


The corvette image is square on in the vertical and horizontal planes, and the Lambda image shows it passing through the hangar door while square in the vertical plane, so we can indeed use both images to determine the length.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

Postby Griffin » Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:29 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:
Deepcrush wrote:I don't recall ever seeing a comship, just the SSD from the Deathstar.


There's also another ship, intermediate in size between the Ex and the ISDs.

Genuine query, I don't want to get into this argument, but couldn't that one just be closer?
There’s a lesson to be learned here, Ladies and Gents: If you love someone, just let them know, because you don’t know when they might get kidnapped by an undead demon man whatever-he-is and taken away to his deep underground castle. - Simon Lane
User avatar
Griffin
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 7:52 pm
Location: Yorkshire!

Next

Return to Star Wars

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron