Opponents off war in reach (Adversaires hors de portée en guerre)

Discussion in 'Battle Bugs' started by Le Ténébreux, Jun 16, 2016.

  1. Bonjour,
    toute la semaine nous n'avons eu que des adversaires hors de portée en guerre. Notre guilde French Touch War (47000 points de moyenne). Et ce soir encore, on tombe contre French Touch 2 (146471 points de moyenne) et encore pire Wicked Hellyard (449856 points de moyenne). Donc ma question, sur quoi vous vous basez pour trouver des adversaires de même niveau? Parce que là c'est du grand n'importe quoi! Il va vite falloir revoir votre système et vous basez plutôt sur la moyenne des points en guerre des guildes pour pouvoir bagarrer avec des adversaires de son niveau.

    Si vous cherchez à dégouter les gens du jeu, vous ne pouvez pas vous y prendre mieux, je pense.

    "Hello,
    all week we had that opponents out of reach at war. Our guild French Touch War ( 47000 points average ) . And tonight yet , we fall against French Touch 2 (146471 Average points) and even worse Wicked Hellyard ( average 449,856 points). So my question , what you base you to find the same level opponents? Because there is great no matter what! He will soon have to revise your system and instead basing on the average points warring guilds for power fight with opponents level ."

    If you are looking to disgust the people of the game, you can not go about it better, I think .
     
  2. peg-brain bob

    peg-brain bob Captain

    Matchmaking is currently based on only 2 factors:
    • Guild size (+/- 25)
    • PH distribution
    Aside from that, virtually every guild can be matched with every other guild. Both of these restrictions are gradually relaxed if matching takes an excessively long time.

    Whilst a number of players have requested for this to be altered/revised - so far Midoki haven't given any indication they wish to change it. This suggests they are satisfied that for the majority of players/guilds it is working as intended.
     
    Skillzone10 likes this.
  3. Skillzone10

    Skillzone10 Captain

    There just isn't a great enough pool of guilds in queue all at the same time, so that's why you will often run into 24/7 rumbling guilds like ours when you fall under the criteria that @peg-brain bob stated. :)
    We don't find much joy in upsetting you by winning, it's just coincidental in matchmaking. If they were to tighten the rumble matchmaking even more, it would take top guilds hours to match, and it would most likely be the same top guild showdowns time and time again.
     
  4. Désolé mais c'est débile comme façon de calculer. Nous faisons la guerre tous les jours. Nous sommmes 38 avec plusieurs PH 9 ou 10 mais qui font de peu de points! Ce sont de mauvais critères, il faudrait se baser sur la moyenne des points en guerre de chaque guilde. Je préfère attendre 1 heure et pouvoir jouer la guerre que de tomber contre des gemmeurs fous et ne pas la jouer.

    "Sorry but it's stupid as how to calculate. We make war every day. We are 38 members with several 9 or 10 PH but a lot of are make little points! These are bad criteria should be based on the average points in each guild war. I prefer to wait 1 hour to play war to fall against mad gemmers and will not play."
     
  5. Spongee

    Spongee Commodore

    A guild with 38 active members can win a decent percentage of match ups. I have an alt account in a guild of 40 members, we win maybe 20-30% of our rumbles. Think that is a reasonable win percentage for a non-gemming guild. @Skye has posted on numerous occasions a clear and accurate explanation of what a guild of active players can achieve without spending a cent. If a guild does not win any rumbles, they need to look within their own ranks as to the reason why. It is always much easier and convenient to blame outside forces (i.e. Matching). If you are winning, but not happy with the win percentage, again look within for a solution. Changing matching parameters will only achieve a temporary fix. If matching was altered to match guilds based on score, in theory you should only win 20% of the time. If you are currently winning less than 20% of your rumbles, the problem is within your guild. Chances are less than half your guild is active. Might consider a merger with another guild in similar situation, taking top players from each guild and forming a new guild that would be far more competitive. If you don't want to give up control of your guild in a merger, then keep doing what you are already doing. But based on the OP of this thread, current approach in guild management doesn't seem to be working and maybe a change is needed.
     
  6. Je confirme la débilité du système même après ta réponse! Nous sommes 38, des joueurs sympas qui ne peuvent pas jouer H24 mais il faudrait que je les vire pour ne garder que les meilleurs et ainsi être moins de 25 joueurs pour pouvoir enfin gagner des guerres. Cette façon de penser est complètement stupide! Il n'y a donc que 2 choix possibles selon Midoki : être 50 joueurs actifs ou moins de 25 joueurs moyens pour gagner des guerres. C'est n'importe quoi !

    "I confirm the weakness of the system even after your answer! We are 38 cool players that can not play H24 but I would have to tack them to keep only the best and thus be less than 25 players to finally win wars. This way of thinking is completely stupid! There are therefore two possible choices according Midoki: be active players 50 or under 25 average players to win wars. This is nonsense!"
     
  7. Spongee

    Spongee Commodore

    @Le Ténébreux Maybe I need to be more blunt in my answer for you to comprehend. The problem is your guild and most likely failed leadership of your guild. Any moderately active guild can easily win greater than 20% of their rumbles. I am speaking from experience. Your solution of changing matching parameters should only guarantee a 20% win chance (1 out of 5 with equal matching). Again, you need to look at the failings of your guild and leadership and not blame Midoki for your short comings.
     
  8. Je ne suis pas d'accord! Nous avons des joueurs qui financent plus les avantages de guildes et d'autres qui sont plus des guerriers. Et un peu de joueurs qui sont les deux à la fois. La guilde est active, les gens se parlent et s'apprécient. C'est ce système de guerre qui est nul. Il faut se fixer sur la moyenne des points en guerre des guildes et arreter de priviligier ce qui dépensent des gemmes !! Et donc ça veut dire quoi aussi qu'on n'accepte pas les petits niveaux. Si toutes les guildes réagissent ainsi, adieu les nouveaux joueurs !!

    "I do not agree! We have players who fund more benefits guilds and others that are more warriors. And some players who are both at a time. The guild is active, people talk and enjoy. This is what war system is zero. It must be fixed on the average of the warring guilds and stop points of priviligier which spend gems !! So what does that mean as we do not accept small levels. If all guilds and react farewell new players !!"
     
  9. Spongee

    Spongee Commodore

    @Le Ténébreux Sorry to say, but a guild with a 47k rumble average is not a very active guild. Until you realize that is the issue and work to improve, it is a reality that you will not win many rumbles. You seem to be approaching the issue from a view of self importance and entitlement, in that your attitude seems to be we don't want to work as hard as everyone else, so Midoki should make it easier for us to always win. It doesn't work that way. The guild that has 40 active players, with each member raiding 5-6 times per rumble (without spending a single penny), will put up 120k+ in points and beat your guild every single time. And that is how it should be, the guild that is smarter and more active deserves to win. I am not disagreeing that matching up against a few powerful guilds don't makes rumbles unfair for the aversge active guild, what I am saying is you can win a great many rumbles without spending money if your guild is active (Again, my alt account is in such a guild so I am speaking from experience).

    Does the current rumble matching format need to be changed, most certainly. But should it be changed to reward guilds with low participation a guarantee win, certainly not.
     
  10. Déjà premier point, ma guilde à été créée le 6 juin 2016. Donc être 37 en 10 jours c'est pas mal! Et être actf, ne signifie pas juste faire 5000 points chacun par guerre. Il y a toute le reste, les échanges entre membres, le financement des avantages, la bonne entente. Je ne vois pas ou c'est marqué dans la description du jeu que chaque membre doit faire 5000 points pour être considéré comme actif ??? Midoki devrait revoir son système de recherche d'adversaires pour les guerres et se baser sur la moyenne des points en guerre. Ton raisonnement est absurde, je suis déjà tombé sur des guildes de 15 membres qui faisaient plus de 150 000 points, alors que nous étions que 6 et qu'on faisaient 50 000 points. On était donc actif et pourtant on s'est pris une guilde qui n'était pas du tout de notre niveau avec des mecs qui gemmaient comme des porcs ! Bref, à Midoki de réfléchir et d'arrêter de ne penser qu'à vendre ses gemmes et de rendre les guerres plus attractives.

    "Already first point, my guild was established on 6 June 2016. So be 37 in 10 days is not bad! And be active, does not mean just to make 5000 points each by war. There is all the rest, trade between Member, funding for benefits, good agreement. I do not see or it says in the description of the game that each member must make 5000 points to be considered active ??? Midoki should review its adversaries search system for wars and based on the average points war. Your reasoning is absurd, I stumbled across 15 guild members who were more than 150 000 points, while we were 6 and we were 50 000 points. we we were so active and yet has taken a guild that was not at all of our levels with guys geming like pigs! In short, Midoki to reflect and stop thinking only sell gems and make them more attractive wars."
     
  11. Spongee

    Spongee Commodore

    Sounds to me you are saying that your guild is very active in every aspect except one, that being raiding. You admittedly state your guild is weak when it comes to rumbles, then why do you expect to win rumbles when your members don't prioritize raiding. It still sounds to me like you are saying Midoki needs to put a system in place to accomodate your guild who wants to win, without really trying. So they should reward your guild where people might raid 2-3 times in a rumble and give you easy rumbles. Then take the guilds where players actually try and give them more difficult rumbles. In that example, both guilds spend zero $, but the one that actually works harder gets penalized (by getting more difficult matches) for trying. The one that works less gets rewarded with easier rumble. Now that I think about it, I actually like that idea. Sign me up :)
     
  12. J'ai pas tout compris! A part le fait que pour toi tout le monde peut faire 5000 points par guerre, c'est faux! Ca dépend déjà du level, du niveau des troupes, du temps que la personne à dans la journée pour jouer au jeu. Moi, je les fait facile les 5000 points mais je bosse chez moi sur ordi donc facile. Mais pour un membre qui se lève part à 4h du matin bosser et fini à 14h, celà ne me semble pas si évident. Donc ce n'est pas parce que nous sommes 37 que nous pouvons faire 150000 points en prenant en compte les différents niveaux de chacun et leurs modes de vies. Donc je maintien Midoki devrait revoir son système de guerre! Je pense qu'ils gagnent assez d'argent avec les russes et les chinois pour revoir le système, non ?

    "I did'nt understand everything! Apart from the fact that for you all can make 5000 points by war is wrong! It already depends on the level, the level of troops of time that the person in the day to play the game. I did the easy 5000 points, but I'm working on my home computer so easy. But for a member who rises from work at 4am and finish at 14h, it does not seem so obvious. So it's not because we're 37 we can do 150000 taking into account the different levels of each and their lifestyles. So I maintain Midoki should review its system of war! I think they make enough money with the Russians and Chinese to review the system, right?"
     
  13. Spongee

    Spongee Commodore

    I agree 100% the current system should be changed, but it should be changed in a way that is fair to everyone and not in a way that will allow players and teams to game the system. And it should reward effort.

    As for the rest, we'll agree to disagree.

    Think we've beaten this dead horse long enough, time to let it rest in peace.
     
  14. Skye

    Skye Commodore

    Given how small the pool of matchable ph10 guilds is, I don't think any smart business would punish regular, active users, many of which pay, to make things easier for casual, free players that can't bother to put a bit of time into the game. I can't think of a single example in the game industry where a company has done this successfully, but if you can cite any examples, I'm happy to look at how they managed it and admit I'm wrong.

    What you're essentially saying is "I can't be bothered to log into your game and actually play it, so will you please make it so I don't have to play with people that actually bother to try? I want easy wins without doing any work! And those people that actually care about the game, and spend time playing it, let them all suffer so I can have a free ride"

    Yes things are unfair against some guild situations, and yes there are things that could be done better. But why would you expect a developer, that you probably aren't paying any money, to spend many of the very limited hours they have available to serving you, when you aren't even playing the game regularly, at the expense of those that put in the effort to battle?

    It would be one thing if you were in an "I try really hard, but I just cannot ever win" situation. I do think rumble matchups should be more fair for the players that do their best and put in time but have no chance, and I've suggested several systems to remedy this in the past that I'm happy to elaborate on yet again. And I really hope things do change to make things fair for players that do try, I really want the game to be fair to anyone that cares enough to take the time to play it; I enjoy this game a lot, and I only want to share my enjoyment with others. But when you're not even trying to win, that's on you.

    I recognize that some players do not have the time to play regularly enough to be competitive, but do want to continue playing the game. Rumbles are meant to be a competitive feature, but there are plenty of other things they can strive for in the game through casual play, and perhaps should be focusing their efforts on those? You mentioned many players are behind on their training and upgrading - that is definitely something to work on that isn't competitive! I know I wouldn't join a sports league expecting to win if I was out of shape and still working on my technique, I'd grab a couple friends, go kick a ball around in a field, and just have fun while I was learning.

    If you care about winning, you want to be competitive - if you don't care about winning, you either wouldn't enter rumbles, or wouldn't care when you lose them to players that are more competitive, since as stated, you don't care about winning. I don't even enjoy rumbles that much, but its the only competitive feature we currently have, and while I completely support the game needing plenty of content for non-competitive players, I don't want to see the only thing we have to challenge ourselves with taken away. That would essentially drive away an entire class of Bartle's taxonomy, as there needs to be something for every player type.

    I highly recommend studying a bit of game design philosophy to understand why certain decisions are made, and why they are important to the game. I promise there is a very talented group of designers :) working on the game that understand player types much better than I could ever hope to explain, and that they are taking care to do their best to make sure there is something for every class of players. Rumbles just happen to be a feature tuned towards a different class of player.

    Now that my rant is over, I'll offer some advice to help with your situation, since it seems some of your members may actually care about trying to win, and some enjoy playing the game but are too busy to rumble. I want you to have an experience in the game you can enjoy as well, just not at the expense of others.

    My best suggestion is that you consolidate your guild into two demographics of players - those that care about winning rumbles, and those that don't care. You can make a sister guild for those that don't want to participate, or are unable to. If someone is unable to, they jump over to the sister guild until they are able to again. All of the players stay in touch through an external chat program, such as a private, guild-wide Slack group.

    This is an approach adopted by a large number of those competitive guilds that you struggle against, and its a strategy I highly suggest taking if you plan on trying to compete. We have players jump in and out of our guilds all the time, to head to resting guilds while they are too busy to play. No one minds a player hopping over to a resting guild to play casually, and by keeping the slot free, it actually makes rumbling easier on those that remain. And then if they have a day off, or feel like being a bit more competitive for a bit, they hop back over and fight! And by using a chat program to communicate, it will actually strengthen the bond of players within the guild - it makes it easy to share screenshots, give each other advice, talk to each other when people are busy and can't log in at the moment. In game chat quickly falls off the screen, and its impossible to have a conversation with a player with a different play-schedule. But with external chat, you can send a player a message, that does not get lost after 64 messages, that they can reply to when they get free. And with all the members able to communicate, there is no downside to the ones that can't fight sitting in a secondary, noncompetitive guild. The ones that do want to try will generally find themselves matching against smaller guilds, which they can beat easier, and the ones that don't want to try can still communicate with everyone, but aren't dead weight.

    A guild of 25 members that all attack 8x a day, which is possible without using any gems, will beat many guilds of 45-50 members, since those guilds frequently have two dozen people that haven't attacked a single time. However, by cutting the numbers down and not carrying extra players that aren't participating, that guild of 25 members is much more likely to match smaller guilds. Those 25 members will all be participating, but that smaller guild you match will probably have a bit of dead weight - and now you have the numerical advantage.

    Guilds of 25 will still sometimes match guilds in the 40s, (which probably have a bit of dead weight), but they also start having a chance of matching guilds with <10 players, which means instead of ALWAYS matching big guilds, you only match big guilds some of the time.

    If you are against the option of a multi-guild setup to meet all your members' needs:

    Maybe during the week you can't score high, but perhaps you could pick a day on the weekend when most of your players are off of work?

    Or

    If you want a more casual rumble experience, several guilds recently organized a rumble where every participant was limited to attacking no more than 10 times during the event, which removes the ability of people to buy their win by gemming a large number of battles. It seemed to be popular, and while the guilds themselves may not end up matched (and they may thus end up losing the actual rumble they end up in), they compared their scores out of the game, and had a private competition amongst themselves. Community is great, and things like that are always an option too! I wouldn't be surprised if many of the players that participated in that were willing to do it again, and it may be an option to consider.
     
    Langballe, awbo and Skillzone10 like this.
  15. Skye, bon je suis d'accord avec tes idées plus bas mais pour le début de ton message pas dut tout. Comment les guerres pourraient être seulement réservé à une catégorie de joueurs ? A une élite ? Si c'est cela la mentalité de Midoki, de ne miser que sur les joueurs qui ne dépensent que de l'argent ça craint! Sinon pour le reste je vais voir! Mais je ne comprends pas comment vous pouvez confirmer que le système est bon, quand une guilde qui fait 40000 points de moyenne, tombe sur une guilde qui fait 400000.

    "Skye, well I agree with your ideas but lower for the beginning of your message not had any. How wars could o,ly be reserved for a category of players? At the elite? If this is the mentality of Midoki to only bet on players who spend only money it sucks! If not for the rest I'll see! But I do not understand how you can confirm that the system is good when a guild that made 40000 points average, falls on a guild that is 400000."
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2016
  16. Skye

    Skye Commodore

    The category of players I'm refering to aren't "Elite" or "spenders". I'm refering to the category of players that gets the majority of their enjoyment out of the game from competitive PvP, that WANTS to get on for multiple hours a day, battling every chance they get, because that is the main enjoyment they get out of the game. Bartle would refer to these players as Killers. The only thing these players care about is winning, be it by climbing rank (which the global rank leaderboard was removed), or by winning competitions.

    Not every player enjoys this type of play, and there are other features designed focusing on these other players. But this is a feature stereotypically created to cater to players that want to get on and fight each other, and by taking the focus off of that type of play, its removing the only thing they enjoy about the game.

    Achievers won't care a ton about PvP, their main focus is going to be completing every quest and finishing everything and upgrading things. They are typically PvE competitive. They want to "complete the game" so to speak.

    Explorers aren't going to care a ton about PvP beyond the mechanics of how it works, nor will their main focus be on upgrading everything as fast as possible, as they care more about exploiting how those upgrades work than how fast they can finish them. They are typically PvE noncompetitive.

    Socializers won't care a ton about most of this, their reason for playing the game is the community and to talk to each other. They are typically PvP noncompetitive.

    These groups of players generally won't stress out about getting on every chance they can to beat others, they're going to have their own aspects of the game they log on to focus on.
    But Killers mainly care about figuring out a way to win and being the best. And by taking away that competition, and saying "these people who don't care get easy wins, when you're trying really hard to win", you're removing the primary aspect of the game they enjoy.

    Bartle's taxonomy isn't perfect, as players fall along a spectrum in both how competitive they are, and whether their focus is player centric or PvE centric. But all four main groups need things they can focus on. Rumbles are what killers focus on, and they absolutely should not be changed to cater to a different class-type like achiever unless a new feature is there for them to enjoy.

    I explained that I think that players of various levels should be able to compete fairly, as not all Killers are going to be in equal situations. But this needs to be done in a way that keeps that specific feature focused around the right type of player, the one that cares about PvP competitiveness.

    Killers of less experience, or lower level, that are still attacking regularly and trying their best, who's main focus is on PvP competition, should have a way to participate in a manner that is fair. This is hard to do given how few guilds there are to choose from, and again I'd like to mention I've made several suggestions that would help alleviate this problem. But this still needs to be in a manner that requires competition, and someone who can't bother to log on when needed isn't very competitive. Being unable to log on can be solved by only being in a competition during times when they are available. But this aspect of play is designed around players that are going to be on and trying to win.

    This is the second time I've written out a huge explanation on player taxonomy and deleted the whole thing because it serves no purpose and I could just as easily link you to an educational video that goes more into depth than I can (
    ) , but I'm hoping players that see there is a reason behind these sorts of decisions will start to understand more how and why games are built they way they are. Some things are designed for a different type of player - that doesn't mean you're being neglected, it means that a developer has a challenge finding ways to make the game enjoyable to players who enjoy things differently than each other.

    We've seen in the past that the PvP aspect of the game seems to be balanced around players that are able to make around 8 attacks a day, based off the scoring for the previous PvP event, and if every player in a PvP guild does that, they should win pretty often. The team that tries harder will generally win. They do their best to make sure you don't have a guild of 12 PH4s facing 50 PH10s. But in 90%+ of matchups I've seen across the many guilds I've either been in, or seen final scores from, if every player in that guild made those 8 attacks, they would have won - in most of the cases, if every player made only 4 attacks, they still would have won.

    There are a few kinks that could be worked out a bit better, but those do not include giving players free rewards when they haven't even bothered to log in to participate.

    In short, this is a competitive feature, for competitive players, and if you're not competitive, focus on the parts of the game that aren't, since not every part of the game caters to your player type. Other parts of the game that don't appeal to Killers are made for you, but that means that sometimes things will be made for Killers that you won't enjoy.
     
    Kamikazemug, Madhouse and Langballe like this.
  17. Donc en gros, ce que tu dis, c'est qu'on ne peut faire au choix que des guildes de guerriers, d'explorateurs, etc... Perso, moi je fais tout, tu avances plus vite dans le jeu de cette façon. Dans ma guilde, tout ceux qui feront 0 points lors de deux guerres obligatoires de suite seront exclus. Et pareil pour ceux non connectés depuis 7 jours. Après si je met un minimum d'attaque à faire, la guilde va partir en live. Elle est trop jeune pour imposer ce genre de règles, je vais attendre un peu! Mais nous avons des niveaux qui vont de 3 à 10 donc même en imposant un minimum de bagarres, nous serons actifs mais pas assez fort pour rivaliser avec des guildes qui font 400 000 points de moyenne comme nous le proposent souvent Midoki.

    En fait, je vais peut-être mettre un minimum de combats à faire lors des guerres obligatoires. ;-)

    "So basically what you're saying is that we can make the choice that warrior guilds, explorers, etc ... Personally, I do everything, you advance faster in the game this way. In my guild, all those who will make 0 points in two wars mandatory on will be excluded. And as for those not connected for 7 days. After that I put a minimum of attack to the guild will go live. She is too young to impose such rules, I'll wait a bit! But we have levels that vary between 3 and 10 so even by requiring a minimum of fighting, we are active but not strong enough to compete with the guilds that make 400,000 average points as we often offer Midoki.

    In fact, I'll maybe put a minimum of fighting to do when mandatory wars. ;-)"
     
  18. Spongee

    Spongee Commodore

    Ignoring my own words of being done on this topic, I venture back into the fray. @Le Ténébreux Sorry, misread an earlier comment. I was not aware you had many lower level players. Reality is, you cannot be competitive in rumbles. Rumbles are designed for active players that are higher levels, and part of the reasoning behind that design is to motivate players to level up and reward players for advancing. Currently, rumbles are not designed to be competitive for guilds with many lower level players as there are just not enough guilds to make such a scenario currently practical. Lose the mindset that you need to win rumbles. Think long term team and player development. Work to grow together as a team and develop friendships. My first guild in this game we all started at the beginning together and grew together. We could not compete against the top guilds at the time (We R Piates and Pirates United), but we stuck together and grew together, eventually becoming a very successful guild. We did not achieve success immediately, but we did develop a strong team mindset and great friendships. When time came to step up to the challenge, we did it as a team with the whole being stronger than the sum of the parts. No one wanted to let the other members down, and was always motivated to go beyond what they would've normally as an individual to help the team as a whole. Be patient, develop your team. Success and winning will follow. Very rare for a guild to be competitive from the start, it just doesn't work that way in this game.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2016
  19. Merci pour ton commentaire Spongee. En fait en relisant tout le topic, c'est que je pense faire! Garder les plus motivés même si se sont des petits niveaux et exclure les PH10 qui ne font rien. Et être patient en attendant que les petits levels grandissent. Mais dur en France, de trouver des joueurs motivés !!

    "Thank you for your comment Spongee. In fact rereading all the topic is that I think do! Keep motivated even have small levels and exclude PH10 who do nothing. And be patient until the small levels grow. But hard in France to find motivated players !!"
     
  20. awbo

    awbo Captain

    One way of ensuring your players are active in rumbles is to set minimums. It's up to you what you do if people don't meet those minimums. Perhaps as someone suggested, have minimums for just one of your weekly rumbles. Given that you have lower PHs, you can choose a sliding scale of scores (for example we have 250 for a PH5 and 3000 for a PH10) or you could have a set number of wins. If you don't have any minimums you will inevitably get freeloaders (people who sit back and let others do the work).

    It also could be the case that your people are sick of rumbling if you're always losing. Maybe scale it back to one rumble a week for a while and see if you can get more participation?

    It is hard to build a strong guild. It takes a lot of time, and patience, and kicking out the people that don't fit your guild. We win more than 50% of our rumbles, but there are guilds we know we simply can't beat unless we are willing to spend a lot of money, which we aren't. Thankfully we only match those guilds 5-10% of the time :)

    Good luck.
     
    Lorent.113 likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice