Jump to content

Darkweaver

Devs; why do you keep rolling over the small company & solo player?

Recommended Posts

Well for a start I play everyday,And there have been large groups who play pvp,and will join pve servers literally just to grief people,one game I play a company did so much griefing the devs shut down the server,and the stuff they did musta cost fortunes.In WOW some players had so much in- game money they had to put a cap on the amount you could have.In eso making gold is so easy if you've played for a long time,even solo players have loads.and a lot of them games at least have cosmetics and shops you can waste your excess cash in,this game barely has anything to buy.In atlas there is already a lotta bored players who would welcome a wipe,well a wipe means losing all your stuff does it not?So why would that bother a serious griefer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MeatSammich said:

One of the biggest disconnects I see is that landowners feel that tenants don't contribute much of anything to the island itself. Which, with the current gold upkeep cost is pretty much true.  Lets face the fact that a lot of us aren't landowners because we don't want to have to worry about the gold grind.

If the cost was changed to X amount of each of the 3 basic resources per day, then the tax on harvesting would actually be a useful contribution to the island's upkeep, and more settlers would equal less time grinding for resources to pay the upkeep cost for the owner.

If the dev team is completely married to the idea of wanting to give the landowners the ability to raze the island, what about giving each tenant company a  small number of sub-claim flags - 3-5 or so on each island - that are about the side of the original claim flags, and can be placed on the island, with similar rules to building now, with the landlord having the ability to quash the claim within 24 hours of it being placed, to prevent people from blocking resources and doing other stupidity, and the landowner sould still demo structures within the claim for 24 hrs, etc...but if the island gets razed, only the objects outside claim flags get poofed?

That way, you get the landowner having the joy and power of island ownership, while the tenants get some measure of protection.

It's good to see you posting again.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Martyn said:

The funny side of this, is people who don't play.. think people who do, will grind out 25k just to grief someone... seriously..

Yes, Martyn, I know I would easily spend 25k per experiment as I could easily farm that every other day in case we would have 500k allready.
But lack of interest in that experiment is the only thing stopping me.

The tax on resources will become usefull once maintenance is activated. Which will then make any tennant trying to maintain an abandonned island an even sadder story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Martyn said:

How does this even compute? You actually think this? I could make a new character.. add a few alt accounts, hunt some whales.. own an island is say.. 2-3 days.. Most of the smaller companies are made up like this.  Or they get their parent's, friends, neighbours to make accounts to join them.. essentially the same thing a company with 2-3 active players and 30 inactive ones.. You could have started a week ago and be owning islands now.  

Steam Family Library Share is disabled for atlas so in your example those people would have all paid the price and, according to your own posts, acquired the right to do whatever.
 

Edited by wandelaar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, [GP] Guybrush Threepwood said:

No response yet, shame.

It's funny how the stationed NPC crew being able to repair structures was immediately reverted because the players stated why it was bad. Was there a need for immediate revert, not really, but it was good to see a quick reaction. Really the end result should have been figured out before it hit the official servers.

But when a new patch is implemented that gives PvE a nuke to wipe islands, there's no immediate pulling of the patch.

How can anyone on the team believe that providing a nuke in PvE is acceptable for PvE?

This image literally shows what someone on PvE is now capable of.

how-i-think-when-my-memes-get-reposted_o

This has to be the worst decision for PvE ever.

So why is it always the players that instantly know it is a bad thing when they read something in the patch notes or captain's log? You don't even have to play the game to know giving the ability to wipe islands in PvE is absolutely wrong.

Well, step one of giving a response would require logging into the forums.  You realize that's a huge thing to ask for, right?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Martyn said:

As spock says.. needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.. so hard luck buddy.. majority wins.. that's called democracy in action.

Now, I'm not a mathematician, and didn't even get very good grades in math when I was in school, so correct me if I'm wrong here.

Majority means the larger number right? Because I see one person happy with this change and 1...2...3... I dunno, a lot more than one unhappy with it.

I also see a lot more people living as settlers in the game than as land owners.

So if majority does in fact mean the larger number, I'm confused which majority you speak of.

Edited by Kidori
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kidori said:

Now, I'm not a mathematician, and didn't even get very good grades in math when I was in school, so correct me if I'm wrong here.

Majority means the larger number right? Because I see one person happy with this change and a lot more than one unhappy with it.

I also see a lot more people living as settlers in the game than as land owners.

So I'm confused which majority you speak of.

The majority (which he made up in his head) have not been seen in PvE regarding supporters, there's a simple explanation for that.... people don't support it.

The majority that do support it are playing PvP so that majority has no say in PvE.

You are right, Martyn is the minority in PvE supporters. You know why he supports it? Because he's a landowner and unfortunately one of the few landowners that is arrogant enough to think he is the only one that has rights on his island and that he can wipe anyone he wants in a PvE environment..... you know why? BECAUSE NO-ONE CAN FIGHT BACK AND WIPE HIM.

He also plays 16 hours a day 6 days a week because he is unemployed. He thinks of that as the base line for everyone else, and if you don't play Atlas every day you have no right in commenting on Atlas.

But hopefully once the weekend is over we'll see what the Devs have to say regarding all of our comments and hopefully they'll realise the majority of PvE players, which as you say are settlers, are not happy at all with this. If they listen to the minority, which is basically Martyn, then that says a lot about their decision making.

Anyone looking at the feedback from this recent announcement, in regards to PvE only, will clearly see that there is little to no support for it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Democracy?I live in a democracy,you can do anything you can afford.that's where democracy starts and ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what is going to happen, everyone is going to go back to lawless if they decide to stay on after all they said about wanting them off lawless, couldn't make it up could you.:classic_laugh:

It would just be nice for the devs to actually tell us their thoughts on this, are they going to listen to what the majority want? We know they read these forums yet they have stayed silent about it, they must have discussed the backlash over this stupid idea in PvE.

The clock is ticking before the first nuke drops, I hope they stand down before it's to late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Whitehawk said:

Well for a start I play everyday,And there have been large groups who play pvp,and will join pve servers literally just to grief people,one game I play a company did so much griefing the devs shut down the server,and the stuff they did musta cost fortunes.In WOW some players had so much in- game money they had to put a cap on the amount you could have.In eso making gold is so easy if you've played for a long time,even solo players have loads.and a lot of them games at least have cosmetics and shops you can waste your excess cash in,this game barely has anything to buy.In atlas there is already a lotta bored players who would welcome a wipe,well a wipe means losing all your stuff does it not?So why would that bother a serious griefer?

So PvP players will start playing on PvE just to grind gold and grief someone by razing an Settlement? And how do those PvP players take that Settlement in PvE in the first place? So according to you they will join PvE servers, farm 25k gold and then they will try to find an island with settlers which is not claimed just so they can raze them? You know how absurd this sounds? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kidori said:

Now, I'm not a mathematician, and didn't even get very good grades in math when I was in school, so correct me if I'm wrong here.

Majority means the larger number right? Because I see one person happy with this change and 1...2...3... I dunno, a lot more than one unhappy with it.

I also see a lot more people living as settlers in the game than as land owners.

So if majority does in fact mean the larger number, I'm confused which majority you speak of.

Don’t forget about the 55k people that left because of decisions like this as well as the 100’s of thousands of console players waiting to be able to play.

but yeah who knows, there might even be 1000 of the 3000 left that like it. Definitely the majority there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care how absurd it sounds it's been done directly to me on other games.Like I said one server got it so bad the devs wiped the server off the board for a month.The leader of the clan who did it even told me they would do it. I can't explain why someone would bother going to all that trouble just to aggrevate people cos it's not something I would do or even understand.Believe me I was very shocked to find my entire build messed up on pve just because I wouldn't move my building.They even locked another player in their base and made him drop all his stuff before he could leave.I don't care whether you believe it or not it happens.

Will it happen on atlas ?I hope not,but that's no reason to create tools to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Whitehawk said:

I don't care how absurd it sounds it's been done directly to me on other games.Like I said one server got it so bad the devs wiped the server off the board for a month.The leader of the clan who did it even told me they would do it. I can't explain why someone would bother going to all that trouble just to aggrevate people cos it's not something I would do or even understand.Believe me I was very shocked to find my entire build messed up on pve just because I wouldn't move my building.They even locked another player in their base and made him drop all his stuff before he could leave.I don't care whether you believe it or not it happens.

Will it happen on atlas ?I hope not,but that's no reason to create tools to help.

There's a segment of pvp players who want to have opponents who can't fight back.

 

Anybody who thinks griefing will never happen should check out every game ever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the people on this forum in favor of it have said they want it to get rid of "eyesores" and ugly buildings.  They specifically see it as a chance to finally get to attack other, active players, simply because they dont like them.

And you dont have to farm gold for this.  Just leveling gives you insane amounts of gold.  We have enough to do this a dozen times over just sitting around, and we have never once gone out "to get gold."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Archsenex said:

Even the people on this forum in favor of it have said they want it to get rid of "eyesores" and ugly buildings.  They specifically see it as a chance to finally get to attack other, active players, simply because they dont like them.

Pretty sure I'm the only one that used that specific terminology that you're quoting in this thread. So not only are you putting words in my mouth but you go on to make some wildly inaccurate assumptions.

Allow me to clarify a thing or two. First of all, no I'm not in favor of the current implementation in PvE. Oversight that many of you were prompt to point out has changed my standing on the matter. Second, ALL of those previous comments were in the context of using the feature as intended as a new landlord. Feel free to continue to hold them against me. Lastly, you shouldn't be so quick to make assumptions about ones intentions or in general really. Assumptions are bad M'kay.

Edited by Nari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand how this change effects PvE, but you guys really hijacked my thread LOL. I created this  thread to discuss how this change, yet again, benefits the larger companies over smaller ones in PvP. There is already a huge power gap and it is not linear. Due to everything related to farming and how BPs work there is an exponential power gap.

The current situation is this. There are mega alliances on PvP servers; consisting of the biggest companies on the entire Atlas. If you are a team of 1-3-5 people, they will not invite you to their alliance not just because you are not of use to them but because they are limited on how many allies they can have. So they stick with the biggest boys. There are a handful of elite clubs out there who get to experience the end game and the mythical naval warfare, and the rest of the player base are just insects to them.

Being the small guy, If you live on lawless you have no raid timer, you can get offline raided. You WILL get offline raided.

If you are a settler on someone's island, all of what you guys discussed for PvE applies and even more scenarios apply due to PvP.

If you own a small island, someone who has the numbers, without any fear of repercussions because of the mentioned exponential power gap and sheer numbers thanks to alliance meta, can raid you at will. A bigger company raids a smaller company that's just life in PvP but this whole mega alliance meta is making it so much easier.

The fast decay change earlier made it very difficult for the small guy to keep control of his island. Anyone can now come and build on my island without permission and use it as a base of operation to grief me. That 24 hour timer to demo works outside raid time and there could be a lot of places to hide a small shack for a smart PvP player on a bigger island especially.

And now the ability to raze an island... Before these two changes I had the chance to persevere on my island even if i was raided. I could simply come back and make sure they can never fully wipe my foundations. Which is something that happened to me. A company who was in a mega alliance wanted to settle on my island, they came and raided everything, but eventually gave up trying to get the island because i had ways to deny them.

Raze an island in this current state of the game is ONLY useful to the mega griefer.

And 12k gold is a pathetic number that doesn't mean anything at all. Especially when you are just done raiding someone who, if worth his salt, already had a decent amount.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kidori said:

Now, I'm not a mathematician, and didn't even get very good grades in math when I was in school, so correct me if I'm wrong here.

Majority means the larger number right? Because I see one person happy with this change and 1...2...3... I dunno, a lot more than one unhappy with it.

I also see a lot more people living as settlers in the game than as land owners.

So if majority does in fact mean the larger number, I'm confused which majority you speak of.

I refer to the companies of people numbering in the dozens to the hundreds.. not the odd solo player here or there.  As for these forums.. most of the people responding here, don't even play the game.. they count as a negative number.

Edited by Martyn
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darkweaver said:

I understand how this change effects PvE, but you guys really hijacked my thread LOL. I created this  thread to discuss how this change, yet again, benefits the larger companies over smaller ones in PvP. There is already a huge power gap and it is not linear. Due to everything related to farming and how BPs work there is an exponential power gap.

The current situation is this. There are mega alliances on PvP servers; consisting of the biggest companies on the entire Atlas. If you are a team of 1-3-5 people, they will not invite you to their alliance not just because you are not of use to them but because they are limited on how many allies they can have. So they stick with the biggest boys. There are a handful of elite clubs out there who get to experience the end game and the mythical naval warfare, and the rest of the player base are just insects to them.

Being the small guy, If you live on lawless you have no raid timer, you can get offline raided. You WILL get offline raided.

If you are a settler on someone's island, all of what you guys discussed for PvE applies and even more scenarios apply due to PvP.

If you own a small island, someone who has the numbers, without any fear of repercussions because of the mentioned exponential power gap and sheer numbers thanks to alliance meta, can raid you at will. A bigger company raids a smaller company that's just life in PvP but this whole mega alliance meta is making it so much easier.

The fast decay change earlier made it very difficult for the small guy to keep control of his island. Anyone can now come and build on my island without permission and use it as a base of operation to grief me. That 24 hour timer to demo works outside raid time and there could be a lot of places to hide a small shack for a smart PvP player on a bigger island especially.

And now the ability to raze an island... Before these two changes I had the chance to persevere on my island even if i was raided. I could simply come back and make sure they can never fully wipe my foundations. Which is something that happened to me. A company who was in a mega alliance wanted to settle on my island, they came and raided everything, but eventually gave up trying to get the island because i had ways to deny them.

Raze an island in this current state of the game is ONLY useful to the mega griefer.

And 12k gold is a pathetic number that doesn't mean anything at all. Especially when you are just done raiding someone who, if worth his salt, already had a decent amount.

 

Maybe post in Pvp - Discussions then? Just a thought.

As to your query.. any game that has servers that cater for hundreds or even potentially thousands of players.. are always bad for solo or smaller groups, unless there is a vast vast map to get lost in.. in Atlas.. you can zoom out, mouseover regions, see exactly who is where.. there's no hiding and once people know you can't win, they'll gank you. Nothing will ever stop that, short of irl punishments for scumbag attitudes.  ie 1000 lashes.. if you ganked someone.. 😉

I'd be the hangman!! For free..

Pvp gaming at a seige level requires more or less balanced teams, made up or more or less the equivilent xp of player.. otherwise it rapidly becomes lopsided and one side steamrolls the other. Then the flattened players complain its too hard..

So the system needs to reflect this.  This is part of the reason I don't pvp in survival games.. it's too unbalanced towards zerging like groups.

Zerg is ok if there's 24 v 24.. but when the numbers are in the hundreds.. it's usually lagged v laggier.. it isn't imo fun for anyone, nor can it be.

I'm amazed noone is complaining here about pvp with more than 4-5 ships involved.. because in pve.. you can't usually see more than 2-3 ships without getting completely desync'd with the rest.. boggles the mind how you manage to fight each other.. so it seems to me, that all pvp really means in a survival lagfest.. is offline raiding.  Sneakemups and stealemups this is the new pvp.. on youtube for every large ship battle.. there's 10 videos showing people sneaking into offline player bases to destroy all their ships.. that isn't pvp to me.. doesn't matter how many people are in your group..

As for the 12k gold.. well, I'd not call it nothing.  Even for a large company.  There's also prerequisites before you can mass grief an island.. you need the island points spare, you need to capture it, then you need to buy the eraze.. then you need to wait 48 hours.. then you get to waste your 12k on empty houses and empty stables.. and a shedload of spam.  Do that a few times and even mega's will get bored and quit.

That all said.. as I said, I don't play pvp, so take my comments with a bucket of salt.. I shouldn't really be commenting on a sphere of the game I don't even partake in.  If you'd posted in pvp discussion.. I might never have.

 

One fix I could suggest that might remove a degree of the more obnoxious aspect of current pvp design.. when a  war starts, sides are limited to a set number, say 35 a side.. now it might be that one side has 100 members and the other 1000 but only 35 can be in the sieged area at a time.. then companies could multitask raids etc.. whilst the campaign to capture the flag.. which is all it really is, is a balanced 1v1 fight like most arcade pvp games.  You take away the ability to zerg, you take away the ability to offline raid.. you force pvpers to play fair.. life is unfair eh.. when even gankers have to obey the rules.

I think the obvious truth is, that mass pvp is just a pipe dream, it will never work, because people will be people and not teamplayers.  And the painful truth is.. unless you live in an oppressed situation, where friends means something, you'll probably never be in a big company, that games like atlas demands.  This is why specific cultures are doing so well in these games.. because being friends, really means something to them.  To the rest of us, it's stab another back, afk, gone to lunch, back in 5 but I meant 2 hours.. it just doesn't work.

Edited by Martyn
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darkweaver said:

I understand how this change effects PvE, but you guys really hijacked my thread LOL. I created this  thread to discuss how this change, yet again, benefits the larger companies over smaller ones in PvP. There is already a huge power gap and it is not linear. Due to everything related to farming and how BPs work there is an exponential power gap.

The current situation is this. There are mega alliances on PvP servers; consisting of the biggest companies on the entire Atlas. If you are a team of 1-3-5 people, they will not invite you to their alliance not just because you are not of use to them but because they are limited on how many allies they can have. So they stick with the biggest boys. There are a handful of elite clubs out there who get to experience the end game and the mythical naval warfare, and the rest of the player base are just insects to them.

Being the small guy, If you live on lawless you have no raid timer, you can get offline raided. You WILL get offline raided.

If you are a settler on someone's island, all of what you guys discussed for PvE applies and even more scenarios apply due to PvP.

If you own a small island, someone who has the numbers, without any fear of repercussions because of the mentioned exponential power gap and sheer numbers thanks to alliance meta, can raid you at will. A bigger company raids a smaller company that's just life in PvP but this whole mega alliance meta is making it so much easier.

The fast decay change earlier made it very difficult for the small guy to keep control of his island. Anyone can now come and build on my island without permission and use it as a base of operation to grief me. That 24 hour timer to demo works outside raid time and there could be a lot of places to hide a small shack for a smart PvP player on a bigger island especially.

And now the ability to raze an island... Before these two changes I had the chance to persevere on my island even if i was raided. I could simply come back and make sure they can never fully wipe my foundations. Which is something that happened to me. A company who was in a mega alliance wanted to settle on my island, they came and raided everything, but eventually gave up trying to get the island because i had ways to deny them.

Raze an island in this current state of the game is ONLY useful to the mega griefer.

And 12k gold is a pathetic number that doesn't mean anything at all. Especially when you are just done raiding someone who, if worth his salt, already had a decent amount.

 

Factions and no claims. Easy fix

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DannyUK said:

You know what is going to happen, everyone is going to go back to lawless if they decide to stay on after all they said about wanting them off lawless, couldn't make it up could you.:classic_laugh:

It would just be nice for the devs to actually tell us their thoughts on this, are they going to listen to what the majority want? We know they read these forums yet they have stayed silent about it, they must have discussed the backlash over this stupid idea in PvE.

The clock is ticking before the first nuke drops, I hope they stand down before it's to late.

tbh if I wasn't in a company that owned it's own island.. and was willing to grind the gold to keep it etc.. I'd still be living on a lawless island.  Probably in the Tundra or Arctic.. where noone else goes.  Except to visit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wandelaar said:

Steam Family Library Share is disabled for atlas so in your example those people would have all paid the price and, according to your own posts, acquired the right to do whatever.
 

In case you don't know.. $30 is peanuts to most people.  Loose change.. $300.00 to pay2win.. compare that to a decent video card or a decent cpu.. there's your answer on instantwin teams.. I pay £700+ on tv every year.. I don't even watch tv.. if pc games cost the same as say.. server software.. or a decent editing suite.. well, maybe grapecard could afford some devs and maybe even some gms.. and I doubt you'd see pay2win teams.. not at a cost of thousands..

I'd like to see a code check on accounts, if someone hasn't played in the last 10 days, they are automatically deleted from their company.  My company.. would drop from 40 odd players down to 3.

It'd royally mess up our island points.. but at least it'd be fair.  Those tiny little islands you get.. for like 15 pts.. you could fit our entire active company on one of those..but you couldn't fit all our tames... biggest waste of resourses in this game.. tames..

Edited by Martyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Martyn said:

I refer to the companies of people numbering in the dozens to the hundreds.. not the odd solo player here or there.  As for these forums.. most of the people responding here, don't even play the game.. they count as a negative number.

Oh, you mean they don't count..for you... in the same way that the taxes tenants pay don't seem to count for you because you repeatedly make the factually incorrect statement that tenants don't pay rent or contribute anything. Since you have absolutely zero proof of your assertion that most of the people responding here don't play the game (don't even bother mentioning Realist, he's the one guy, everyone already knows), why should anyone take it at face value? It defies common sense.

The biggest negative number here is the negative amount of logic or facts backing too many of your statements on this topic. You just continue to assert things that are verifiably false or that you cannot possibly know to be true and that defy common sense.  Based on your statements here, your perception of what and who should count is skewed far away from anything based upon the typical player and towards your own hardcore play all the time mindset.

Let's just be clear about what your statements really mean when taken in proper context of understanding the lens through which they are made.

Edited by boomervoncannon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Martyn said:

In case you don't know.. $30 is peanuts to most people.  Loose change.. $300.00 to pay2win.. compare that to a decent video card or a decent cpu.. there's your answer on instantwin teams.. I pay £700+ on tv every year.. I don't even watch tv.. if pc games cost the same as say.. server software.. or a decent editing suite.. well, maybe grapecard could afford some devs and maybe even some gms.. and I doubt you'd see pay2win teams.. not at a cost of thousands..

I'd like to see a code check on accounts, if someone hasn't played in the last 10 days, they are automatically deleted from their company.  My company.. would drop from 40 odd players down to 3.

It'd royally mess up our island points.. but at least it'd be fair.  Those tiny little islands you get.. for like 15 pts.. you could fit our entire active company on one of those..but you couldn't fit all our tames... biggest waste of resourses in this game.. tames..

I wouldn't consider it a given that $30 is peanuts to most people, especially not the large numbers of gamers that are not self supporting adults. This seems to be yet another example of asserting your own personal situation as reflective of most others without having anything but your own personal experience to base that on.

If you're one of only 3 people in your company that is active and you don't have admin authority, why are you still in that company, since you clearly have great disdain for those that don't play every day? If you do have admin authority, why don't you just kick them instead of wanting the devs to institute a new mechanic that does your dirty work for you?  Either have the cojones to kick all the inactives, leave the current company and start fresh with your two buddies, or deal with the present situation without trying to have the game altered just to solve a situation you already have the tools to deal with ?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Whitehawk said:

Obviously someone or someone's on the design team isn't gonna be happy until this is just a massive pirate war game.It won't be long before there will be a pvp element thrown into pve for those that want it,If you look at the blackwood update,great we get more to do,but isn't it just another type of pvp but with an npc substitute?what happened to the exploration side to the game?Explore for war?Find lots of interesting places and annihilate them all?There are plenty of good war games out there,why just make another one?

That's the problem.  All the potential the game has, all the things you could do in and with a sand box and they ONLY want a big battle PvP game.  With the occasional boss fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...