Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 10 of 32 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 31 32
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by rdb100
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
There is a reason the whole "fatigue" system, or "damaged armor" system has basically been removed from 99% of these type of games and MMOs. Most people do not like them, and find them restraining. There really should be no type of limit of long rests per day, considering there is actually no time tracking system (day/night cycle) in the game to begin with. Who knows, maybe they will integrate the whole day/night thing. But I am thinking since it is not integrated by early access, I am not confident it will be added at all. But again, who knows until launch day.
Having what amounts to infinite rests means they will have to homebrew even more stuff to balance things in later levels.

They SHOULD include a time tracking system, but to give you a certain time to complete act 1 before instantly dying via the ceremorphosis into a mindflayer. Say you couldn't complete Act 1 with any character and *had* to play multiple times to see it all because of the time constraint. That way you'd rush to one of the three paths to the towers instead of combing the entire map. It would make sense story-wise as well, and I'm surprised it's not already integrated into the game.

To see that on the full release would be awesome. It would speed up Act 1 (which we've all played to death already) and give you a reason to replay to try another path. It would tie into the story really well if they added sickness later and more dreams or other events about your infection. Again, insta-death if you don't finish Act 1 in time.

This is a terrible idea.

It would definitely make sense for the story but it would be horrible.
I'd rather have changes in the story and something that clearly say : "you're not going to become a mindflayer soon" that having to rush act 1.

Then what ? Going to the gith patrol right at the beginning and dying ? Looking for Halsin takes times, what's considered as "enough time" ? And if you're going to the Hag first which is finally not a solution ? Game over ?

Timed quests and a more living world in which things happen even if you don't trigger the script by yourself is something I'd like... But a game over if you don't rush fast enough would be a terrible mistake (and they won't do it).

Last edited by Maximuuus; 20/04/21 08:21 PM.

French Speaking Youtube Channel with a lot of BG3 videos : https://www.youtube.com/c/maximuuus
Joined: Jan 2021
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2021
I heartily agree that time limits aren't the best solution to the false sense of urgency in the game. I like exploring areas fully, interacting with as many NPCs as possible, and taking time to manage my inventory, so I don't want to feel rushed. Plus, you would end up missing half the story due to the ridiculous amount of times you have to camp to see all the convos and cutscenes with party members. I didn't realise that on my first playthrough, so I camped infrequently, and I'm finding out now that I missed a ton of interactions.

I don't like the use of the trite fake urgency either. However, because most players have been conditioned to ignore in-game urgency, that's even more reason not to have a time limit, as it will end up being an unpleasant surprise for people. As others have suggested, it's better to make it more clear early on in the story that the tadpole is in stasis and finding a "cure", while important, is not urgent. I think it would be better to address the story-related issue with a story-related solution, rather than add game mechanics that may frustrate a portion of the player base (and significantly change the experience).

I also agree with the OP and others who have said that the companion dialogue queues (and cues) need to be improved. This playthrough, I'm getting much more of the companion dialogues, but I have to purposely avoid doing any significant things together. This is something I didn't know to do on my first playthrough, and other new players won't know to do it either (and shouldn't have to).

If they had a specific order for companion interactions and each one that you acquire just queued up, then they wouldn't get out of order. Some of them that don't indicate an end to the night could also double up (i.e. more than one companion interaction per night). Perhaps some of the companion discussions could even happen outside of camp if they don't need a cutscene (right after a short rest?), and it would be helpful if companion cues could be more obvious (e.g. say something to you without forcing you into a dialogue).

On a side note, this would be a "nice to have" feature to increase immersion: instead of big yellow exclamation marks, companions could do something else to attract your attention in camp if something is on their mind. Like pace back and forth or have a very different sitting or standing pose than their default. If their dialogue would lead into a more involved dialogue/cutscene (e.g. Gale admiring his double or Astarion looking up at the stars) then perhaps they could be in their starting pose for that (which would suggest that you to go over to them to see what they're doing).

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
"Time limits" (or to more properly call them, "timed restrictions") if generous enough to not force a player to skip content can make a game of this kind.

One of my favorite examples (and one i already mentioned countless times in other threads, but redundancy is a bit of a second nature of every forum) is the first act of Pathfinder Kingmaker: you have a "soft" deadline of a month to accomplish the first major goal (getting rid of a Baron Robber) and a hard deadline of three months.

Achieving the first is reasonably challenging but it's entirely possible while still completing 100% of the content if you travel light and avoid resting TOO often. But accomplishing this goal rewards you with the best magic sword up to that point into the game.
Achieving the second is trivial. You'd have to go out of your way to waste entire weeks in the most unproductive way to not get rid of the first minor villain by three months.

It's a simple mechanic, but it manages to achieve several goals:
- it gives MEANING to the rest and encumbrance systems rather than making them just a negligible minor annoyance.
- It gives a reasonable sense of urgency while being more than forgiving enough to not rush the player too much.
- It offer an optional additional challenge if you want to go for the "hard goal" and it rewards you appropriately for it.
- It surely as fuck makes a lot more sense and offers more internal consistency than the trite "You have to hurry, it's NOW OR NEVER" only to follow with "Lul, just kidding. Take all the time you want".

It's also a mechanic that works exceptionally well when it comes to secondary, optional goals. At very least in terms of having less people bitch and moan about it on mere principle of "I don't like being rushed" (when in reality they haven't been rushed at all, just asked to not spam a long rest every two goblins and cobolds).

Last edited by Tuco; 21/04/21 09:51 AM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Oct 2020
R
old hand
Offline
old hand
R
Joined: Oct 2020
No time limits. This was already annoying with pathfinder. I don't care how much time I have, the mere existence of time limits makes me rush instead of enjoying the game.
Fortunately, time constraints aren't very popular and generally disliked, so there is no chance that Larian would try it.
Pathfinder is practically the only time-limited RPG game, and it better keep it that way.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
No time limits. This was already annoying with pathfinder.
Nah, it wasn't.
You did find it annoying, which is a different claim to make.

Quote
Fortunately, time constraints aren't very popular and generally disliked, so there is no chance that Larian would try it.
Yeah, popular consensus seems to be the BANE of sensible game design.
People hate restrictions even when they make perfect sense and enhance immersion. Hell, even when they actually improve things mechanically (see XCOM 2). They want convenience above quality of experience, they want flashy question marks above quest givers, instant fast travel from anywhere to everywhere taking away any sense of scale and pace from the game world, they want minimaps telling them everything is going on on a 50 meters radius and omniscient GPS driving them with military-grade precisions on their targets without a single need to having to figure out a thing by context.

And modern mainstream game designers are absolutely terrorized by the idea of daring giving to these people the middle finger they deserve and stick to what actually works and makes a game mechanically more interesting.

Last edited by Tuco; 21/04/21 02:17 PM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
I like time constraints as long as they're fairly lenient (like Kingmaker's). They add tension & immersion while still, in PKm's case, allowing the player to complete most if not all of the content. I could type out all the reasons why, but just go up 3 posts to read everything @Tuco said.

If Larian's not going to make changes to class balance, then there should to be some type of time or resource constraint to limit long resting. This can be any of:
-large-scale time constraints (7 days until you're turned into a mindflayer, possibly with each "healer" NPC slowing the transformation and adding a day or two)
-quest-based (various quests that progress when you long rest: e.g., Hag, Waukeen's Rest, Druid Ritual)
-daily constraints (you literally cannot long rest until X in-game hours have passed and/or you've taken Y short rests)
-resource (gold or ration requirement for resting)
-location-based (Cannot long rest in Hag's lair, the underdark, any dungeon, and you can only fast travel to designated waypoints. No clicking a button, teleporting to camp, then returning to exactly where you were)

And of course, camp cutscenes need to NOT be tied to long resting. If you're not going to put a restriction on resting Larian, at least don't require long-rest spam in order to get all of the story and companion dialogues.

Joined: Oct 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
No time limits. This was already annoying with pathfinder. I don't care how much time I have, the mere existence of time limits makes me rush instead of enjoying the game.
Fortunately, time constraints aren't very popular and generally disliked, so there is no chance that Larian would try it.
Pathfinder is practically the only time-limited RPG game, and it better keep it that way.
up

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Icelyn
up
[Linked Image from icon-library.com]


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Oct 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
[Linked Image from icon-library.com]
laugh

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
I like time constraints as long as they're fairly lenient (like Kingmaker's). They add tension & immersion while still, in PKm's case, allowing the player to complete most if not all of the content. I could type out all the reasons why, but just go up 3 posts to read everything @Tuco said.

If Larian's not going to make changes to class balance, then there should to be some type of time or resource constraint to limit long resting. This can be any of:
-large-scale time constraints (7 days until you're turned into a mindflayer, possibly with each "healer" NPC slowing the transformation and adding a day or two)
-quest-based (various quests that progress when you long rest: e.g., Hag, Waukeen's Rest, Druid Ritual)
-daily constraints (you literally cannot long rest until X in-game hours have passed and/or you've taken Y short rests)
-resource (gold or ration requirement for resting)
-location-based (Cannot long rest in Hag's lair, the underdark, any dungeon, and you can only fast travel to designated waypoints. No clicking a button, teleporting to camp, then returning to exactly where you were)

And of course, camp cutscenes need to NOT be tied to long resting. If you're not going to put a restriction on resting Larian, at least don't require long-rest spam in order to get all of the story and companion dialogues.


I seriously wonder if Larian even considered how the resting system impacts the class balance? Like with warlocks and monks and fighters, largely centered around short rests for instance. As it stands now there is zero reason to take short rests when you might aswell spam long rests. It completely screws up the class balance, but... do they even know that? I mean, they MUST know it, right?

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
The question is never if they know (it's generally assumed they do) but if they care and if they are attempting to address it.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
I seriously wonder if Larian even considered how the resting system impacts the class balance? Like with warlocks and monks and fighters, largely centered around short rests for instance. As it stands now there is zero reason to take short rests when you might aswell spam long rests. It completely screws up the class balance, but... do they even know that? I mean, they MUST know it, right?
Originally Posted by Tuco
The question is never if they know (it's generally assumed they do) but if they care and if they are attempting to address it.
When the game launched you were only allowed to take 1 short rest in between long rests.
In Patch 3 they changed this to 2 short rests per long rest with the following reasoning:
Originally Posted by Larian
More adventuring, and less resting
You now get 2 short rests after your long rest. Previously, you only had a single short rest. That’s twice the rest, for the same price! This means you have more uninterrupted adventures, and all the perks of resting.
Make of this what you will.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Sweden
Dez Offline
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Sweden
Originally Posted by Tuco
"Time limits" (or to more properly call them, "timed restrictions") if generous enough to not force a player to skip content can make a game of this kind.

One of my favorite examples (and one i already mentioned countless times in other threads, but redundancy is a bit of a second nature of every forum) is the first act of Pathfinder Kingmaker: you have a "soft" deadline of a month to accomplish the first major goal (getting rid of a Baron Robber) and a hard deadline of three months.

Achieving the first is reasonably challenging but it's entirely possible while still completing 100% of the content if you travel light and avoid resting TOO often. But accomplishing this goal rewards you with the best magic sword up to that point into the game.
Achieving the second is trivial. You'd have to go out of your way to waste entire weeks in the most unproductive way to not get rid of the first minor villain by three months.

It's a simple mechanic, but it manages to achieve several goals:
- it gives MEANING to the rest and encumbrance systems rather than making them just a negligible minor annoyance.
- It gives a reasonable sense of urgency while being more than forgiving enough to not rush the player too much.
- It offer an optional additional challenge if you want to go for the "hard goal" and it rewards you appropriately for it.
- It surely as fuck makes a lot more sense and offers more internal consistency than the trite "You have to hurry, it's NOW OR NEVER" only to follow with "Lul, just kidding. Take all the time you want".

It's also a mechanic that works exceptionally well when it comes to secondary, optional goals. At very least in terms of having less people bitch and moan about it on mere principle of "I don't like being rushed" (when in reality they haven't been rushed at all, just asked to not spam a long rest every two goblins and cobolds).

While I might not approve of the tone Tuco sometimes have (although, I know why you argue the way you do from time to time, Tuco :p I've read those posts too!) - but hands down, I am actually with Tuco on this one.

While I do not necessarily feel like it would ruin the game by not implementing it - time limiting, when done right, is not at all the kind of rush-feast that people think it is. Maybe it is because I played a LOT of Xcom 1/2 (and other strategy games like Civilization that does not allow one to dwell for too long) before I even began with CRPGs, but I simply feel like it adds some realism to the matter. They say it is urgent, but this is demonstrated in no other way than in words.

Anyhow - while on the matter, I was very hesitant about buying Pathfinder: Kingmaker because of all the nay-sayers on Steam. I was nervous about the difficulty and I was *VERY* nervous about the time-limited aspects - especially since Pathfinder is it's own game and not following the same ruleset as many other CRPGs. But, when all was said and done, I bought it - while still reasonably fresh to the CRPG genre - and I enjoyed it very, very, very much. Tuco is 100% right in that while you might feel rushed when entering P:K and they say "You got X amount of time before this is all over" and actually see the count-down in your journal - you very soon realize what an insane amount of time you actually have. I could with ease make it within the month (that would be the more difficult reward, as Tuco mentioned) while doing everything I wanted to do - and I had sooo much time to explore the entire game, while still leaving room for mistakes like non-optimal pathing, running back and forth etc without being hindered. Granted - I played it on easy because... Well, the P:K rumors scared the crap out of me - but I feel no shame about it. I mainly play CRPGs for the story - not to get stuck on particular encounters. Running the game while enjoying the combat challenge is for my second/third etc playthrough, not for my first run. :]

So - while I doubt Larian will add a time restriction now, I certainly think they could have - or should, in future games. It doesnt have to be merciless, it doesn't have to stress you to the point where you do not dare to waste time on anything optional... It is just to increase the immersion and actually grant a more believable feeling of time passing. PoE2 also did this to an extent, and I did enjoyed it there as well, although certain time limited aspects (like chasing that damn ship) made my heart skip more than just a couple of beats (but that was because I screwed up big time and had to rush in an attempt to make up for it).

What I am trying to say is - even people who play like me can play with time limits. I am going to make a guess that Tuco is more of a min-max player than I am, since I am very casual and hence enjoying a huge chunk of comfort into my roleplaying experience - but that did in no way hinder my experience in P:K. It is not as dreadful as it may sound to those who are not used to time limiting aspects - and, when implemented properly, it is true that you literally have to waste time in a way that is simply not appropriate in order to fail on easier difficulties.

I'd even go the step further than Tuco above. If Larian implemented the same kind form of time limiting that "Story time"-Pathfinder has (easiest difficulty there is), then you could rest after every, single encounter - if you wanted to. You could even take an extra rest every now and then, just for fun. You could backtrack, run around in circles and do all side quests. You'd still make the hard-limit, no sweat. And you would easily make the soft-limit by just resting every second camp while still doing a through search of each and every area you go to - even with a comfortable amount of time left to explore the surrounding areas, if you'd like.

The biggest argument I'd see against time limiting in BG3 is the fact that our current system regarding companion conversations demands us to "waste" time resting (a lot) even when it is not needed nor appropriate. You also have to "test-rest" often in order to double-check that there has been no conversations triggered, as our companions rarely tell us when they want to talk. I mean - I rest *A LOT* on my current play through, and I STILL managed to miss multiple conversations...... This system does not match well with a time-gating system, but that does not make time-limiting aspects bad in general.


Hoot hoot, stranger! Fairly new to CRPGs, but I tried my best to provide some feedback regardless! <3 Read it here: My Open Letter to Larian
Joined: Mar 2020
M
member
Offline
member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
I agree as well that time limits can and do work very well if implemented right.

In Disco Elysium i feel time limited quests are not strict at all (but they add a sense of urgency) and they are communicated well once you accepted them. Having them adds tension, immersion and dynamic to the world as things are changing while you play, it lets you explore freely but it doesnt wait for you with everything.
I think one key is that the game should be really clear in giving the feedback to the player - preferably BEFORE or at least AFTER accepting a time-limited quest - that this is a timed quest and you need to prioritize your to-do-list a little bit to get a certain result. In DE, the game cleverly share you these hints via your thoughts but this can be done in any game.

I also like how immersive the flowing of time for example in Kingdom Come, if you take certain quests (but never felt it rushed or too strict again). I remember there was one occasion my journal mocked me, saying hey while you were taking a rest right after accepting this pretty urgent quest - because its just a game, what can happen, right? - your companions did not wait for you and they started to travel already to the quest location. It was fun, they even had some things to say when i was able to find out which direction they went and caught up to them, showing real reactions to my lazy thinking. The quest was still solvable, but all this added a nice flavour to things.

All in all, if its cleverly done, it can add a lot to the world. Implementing extra challenge (and reward) with hard goals is a cool idea as well.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
1. Time constraints will ruin the game for some people, it's just a fact. Many people hate rush, or even the illusion of it, because it causes them stress.
2. Obviously, at this stage, there is no need to rush to BG3, because at a certain stage npc are told you "you have time". Of course, at first it does not seem so, you will most likely try to find Halsin as quickly as possible or Nettie, but as soon as they tell you that the transformation will not come immediately, then the "stress" mode goes away. And I think that's a good thing.
Perhaps some of you like the feeling of "rigor", even if it is an illusion, but personally I do not, and if dev add this to the game, then I will not be able to play and have fun. When game says "You need to be faster", there is no more fun, only stress. And I don't think I'll be able to turn it off somehow, lol. So technically, this is a bad idea. Especially for rpg genre.

Do you need time limits? So create them for yourself! The joke is that you won't lose anything if they aren't added to the game. This will not spoil your game, because you can run forward at breakneck speed, who will stop you. But don't force others to play the way you like.

I'm not talking about the problem with the camp and the cut scenes, they really are, and I would like to change that, just because even I don't need to rest so many times.


I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
Joined: Sep 2017
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Sep 2017
Again, the most problem is the rest system is that Larian designed the game with all the major cut scenes and story progression to happen at camp or right before and after long rests.

This was so that you are almost forced into doing so, manipulated into resting more than you need to in order to get the full experience and story of the characters. It ties back into Larian designing the game for the lowest common denominator and adding so many training wheels facets to the flow of the game.

If you follow the long rest regimen set by the game in EA, you will have your spell slots available roughly every other fight.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by gaymer
Again, the most problem is the rest system is that Larian designed the game with all the major cut scenes and story progression to happen at camp or right before and after long rests.

This was so that you are almost forced into doing so, manipulated into resting more than you need to in order to get the full experience and story of the characters. It ties back into Larian designing the game for the lowest common denominator and adding so many training wheels facets to the flow of the game.

If you follow the long rest regimen set by the game in EA, you will have your spell slots available roughly every other fight.

Exactly! It breaks class balance and immersion.

Last edited by andreasrylander; 22/04/21 08:08 PM.
Joined: Feb 2021
P
addict
Offline
addict
P
Joined: Feb 2021
Although admittedly, I am a big fan of XCOM2, and I do also like the timer on that game which matches with the stress of an alien invasion, and it really worked in that game. I really don't see any kind of timer working in this game. They are two totally different types of game. Not to mention, we have no idea what is going to transpire after the starter area (the EA).

Considering that originally (as quoted by a poster above) Larian actually increased the number of short rests to streamline adventuring time, I really don't see them just doing a reverse course, and putting some kind of time restraint or any other mechanic that would limit the amount of time you can go to camp for a full rest now. They have never had a day/night cycle, maybe that is an engine limitation, I don't know. But it would be cool to have some "night missions" when we reach Baldur's Gate. I am assuming even if this was done, it would be a loaded instance of the quest area, and not open world.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Although admittedly, I am a big fan of XCOM2, and I do also like the timer on that game which matches with the stress of an alien invasion, and it really worked in that game. I really don't see any kind of timer working in this game. They are two totally different types of game. Not to mention, we have no idea what is going to transpire after the starter area (the EA).

Considering that originally (as quoted by a poster above) Larian actually increased the number of short rests to streamline adventuring time, I really don't see them just doing a reverse course, and putting some kind of time restraint or any other mechanic that would limit the amount of time you can go to camp for a full rest now. They have never had a day/night cycle, maybe that is an engine limitation, I don't know. But it would be cool to have some "night missions" when we reach Baldur's Gate. I am assuming even if this was done, it would be a loaded instance of the quest area, and not open world.

Yeah, they COULD put a day/night cycle in if they wanted, it certainly is not beyond their abilities; and that would accurately solve the "rest when you want" problem because long rests are ( at most ) once per 24 hrs. Actually having to wait in-game before you can rest would definitely promote the proper consideration of when you use per-day resources.

But there are 2 problems with doing this. First, Larian's co-op play model ( which is apparently very popular ) relies on time being an illusion. And second, most people that buy the game would hate being made to wait and, therefore, complain; this would be a valid complaint, since having no respect for wasting your customer's time is always a bad idea if you want them to buy your product.

It seems to me that it is simply a result of a bad system design in DnD, right from the first edition, really. Resources are limited by passage of time, but passage of time can only be made important in a specious or contrived manner.

The best way of moderating resting in the field remains the original idea of random encounters; but that gets boring quickly. The alternative is to do what Larian have, and assume that resting occurs often, and construct the game on that basis.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by etonbears
<snip>The best way of moderating resting in the field remains the original idea of random encounters; but that gets boring quickly. The alternative is to do what Larian have, and assume that resting occurs often, and construct the game on that basis.
The issue is that Larian has only done ~half of what is needed to construct the game assuming resting occurs often.
Aspects that complement or encourage frequent resting
- Combat encounters seem to be constructed assuming you have ~full resources for each fight.
- Long resting is encouraged via the camp cutscenes (although Larian obviously needs to put more emphasis on this, given the # of players who don't rest and miss a significant chunk of cutscenes)
- You can fast travel from almost anywhere directly to camp and then back to where you teleported from, and resting doesn't require resources or provoke random encounters.

Aspects that aren't constructed for frequent long resting
- Balance between classes. Short v long rest-based classes are a big thing in 5e, and most of Larian's changes haven't addressed this. Long rest spellcasters are relatively much more powerful in BG3 because they can afford to use all of their spell slots each fight.
- Prevalence of consumables, food in particular. You would think that, since long resting fully restores HP, a 5e game with unlimited resting would have less healing consumables. However, there is a ton of food & potions in BG3 which discourages long resting because you can just heal by using these. There is also a ton of scrolls, flasks, etc which everyone can use (I suppose this actually helps to balance martials vs casters, but at the cost of class-uniformity), allowing you to do more fights before needing to rest.

Page 10 of 32 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 31 32

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5