Jump to content
TedderVision
Doomhammer

Recommendations and Ideas for the Sim

Recommended Posts

1.      The first is that I felt there was no true benefit for participating in the scandal function.  Being a noob, I thought everyone had to choose one. So I figured if everyone had a scandal, I might as well pick 7/10 (not knowing what I was doing but thinking that if everyone had a scandal, I would need to have a scandal level that would keep me competitive with everyone else). The thing is, if someone picks a 7, they should have benefits greater than someone who chose not to participate in the scandals or chose a lesser scandal. If a non-scandal person gets a $10 million donation, the same card for a 7 point scandal person should be like $70 million. The risk should be rewarded as it felt that there was no reward for risking a scandal that essentially ruined the campaign/career of the character.  All it appeared to do is have a looming effect on the character with no advantages of participating in it. 

 

 

Also, if a scandal is released, there needs to be the exact story given to the candidate of the scandal.  If there are two stories, the admin’s story and the player’s story, the player will always appear to be lying because the player is using his imagination instead of truly understanding of what happened.  No way to spin or shape the scandal other than resigning or giving back money which is an admittance of guilt; otherwise, your character is essentially out of the game because his/her mere existence jeopardizes the party. 

 

 

A VP scandal also shouldn’t have wrecked the Presidential candidate’s polling as much as it did.  A negative affect should have taken place, but I don’t know what numbers you used, but there were WAY too many blue states giving up on Ward and the result was essentially handing the election to the GOP.  I could see the swing states/undecided voters start to move Republican.  Technically, a better tactic would be for the opposing party to receive a great momentum card or Ward/Solin campaign should have been slapped with a -40 momentum or something like that.  That way, we could have recovered, but it would have taken work.

 

 

2.      The second is having event cards. Something to spice the game up. Fitz never dealt with anything of substance (not entirely his fault….). We should have cards drawn every schedule with potential conflicts and circumstances like natural disasters, civil unrest in other countries, Barbara Bush or Jimmy Carter dies, Russian aggression, large business goes bankrupt and millions of jobs are at stake, etc... This way, there is more for the POTUS and legislative branch to fix or make worse.

 

 

I proposed this in the Cloak Room and understand that it was a new idea that couldn’t be integrated mid-round, but I think it is important as it creates opportunities to use brilliant problem solving or potentially make mistakes the opposition may use.  I am willing to help create this if you need along with any help from other players who have ideas for event cards.

 

 

3.      3rd, I also have no idea why there were no debates. I mean, our democratic debate was awesome. 43 replies and thorough facilitated by an unbiased player. The debate had ZERO impact on the primary or the campaign which was a lot of work for nothing despite what seemed to be a strategic dialogue and conversation over issues.

Also, if not the primaries (which they still should have) but at least the POTUS election should have had something between Ward and Mac.  Ward, Hong, and I agreed to do 3 debates in the primaries and only did one because we realized it was irrelevant this round. The first debate was hosted by our DNC chair/Cardinal Fan who acted like Jake Tapper. he did an excellent job. The 2nd one was going to be a town hall debate where any player can ask a question like a voter as normal town hall events might be. The 3rd was going to be another generic debate with a moderator like an admin or even Cardinal Fan again. The problem was, it was ignored. Just a missing important piece from a campaign game.  Again, the admin’s don’t have to facilitate it either.  But some impact should have occurred due to debates and repercussions should happen to those candidates who don’t participate.

4.      4th. No schedule should advance until all PRs, townhalls, and other factors are graded. We can wait another day or two if an admin is busy with life. We get that. No need to advance a day just because we hit the deadline. Players should meet the deadline, but get all the information first, then proceed.

 

 

5.      Primary polling should be displayed consistently or change polling acquisition.  Playing in the dark is not great or fun. Either we should remove the 30 minutes per poll limitation and allow everyone to purchase as many polls as we have money for or make polling available every schedule-two schedules for primaries.  As you mentioned, the polls are not 100% accurate as they shouldn’t be, but the primary season was difficult to navigate as I had no idea where I was doing well or poorly and would have to have spent too much time not campaigning only to receive notice that I wasn’t doing well. 

 

 

6.      Home state advantage.  Is this a thing?  If it was, it didn’t feel like it was.  Additionally, DNC/RNC conventions should have had an impact where they were.  Maybe not enough to flip the state the convention was hosted, but some strategy where the convention was located could have made things more interesting.

 

 

Speaking of the convention, that was not clearly understood.  Perhaps it was me being new to this style of campaign game.  When we were told to have 8 NPCs, I don’t remember hearing anywhere that we were supposed to write their speeches for them just that they spoke on Ward/Solin behalf.  Trust me, I would have done it for them.  Additionally, we had every speech for players in our WarRoom but not everyone was clear about what to do about it.

 

 

Last thing about conventions, the Republican ticket should not have been allowed to campaign in June/July since the nominee was not selected until the convention.  Democrats would have had a contested convention but I dropped to allow Ward the nominee.  Will Conway did not step aside, you divided Hayton’s delegates 50/50 resulting in Mac having enough to win the nominee.  None of this would have been decided until the convention.  Additionally, there was no outrage from Conway supporters for the RNC choosing Macmillan.  Those contested conventions are vicious and usually divide a party instead of uniting them.  If Conway yielded, that would have changed things as tempers would cool down except in Bernie’s case. lol

 

 

7.      Allow for more influence over NPCs in senate and house races as well as active NPCs who would be campaigning on behalf of candidates.  First, the obnoxious influx of Republican senators in many Democratic states was just absurd.  It can happen, but whatever factors or global formulas that were used skewed the senate in the GOP’s favor in both elections when there was barely any influence by player characters.  States like Connecticut (with rising Democrat Chris Murphy), Maryland, Rhode Island, California (Caitlyn Jenner would have lost epically due to no Republican Evangelical would show up to vote or vote for her.  California has not had a Republican Senator since 1992.  Only a player character should have had the ability to win there unless there was enormous campaigning effort to get a Republican there.  Which was not the case… and Caitlyn Jenner was an unrealistic candidate let alone winner) etc..  since none of these people were opposed by real players.  The only one (win in a liberal state) that made sense was Warren losing Massachusetts because of Gabriel Gonzalez stealing votes from her as a strong 3rd party candidate ruining a main party’s dominance. 

 

 

One option to fix this is to allow each party to place an NPC schedule for these senators or help them help themselves in their senate races. Additionally, the DNC chair/team as well as the RNC chair/team should select which NPCs run even if it is just to add to primary contests.

As for other NPCs, each party should have had NPCs who would campaign on their behalf such as Bill/Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, Collin Powell and George W Bush, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, etc..  Why not allow each party to select several NPC campaigners, give each a rating, and then allow them to have 6 hours or maybe 6 Rallies of campaigning each schedule that can be used to boost senate races or the Presidency?

                       

8.      Endorsements should be included.  I know there is a small incorporation with some cards such as Newspaper ads giving more Name Recognition or a big donor gives you money, but I mean influence and boosts in states.  For example, Bernie endorsing a progressive candidate for president would make sense and would impact that candidate’s pull with progressives across the country while Governor John Kasich endorsing someone like Mac would give him a bonus in the Ohio Primary.  Organizations like the NAACP, Right to Life, NRA, and other organizations would likely announce support for candidates that would give boosts based on their AR and stances.  Candidates should also be able to campaign for those endorsements to increase their chances of getting a boost.  Adding an endorsement factor/formula to the game would make it more realistic and create more variations to strategizing a campaign.  I am willing to help discuss this more accurately if you want.  

 

 

9.      Public Releases need to do more than affect AR during campaigns.  This is where a candidate can lay out their policy and receive feedback on it.  Otherwise, we are stuck with “I have a plan.  Yes, a great plan.  The best plan.  Believe me.”  If one candidate is using PRs effectively, they should gain momentum or a bonus if the opposing candidate does not match the PRs.  This involves staying on top of your campaign and election and controlling the narrative.  Ward/Solin had so many press releases explaining policy while the Republicans were silent.  The democratic ticket was working for the votes while the GOP ticket remained quiet and they benefited from not saying anything. 

 

 

10.  Post the results of races/elections where everyone can see them as soon as you have them.  I had to ask Ward or even had Ward comment to me about the results of an election without any knowledge on my part or ability to see the results for myself.  Eventually, they were posted, but that was after the fact.    

 

 

11.  Don’t doc points for addressing other issues and then say we aren’t addressing enough issues.  I lost points in a primary town hall for talking about Net Neutrality among every demographic except the three left ones because quote “This issue is not really a big deal with many people except far left SJWs who think that anti-net neutrality is the coming of the Apocalypse.”  Which I thought was a biased evaluation/rating.  Moderates may not care about some issues but bringing up other issues wouldn’t make them view a candidate less unless the issue was extremely outlandish.  No change would have made sense but losing points was a bit cheap imo especially when I provided a thorough explanation of why it was needed and the harms of not having it.

Edited by Doomhammer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Net Neutrality, while it is true that it's one of the less-talked about issues of the day, it does draw broad support from both Democrats and Republicans, not just "far-left SJWs." 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.       A more enhanced character creation.  The character creator had some nice features; however, it would be nice to be able to build a character with more options.  Having a background selection was nice; however, it had no impact on the kind of character we were playing.  For example”

a.       A character with a political background should get a +5 to Experience

b.       A character with a business background should get a +5 to Wealth and +5 AR toward Business

c.       A character with acting/celebrity background should get a +5 to Charisma

d.       A character with a Military Background should get a +5 Experience and perhaps a +2 to all AR ratings

e.       Etc….

Additionally, the different religions and demographics should also play a role.  Such as:

f.        Protestant and Catholics should get a +5 to Evangelical Voters

g.       Muslim, atheists, and maybe Jews should get a +5 to SJWs

h.       A minority candidate such as a woman, African American, Hispanic, Asian, etc… should give a +5 to SJWs

There was an option to say how “wealthy” your character was which was nice but had no tie into the game.  I created Raheem Ramsey to be kind of like the Liberal Trump; however, he was just as broke as all of us.  Thus, there should be an inverse relationship between the Wealth attribute and moderate affinity ratings.  The more wealthy you are, the less likely you are to relate to the general public.  For example:

a.       Poor -5 Wealth, -$30,000,000 but a +10 to both Moderate Republicans and Moderate Democrats

b.       Lower Class -2 Wealth, -$10,000,000 but a +5 to both Moderate Republicans and Moderate Democrats

c.       Middle Class No change

d.       Upper Class +2 Wealth extra $10,000,000 but a -2 to both Moderate Republicans and Moderate Democrats

e.       Wealthy +5 Wealth, extra $30,000,000 but a -5 to both Moderate Republicans and Moderate Democrats

I would also recommend adding another attribute to the current 4: Experience, Name Rec, Wealth, Charisma.  I recommend we add “Integrity” or “Credibility” as one of the factors.  Integrity.  A higher attribute of integrity/credibility will reduce the impact of negative attack ads as well as can help a candidate overcome a scandal if the public views the candidate with high integrity.  Any attack from PRs against a candidate with high integrity will be less effective since the candidate is positively viewed. 

 

Another potential attribute to consider is stamina.  I am not sure how to incorporate this yet; however, the concept is you have so many hours to campaign based on your stamina.  The more stamina, the more hours you have to campaign.  Just a thought.

 

Allow us to reposition our starting stats.  If we add Integrity, a candidate would ideally start with 30 points for each of the 5 attributes (Experience, Name Rec, Wealth, Charisma, credibility) for a total of 150 points.  Allow a player to select where those 150 points go.  If someone wants to start out with a character that has 15 Experience, 40 Name Recognition, 25 Wealth, 30 Charisma, and 40 Integrity, we should be allowed to customize that.  This would be a better feature for experienced players; however, new players could be recommended to do an even 30 across all attributes.

 

2.       Any benefit from being on a TV show?  I think if we have our own player run TV shows like Mac did and CardinalFan tried to do, any character that participates in one of those interviews should get a +1 Name Recognition.  Additionally, every Town Hall event should have some sort of impact on attributes and not just AR. Perhaps, if a character does 4 town halls, they get a free attribute point to be applied anywhere they like.  This will encourage participation for town hall events.

3.       Change MOMENTUM.  Instead of having a blank momentum card that can be applied to a specific candidate that affects the entire country, have a momentum card only affect 1 character and 1 state.  For example, if Calvin Ward received +15 momentum card and Macmillan received a +20 Momentum card.  Based on luck, Macmillan gets the advantage; however, if they can only use that card in one state, all of a sudden, they have to use strategy.  Ward could use the +15 momentum in Ohio while Macmillan could try to use the +20 momentum in Michigan.  Of course, cards are a luck factor; however, this makes it so that we have to be more tactful. 

 

4.       Reduce the impact of all players other than POTUS and VPOTUS candidates (with expectation of past POTUSes and VPOTUSes) as they should only have normal impact in their home states.  They can still have impact in other states, but the ones who carry the influence are the candidates themselves. 

 

Improve the impact of senators over representatives.  Senators are typically more well known (with exception of speaker, HML, and HmL). Winning a senate race should boost Name Rec by +5.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Doomhammer, I'm going to respond to those points that I can.

1. a. Scandals effect your election performance. A more "risky" scandal helps you more.
c. That is literally just how the system works.
3. I wasn't going to do it because a - I didn't have a computer and b - your first one never got graded. (But if it had, it would have been incorporated in the sheets).
6. It was. And conventions did get boosts in the states.
8. It was suggested (by me) but never acted on because of the other admins being incognito.
9. PRs (if they were tied to a state) were put in the sheet. (But that required them to be graded).

I'm thinking right now how to eliminate the barnstorm strategy that the GOP used all round. Hopefully, you'll see something about that soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Richard said:

I'm thinking right now how to eliminate the barnstorm strategy that the GOP used all round. Hopefully, you'll see something about that soon. 

Here are a few ideas that might help with figuring out a direction to go.

 

1.       Is there a way to tie whatever formula you have with fundraising where you cannot spam California every fundraiser and keep getting a high influx of cash and use that do devalue the amount of rallies targeting a specific demographic in a state?

 

2.       Create tiers for rallies just like ads. Each tier costs more time and has a greater impact the higher the tier?  Additionally, you could make a Rally in California take more time than a Rally in Rhode Island.  That way, a candidate cannot barnstorm the larger or more valuable states as much as they could a smaller state.  Example, if a candidate has 12 hours to campaign, a sample schedule might be:

John McCain – September Schedule

3 Hours Tier 1 Rally targeting moderate conservatives in Florida

6 Hours Tier 2 Rally targeting moderate conservatives in Florida

 3 Hour Tier 3 Rally  targeting Nationalists in Montana

              The extra time could be considered more preparation time or organization time to perform the rally.  This might put more strategy and create less:

12 rallies targeting moderate conservatives in Florida

             

3.       Next option could be to add fatigue to the schedule where a candidate has to “rest.”  If someone doesn’t have the stamina or have the right amount of “rest” their campaigning will be less effective.  A tired campaigner is more likely to make mistakes and be less effective.  An idea for character creation is having stamina or energy.  This would mean candidates must conserve energy or risk gaffes or mistakes along the campaign trail.  Example,

 

Someone’s stamina ability is how quickly they can regain their energy.  Energy can be between 1-100.  A rally might cost 20 energy points, a fundraiser might cost 10, or something like that.  If Jennifer Granholm campaigns and does 5 rallies, she loses 100 energy points.  If she does not “rest” anything she does that exceeds those 100 points will be ineffective or less effective and could increase chances at a gaffe or potential mistake that could hurt her campaign or whoever she is campaigning for.  Resting could depend on their stamina rating as to how much energy points they can gain back.  If her attribute stamina rating is 40/100 perhaps a 1 hour rest could give back half at like 20 energy points while a 2 hour rest can restore the 40 points, and 3 hours can reset anyone back to 100.  This means Jennifer must spend a couple hours restoring her energy and do her best to stay in the positives.  We could add penalties for someone going into negative energy points so that the lower you go the less effective and more “bad” stuff happens.   

 

 

4.       Another option, in the Game President Forever, each candidate can give only 1 speech on a specific topic for the election cycle.  So you could give a speech/rally about the economy in Ohio but then never be able to have a rally regarding the economy again.  So everyone would be allowed to give up to like 12 rallies the entire campaign and must use them strategically.  They can use them all in one state in one schedule; however, they will no longer use a rally again.  Not my best option, but one that could be used.

5.       Make each rally less and less effective for each demographic.  If I give a rally in Michigan toward Moderate Liberals, the second rally is only 90% effective, a third rally is only 80% effective, all the way down to 10% would be my floor so that you can still spam a demographic in a state; however, it doesn’t do much.

Share this post


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

@Doomhammer, I'm going to respond to those points that I can.

1. a. Scandals effect your election performance. A more "risky" scandal helps you more.
c. That is literally just how the system works.
3. I wasn't going to do it because a - I didn't have a computer and b - your first one never got graded. (But if it had, it would have been incorporated in the sheets).
6. It was. And conventions did get boosts in the states.
8. It was suggested (by me) but never acted on because of the other admins being incognito.
9. PRs (if they were tied to a state) were put in the sheet. (But that required them to be graded).

I'm thinking right now how to eliminate the barnstorm strategy that the GOP used all round. Hopefully, you'll see something about that soon.

 

#Biased

Share this post


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

I'm thinking right now how to eliminate the barnstorm strategy that the GOP used all round. Hopefully, you'll see something about that soon.

Hey, just because we're amazing you don't have to nerf our winning strats... ?

Share this post


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

 

I'm thinking right now how to eliminate the barnstorm strategy that the GOP used all round. Hopefully, you'll see something about that soon.

What are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Doomhammer said:

Here are a few ideas that might help with figuring out a direction to go.

 

1.       Is there a way to tie whatever formula you have with fundraising where you cannot spam California every fundraiser and keep getting a high influx of cash and use that do devalue the amount of rallies targeting a specific demographic in a state?

 

 

 

2.       Create tiers for rallies just like ads. Each tier costs more time and has a greater impact the higher the tier?  Additionally, you could make a Rally in California take more time than a Rally in Rhode Island.  That way, a candidate cannot barnstorm the larger or more valuable states as much as they could a smaller state.  Example, if a candidate has 12 hours to campaign, a sample schedule might be:

 

John McCain – September Schedule

 

3 Hours Tier 1 Rally targeting moderate conservatives in Florida

 

6 Hours Tier 2 Rally targeting moderate conservatives in Florida

 

 3 Hour Tier 3 Rally  targeting Nationalists in Montana

 

              The extra time could be considered more preparation time or organization time to perform the rally.  This might put more strategy and create less:

 

12 rallies targeting moderate conservatives in Florida

 

             

 

3.       Next option could be to add fatigue to the schedule where a candidate has to “rest.”  If someone doesn’t have the stamina or have the right amount of “rest” their campaigning will be less effective.  A tired campaigner is more likely to make mistakes and be less effective.  An idea for character creation is having stamina or energy.  This would mean candidates must conserve energy or risk gaffes or mistakes along the campaign trail.  Example,

 

 

 

Someone’s stamina ability is how quickly they can regain their energy.  Energy can be between 1-100.  A rally might cost 20 energy points, a fundraiser might cost 10, or something like that.  If Jennifer Granholm campaigns and does 5 rallies, she loses 100 energy points.  If she does not “rest” anything she does that exceeds those 100 points will be ineffective or less effective and could increase chances at a gaffe or potential mistake that could hurt her campaign or whoever she is campaigning for.  Resting could depend on their stamina rating as to how much energy points they can gain back.  If her attribute stamina rating is 40/100 perhaps a 1 hour rest could give back half at like 20 energy points while a 2 hour rest can restore the 40 points, and 3 hours can reset anyone back to 100.  This means Jennifer must spend a couple hours restoring her energy and do her best to stay in the positives.  We could add penalties for someone going into negative energy points so that the lower you go the less effective and more “bad” stuff happens.   

 

 

 

 

 

4.       Another option, in the Game President Forever, each candidate can give only 1 speech on a specific topic for the election cycle.  So you could give a speech/rally about the economy in Ohio but then never be able to have a rally regarding the economy again.  So everyone would be allowed to give up to like 12 rallies the entire campaign and must use them strategically.  They can use them all in one state in one schedule; however, they will no longer use a rally again.  Not my best option, but one that could be used.

 

5.       Make each rally less and less effective for each demographic.  If I give a rally in Michigan toward Moderate Liberals, the second rally is only 90% effective, a third rally is only 80% effective, all the way down to 10% would be my floor so that you can still spam a demographic in a state; however, it doesn’t do much.

 

 

 

This is way too complicated.

Seriously, one of the great things about Capitol Hill is how simple it is compared to other games. Let's please keep it that way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

This is way too complicated.

Seriously, one of the great things about Capitol Hill is how simple it is compared to other games. Let's please keep it that way.

Simplicity is nice, however some level of measure needs to be added so that elections aren’t decided just by the fact GOP has more bodies. There should be some merit to argument and strategy. It may not be what Doom suggested but it needs to be something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Democrats need to do better as recruiting new players. Every round so far has ended in either a landslide 2020 victory for the GOP or the DNC Chair getting arrested for donating to a terrorist organization

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Chris said:

Simplicity is nice, however some level of measure needs to be added so that elections aren’t decided just by the fact GOP has more bodies. There should be some merit to argument and strategy. It may not be what Doom suggested but it needs to be something. 

I didn't mean to do all of those things suggested.  I just wanted to give a spread of potential options that can be used if wanted or if any of those ideas sparked other ideas from other members of the group.

Some of what I proposed would also be backend things that the admins would know.  To simplify it for members @TexAgRepublican, all that would need to be stated or said to players about the last option with rallies becoming less effective is that "Rallies will give your candidate a boost with a particular demographic in a selected state.  Watch out that too many rallies targeting the same demographic in a state as that may lose its impact if overused."  That isn't over-complicated; however, the formula the admins use will need some structuring.  Otherwise, 10 vs 6 will just beat down whoever has fewer players. 

I don't think the stamina/energy would be that complicated.  It would be like managing our War Chest but with energy.  I have not played any Political simulators like this before.  This was my first; however, I have played many campaign games like Political Machine and President Forever where I modded those to the core.  In every one of those games, stamina and energy play a role.

Are there other ideas to counteract a blitzkrieg from one party?  We could simplify it totally and allow about 5 alternate characters from both parties who are controlled by the party chair who can use these characters for campaigning if they are outnumbered.  Kind of like if the GOP has 10 players and the Democrats have 6, the Democrat Chair can use 4 of the alternate characters and craft a schedule for them to balance how many hours each party gets.  This way, each party creates alternative characters who only get a schedule if their party is outnumbered.  This would be the simplest option if the others suggested are too "complicated"

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Hey, just because we're amazing you don't have to nerf our winning strats... ?

GOP is op pls nerf

Share this post


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

The state you fundraise in is just for RP apparently and doesn't affect how much you get.

Wait?  Is this correct?  Because a fundraiser in Wyoming shouldn't bring in as much campaign contributions as a fundraiser in Texas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2018 at 7:49 AM, TexAgRepublican said:

What are you talking about?

The fact that sheer numbers of players can outmaneuver good strategy. Quality vs quantity. We've been 80% quantity for the last few rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Richard said:

The fact that sheer numbers of players can outmaneuver good strategy. Quality vs quantity. We've been 80% quantity for the last few rounds.

I mean in the last few rounds have seen strategy and numbers in favour of the GOP what with the Dems fighting themselves, paying off terrorists, and then returning to fighting themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×