Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

APE

Testers
  • Content Count

    1,715
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    APE got a reaction from JamesGoblin in What would it take to get you playing again?   
    While this seems to be their plan, I would like to see a bit more complexity/strategy to it then just gank those mid PVE fight so the victors can then try to play the RNG slot machines without being ganked themselves.
    Something more like Darkness Falls from DAoC. Totally lock out good PVE content until XYZ conditions are met. Or Relics that provide guild/faction wide benefits.
    This causes players of different play styles to work together across the map/world. If a guild or faction can control everything all the time, they should have won the campaign already.
    Some PVP rewards like RR wouldn't hurt either... CU better launch in my lifetime.
  2. Like
    APE got a reaction from JamesGoblin in What would it take to get you playing again?   
    I believe it's more a problem of "Uncle Bob" as ACE calls it. The same players winning/losing is what gets people leaving. Which is usually due to systems that keep the winners winning and the losers losing.
    Lobby/eSport games are very repetitive but are massively more popular then MMOs that cram thousands of hours of content in and continue to do so over time. People love competitive games that at least attempt to balance when possible.
    Many MMOs have RvR/Arenas that are popular as well. So it isn't just FPS/RTS type games that keep people coming back.
    Campaigns have yet to show they "fix" anything. The same guilds/faction have been winning Trial after Trial. Which is due to various factors, but it remains all the same. Having more players and campaigns will likely mix it up, but if it just the same 10 guilds winning 10 campaigns over and over, doesn't really "fix" anything. Losers can choose who they lose to I guess?
    Crowfall is in a funky middle ground trying to hold on to what people enjoy about persistent MMOs but at the same time try to capture the lobby/eSport feel. Currently seems it's way too much in the Uncle Bob side. Too much prep work, not enough action/reward.
    Test is nice for having relatively quick/easy access to a full build although crafting high end stuff still takes time. However, as I've been the only player on Test more then once, can't exactly "test" things beyond what an individual can do or a small group.
    Believe it's actually still "pre-alpha" but doesn't mean much either way.
  3. Like
    APE got a reaction from oneply in What would it take to get you playing again?   
    While this seems to be their plan, I would like to see a bit more complexity/strategy to it then just gank those mid PVE fight so the victors can then try to play the RNG slot machines without being ganked themselves.
    Something more like Darkness Falls from DAoC. Totally lock out good PVE content until XYZ conditions are met. Or Relics that provide guild/faction wide benefits.
    This causes players of different play styles to work together across the map/world. If a guild or faction can control everything all the time, they should have won the campaign already.
    Some PVP rewards like RR wouldn't hurt either... CU better launch in my lifetime.
  4. Like
    APE reacted to Sloppy in Item Rewards - Official discussion thread   
    I'm actually glad you guys are adding this.
    I really love that it isn't just prefix and suffix, but a 3rd category.
    To get all 3 categories to be the exact ones you want could take weeks waiting for a drop in the quality you want.  Plus you need 3 good rolls.  (Unless you add a craft that can tweek these items later)
    For example, Say your clan wants to make a centaur spec group and you got 10 guys who need boots with windlords (running speed), Strength and Crit damage.  How long will it take to find 10 sets of that to drop in game as a purple item?  That's why people will still need a crafter to min/max everything in large quanities.
    I personally feel you should allow legendary drops from certain mobs.  Make the drop 1% chance to be legendary, 10% chance to have all 3 category's, a 1% chance to get the 3 categories you want, plus a 10% chance to get decent rolls.  You end up with the drop you want every 1 million drops (I did the math).  Plus if it's a pvp item, it's gonna break!  If it's for a crafter...lucky you, you dont have to craft 1 small item of 10 you need.  But you won't have that item in the next campaign if there's no imports!
    Examples of drop systems from other games I loved.
    Asheron's Call - Thousands of random items would drop.  You would loot macro all week, and your scanner program would pick up maybe 5 good items.  You would than use salvage to tweak those items into an uber item.  90% were low quality, and you wouldnt even waste your time salvaging them.
    Shadowbane - Magic items would drop.  I'd get excited identifying them and hoping for some max rings.  Of course your crafters/buildings would be wear 90% of your items would come from.
    Diablo - Everytime a legendary item dropped Id get so excited.  99% of the time they were garbage.  But you could salvage them!
     
    Anyways, good job and I look forward to testing.  
  5. Like
    APE reacted to blazzen in Item Rewards - Official discussion thread   
    Agreed.
    Disc rune droppers should spawn in same spot, not roaming, as a random spawn doesn't induce as much conflict as a static one. Timers are fine, however I do like the idea of being able to kill X number of monsters to force a spawn. @KrakkenSmacken had an idea that if a monster was on a 60 minute cooldown you could reduce the spawn timer by 30-60 seconds per wartribe kill in the camp. This might require some tech though. 
    Completely agree about the 100% drop percentage also. There should be a Juggernaut mob/thrall that always drops the Juggernaut rune. 
    With discipline quality being a thing I suggest the following:
    R5 and below disc droppers = white quality. These would be found in God's Reach. You could kill the disc rune dropper or just buy it off a vendor instead. 
    R6 = 75% green quality, 25% blue quality. R6 and up would not appear in God's reach. You'd have to go to a campaign world. 
    R7 = 50% green quality, 50% blue quality
    R8 = 25% green quality, 50% blue quality, 25% purple quality
    R9 = 25% blue quality, 50% purple quality, 25% legendary quality
    R10 = 50% purple quality, 50% legendary quality
    Or something along these lines to where the higher the rank the better chance you have at a higher quality discipline. Similar to how the loot tables work for harvesting nodes. 
  6. Thanks
    APE reacted to jtoddcoleman in Item Rewards - Official discussion thread   
    A few points, since there seems to be a lot of confusion and trepidation about this system.
    Part of our game vision has always been -- and remains -- fostering interconnection between players of different types.  That hasn't changed.  However, we can't pursue that goal to the exclusion of everything else.  In our current design, we haven't just encouraged interconnectivity, we have enforced it in dozens of ways.  Players aren't just more efficient or effective when working with others, they are completely dependent on others.  And by "completely dependent", I mean that.  If a player doesn't have access to a variety of crafters with a spread of disciplines, they can find themselves in a position where they simply cannot participate in the game.  And this happens early; you hit your first gate within a few hours of gameplay. If a player cannot find equipment of the appropriate type, their game play loop is broken.  This is not theoretical, or conjecture, we can see it happening now.  We can debate the reasons WHY it they might not be able to find that equipment -- I can name a dozen reasons, and I'm sure you can too -- but what cannot be debated is what happens, if a player finds themselves in this situation.
    They quit.
    Of course, our team will attempt to identify and fix every root cause that leads to this situation.  But that's not enough.  We need to have a design in place to correct for that situation, if and when it arises.  In an open world, there will be scenarios (Durenthal noted one, above) where players may simply choose not to do something.  Whenever a system is 100% dependent on the actions of other players, which we of course can't control, we are in danger of that system failing.  and if that system is critical to the game, that's a problem.  
    Randomized, disposable items is a solution to a very real problem.  This system is almost identical to the system that we used on Shadowbane.  I know that it works.
    So why don't people like it?  Let's look at the main concerns, as voiced in this thread.  Some of them I agree with, some of them I don't.
    Concern #1: "it creates more grind"
    I don't agree.  Players can ignore this system completely and use the previous method to harvest and craft items.  Adding an optional way to get something in the game that can be ignored isn't forcing an additional "grind".  Further, since these items can be sacrificed for XP, this system shortcuts the PvE loop (less grind) and since they can be salvaged, it shortcuts the harvesting loop (less grind).  For the last year, we have heard complaints from our PvP-focused backers that the balance of time I get to spend in PvP was being far out-weighed by things I have to do, in order to PvP.  This should dramatically help to address that problem.
    Concern #2: "what happens right after a wipe?"
    I agree with this concern.  This is a valid issue.  That said, I believe this is an issue that we already had, resurfacing: all of the top-tier items in the game are gated behind months of passive training.  This is definitely a problem with the current design, and once that I've been thinking about for some time (long before loot).  I have ideas for how I think we should address it, and of course I'm open to other ideas.  I absolutely agree that it needs to be resolved before launch.
    Concern #3: "this will cause even more strain on the banking system"
    This is also valid, and unfortunately I don't have a great answer... yet.  This isn't a design issue; I want more storage.  The reason for the limited bank space / guild storage options is purely technical; the engineering team has been working on a solution for some time I'll be delighted to launch it the moment it is ready.  I get that there is a lot of frustration in this area, and I look forward to the day when this problem is behind us, more than you can imagine.  
    Concern #4 (which I imagine is the most critical): "this means that crafters won't be important"
    I absolutely understand that crafters are nervous that this will undercut their role in the game.  But there is a difference between being something being "important" to me, and forcing me to be 100% dependency on it.  Food is important.  Oxygen is critical.
    We recognize this concern, and we're taking great pains to underscore the importance of crafting.  We aren't going to drop any legendary quality items.  Every attribute that can be found on a loot item can be created via crafting, but not vice versa.  Loot items are disposable; they are made to be used (and used up) very quickly.  They can be salvaged for resources and components.
    We are putting these safeguards in place because our intention is still to keep dedicated crafters at the top of the economic food chain.  We want crafting to be a full game experience and parallel advancement path. 
    However, we cannot go so far in this pursuit that we risk making a game that is literally broken for everyone else.  
    Todd
     
  7. Like
    APE reacted to Rikutatis in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    While I agree with your point in principle, I think a major issue here is that ACE has been marketing this buggy, unbalanced and incomplete pre-alpha test as something fun and exciting for people to buy into so they can drive sales (war stories, videos, social media, trials with rewards, etc.). I partially don't blame them, because I know it costs money to keep the lights running and monthly pledges is a decent chunk of their flow of revenue. On the other hand it creates this very awkward situation where they're trying to sell a fun #warstory experience when in fact it's an incomplete and rough pre-alpha test. It's even worse than many early access games on Steam. So I guess the devs need to decide whether they want to make this pre-alpha test a fun and enjoyable experience, in which case they should keep all the experimental, incomplete and hassle features for Test and keep Live as streamlined and fun as humanly possible for the trials and the war stories. Or they just dump this whole marketing thing and focus on what it is: a pre-alpha. 
     
    I completely agree with you. And I'm one of those who chose to not play it for now. 
  8. Like
    APE reacted to Wrain in What would it take to get you playing again?   
    Been saying this since the start.  You have a "CRAFT-SIMULATOR" that has absolutely ZERO fun involved.  Stop and think about what brought MMO's to top tier AAA status...
    1.  LORE.  It united you and your guild/faction of players to a common cause.  It was interesting, unique, and you carried a sense of pride behind playing there.  This game has a fragment of that.  You walk around in places named some ridiculous name because someone "purchased" the right to do so.
    2.  The classes are dry, stale, cookie-cutter builds that basically let you "fail-safe" your character.  What caused WoW to lose its playerbase of die-hards??? Welcome to the pruning and dumb-downed removal of talent tree's.  (aka character creation/personal design).  UO had it, Shadowbane had it, DAOC had it..but nope, not this game.
    3.  GRIND!!! Grind grind grind grind grind for what?  To hit your lvl cap, then rinse, repeat, and do it again on another body/vessel.  Sorry, but I said this was dumb ages ago and it still sits the same.  You want war and engaging players?  FORCE IT!  Put up mob camps with rare drops, runes, weapons/armor etc so people go there and fight over it.
    4.  No sense of character attachment whatsoever.  I have no connection with my toons and can really care-less about them.  In the end i know its a throw-away and i'll just have to build a new body thats a "prettier color, green, blue etc" so who cares.  DAOC kept players because each RR mattered...this is just another wasted crafting simulator experience.
    Noted Improvements so far:
    1. The music/atmosphere has gotten alot "darker".  This is a good thing, noticed this right away after running around for 2 minutes.  2 big thumbs up for bringing this over...Hoping to hear more.  (especially if you bring back the desert lands...that music was top-notch!)
    I'm sorry for being harsh, my friends and I had VERY high hopes for this; but its NOT nor is it even in the same tier of Shadowbane.  I'll never understand how this even happened.  The majority of pre-backers in this game wanted nostalgia back.  I still have my old Shadowbane lore/strategy guide I flip thru time to time...was so deep in complexity with builds, races, stats etc...
    Feel free to browse my old posts. Either this. dev team DROPS all this ridiculous grinding/crafting or you have yourself a busted farm simulator.
     
     
    Wrain
  9. Like
    APE got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Item Rewards - Official discussion thread   
    Looks good.
    Few questions about how "random" this will be:
    Will loot drops be based on NPC type? Ex: Can a Champion NPC drop Pistols?
    Will item quality be based on NPC rank/difficulty?
    Will items go up to Legendary or have a ceiling to keep high end crafting more valuable?
    Believe this addition will do good for the overall experience and game loop, but still hoping we see more PVP systems added prior to launch. Fighting over PVE stuff is fine, but there isn't much for larger strategy or conquest.
  10. Like
    APE got a reaction from Rikutatis in Kickstarter MMOs   
    There's strengths and weaknesses to every targeting system, but to me it comes down to implementation and how it works (or doesn't).
    CU is supposed to be more of a hybrid targeting system, with tab and free aim depending on the player/ability. Along with the A.I.R. spell interaction system, physics, and players being able to tailor each ability to their liking, I can see CU's combat being preferred over more open action systems. Not sure if the every body part is a target will make it, but that adds more challenge to any targeting system.
    CF's system could of been better but they backed away from physics and aiming to rely on raycasts and cone/aoes. To me it isn't that much different then tab if you can point your mouse in the general direction of an enemy or likely ball of enemies.
    It's possible CU's system will end up being fairly strategic which ACE seemed to initially want but got shot down due to the first implementation. Never got a chance to build it out.
  11. Like
    APE reacted to blazzen in Item Rewards - Official discussion thread   
    This is great! Nice writeup @thomasblair!
    I really like the system for having prefixes, core attribute and suffix. Reminds me of rolling gear in Shadowbane. I like the stat choices for the armor too as they just make it so much more interesting than what we currently have. 
    I also REALLY like that we will get armor/weapon drops from monsters. Aside from the more obvious pro's like allowing players to gear up quicker this also gives me hope that we may see equipped item loot in the Dregs after all. I could see people wearing "dropped gear" as an "everyday" type of armor and save the high end crafted stuff for sieges. That risk/reward component of not always wearing your best armor in fear that you might lose it is missing from the current faction campaigns in Crowfall and I certainly hope it appears in the Dregs. 
  12. Like
    APE reacted to Rikutatis in Upcoming Discipline Changes   
    I'm gonna be real, for most PVPers I've ever known just having fun PVP with good mechanics out there in the world is enough for guilds to be out and about hammering at each other all night long. Just look at any RvR game. There's usually no meaningful character progression to be gained from doing the RvR, most of that is done off stage in pve, and there's no real benefits to "winning" the faction war, it's usually inconsequential buffs. And yet in the successful games guilds still spend most of their time fighting each other nonstop on the field.  I'd expect going through the motions needed to score the objectives and win the CW would be more than enough incentive to have ppl out and about in the live game (not a pre-alpha test with 200 players and tons of bugs in its best days), without the need to go too overboard with overly complicated grind mechanics that stack layer on top of layer of farming and grinding and crafting. But that's just my personal taste, I guess. Also note that I said going "too overboard", but never said remove the need to farm mats completely. 
    Regardless, it seems like refineries have the potential to really contribute to the "fun factor" of this gear grind at least, and with these news that specific NPCs will have specific discs, it should make the disc grind more bearable as well. But I'll probably stay away from testing until more of these systems are implemented. 
  13. Haha
    APE reacted to KDSProm in Upcoming Discipline Changes   
    Download Game Client
    Crowfall has not launched and is currently in early testing.
    That means the game will have bugs (finding and fixing them is why we test), and some skills, features and content are still in development and not yet available. By downloading the game client you are acknowledging that Crowfall has not launched yet and may contain bugs and missing features

    ^^
    Feedback is one thing. The situation being acknowledged is the best we can have atm. Putting more pressure on ACE is not helping. Most likely will lead to them starting to ignore 'the noise'. If you feel like making noise and you actually care about the final product then take a break!
  14. Like
    APE reacted to McTan in Upcoming Discipline Changes   
    Smaller and smaller improvements that take more and more time.
    The real key is that what you are asking/allowing players to do between improvements is very fun.
    Eyes on the prize, devs! Good combat, great politics, real victories (not just points, substance)
  15. Haha
    APE got a reaction from JamesGoblin in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    Which is why transparent is on my list of dumb cringe marketing buzz words. Along with dynamic, emergent, sandbox, and a few choice phrases.
  16. Like
    APE got a reaction from Marth in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    Transparency comes in many forms, but it is humorous that every game in development seems to have folks that say "X has been the most transparent ever."
    ACE thought there was a shortcut to creating a MMO, at least based on their initial timelines and expectations.
    It's more like 99.5 - 99.9% as well. Which is fine but all that transparency doesn't seem to help compared to other games in transparent alpha's that pull in more.
  17. Like
    APE got a reaction from JamesGoblin in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    Transparency comes in many forms, but it is humorous that every game in development seems to have folks that say "X has been the most transparent ever."
    ACE thought there was a shortcut to creating a MMO, at least based on their initial timelines and expectations.
    It's more like 99.5 - 99.9% as well. Which is fine but all that transparency doesn't seem to help compared to other games in transparent alpha's that pull in more.
  18. Like
    APE got a reaction from JamesGoblin in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    The issues that seem to be annoying people aren't remedied from one patch to another or several patches later. It is more the way in which ACE is choosing to implement systems and features that are some what backwards.
    There should be bandaids or placeholder options to alleviate some of the problems that arise when something is added prior to other necessary pieces to the puzzle.
    It's their choice to run LIVE like a "game" and expect players to experience it as such. They could treat it like a TEST (which it is) and provide tools/settings that make playing/testing less of a hassle regardless of whatever features they are adding or will add 6 months down the line.
    I'd rather they get big picture stuff done first prior to fine tuning things, but looking at patch notes and changes, seems ACE continues to attempt to fine tune things that then break other things or better yet become irrelevant once they add another new system in that changes/breaks a whole list of other things. If they are several builds a head in studio, seems strange that they do things like this. From recent comments, I doubt they are a full build a head at times. More like everyone is working on something that eventually gets bundled into a something else. Which could explain why different updates/features don't line up so well and are causing the critical feedback.
    No easy choices here, but there are definitely steps they could do to please those being critical without needing to do extra work.
    Not everyone wants to see the sausage made but if only 50 people do, going to be rather limited feedback. Same goes for this being a niche, if only 500 show up at launch, going to be a short lived game.
  19. Like
    APE reacted to Ussiah in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    I hate this mentality of "just dont play"
    I see it from so many who have made that choice. I seriously am starting to believe they'd rather just run us all off from trying to play the game, if they want that just have us test(and fix what we state is broken) and stop doing campaigns with rewards.
    @APEis perfectly reasonable with what he is saying. ACE has tried to have us both "play" and "test" yet by doing both they really aren't supporting either in a coordinated way.
    If they want us to be able to "play" then they should understand criticism of how the game currently plays and maybe the people who say "just dont play" can stop criticizing us for wanting to be able to.
    If they want us to "test" they should give us all the tools to test without the grind and listen to our feedback/fix what is majorly broken before going on.
     
  20. Like
    APE got a reaction from Marth in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    The issues that seem to be annoying people aren't remedied from one patch to another or several patches later. It is more the way in which ACE is choosing to implement systems and features that are some what backwards.
    There should be bandaids or placeholder options to alleviate some of the problems that arise when something is added prior to other necessary pieces to the puzzle.
    It's their choice to run LIVE like a "game" and expect players to experience it as such. They could treat it like a TEST (which it is) and provide tools/settings that make playing/testing less of a hassle regardless of whatever features they are adding or will add 6 months down the line.
    I'd rather they get big picture stuff done first prior to fine tuning things, but looking at patch notes and changes, seems ACE continues to attempt to fine tune things that then break other things or better yet become irrelevant once they add another new system in that changes/breaks a whole list of other things. If they are several builds a head in studio, seems strange that they do things like this. From recent comments, I doubt they are a full build a head at times. More like everyone is working on something that eventually gets bundled into a something else. Which could explain why different updates/features don't line up so well and are causing the critical feedback.
    No easy choices here, but there are definitely steps they could do to please those being critical without needing to do extra work.
    Not everyone wants to see the sausage made but if only 50 people do, going to be rather limited feedback. Same goes for this being a niche, if only 500 show up at launch, going to be a short lived game.
  21. Like
    APE reacted to Cherub007 in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    A few things that require enchancing in my opinion:
    I don't need so many indicators with my opponents healthbar - the one above his head is enough (basically there is really too much stuff on the screen - try out minimalistic style pls)
    The reticle while aiming is too big - it covers whole enemy and is really annoying.
    And the most frustrating one - I don't want the game to remember the status of previously opened windows. Whenever I hit ESC after doing something I don't want the window to pop-up again, while looting, or just checking eq. It's one of the reasons I don't play this game daily - it's too annoying as it is right now.
    I hope that You read all of this, thanks.
     
  22. Like
    APE reacted to Fefner in my frustration with crowdfunding, explained   
    If having a live server running makes things more stressful and slows progress down, why don't you close the live servers down and only bring them up now and again? keep test up when you need stuff testing and when you want to show off certain stuff that is finished, that's when you can open up the live servers for ppl to mess around on for 5 or so days. This will also help in player burnout.
  23. Like
    APE reacted to McTan in Upcoming Discipline Changes   
    Two questions woven together here.
    (1) How much should better gear improve your character?
    (2) How hard should better gear be to get?
    People usually have problems with (2) precisely because of the answer to (1).
    Disciplines, and gear in general, being too big of power leaps leads to better gear being necessary, and so access comes under heavy scrutiny.
    Make white vessel, fully leveled with disciplines and gear be 90% of maximum possible statistical power.
    All Greens 94%
    All Blues 97.5%
    All Purples 99%
    All Oranges 100%
    Then make each of those improvements exponentially harder to achieve in time and RNG, and you've got yourself a sustainable game that supports a long-term economy.
     
     
  24. Like
    APE reacted to Ble in the game was too grindy and then made it more grindy- RNGx3   
    Another reason you might not be min maxing is because you don't play?
    And I can't fault you for that, 90% of the people have decided to do the same.
    Response: Yes, its alpha.  But the people here want to play the game. If the testers have value to the game devs, they'll need to implement things in a less-painful way.  You do this by ensuring the "place holder" is not a tedious horrible experience, or you wait until the system thats having its place held is implemented to remove the aspect of the game that it's supposed to provide.
    On the other hand, if the testers are not important to the game dev team, then yeah, keep doing this.  Its their prerogative.  But if you look at the ghost town this game has become, you got to recognize the effects of these changes.  You havent been here for most of the time its gotten really bad.  It's just not fun.  It comes down to them deciding if they want testers or not (at least for this portion of the alpha).
  25. Like
    APE reacted to jtoddcoleman in my frustration with crowdfunding, explained   
    Hey folks, just a quick note, apparently some people took my statement on yesterday’s livestream that “I will never do crowdfunding again” as frustration with community feedback.  Nothing could be further from the truth; this game wouldn’t be here without you and frankly won’t be successful without you.  
    That said, I was being earnest about my feelings on crowdfunding; I think it’s a particularly challenging way to develop a game for a few reasons:
    1. You have to build excitement/hype at the beginning of the project, and it’s impossible to keep that excitement up for the duration of the project.  That means your fighting an uphill battle of fatigue in the press and the audience going into launch.  Not good.
    2. Supporting a “live” service for the duration of development, with the accompanying build process, deployment pipeline and operational environment is very expensive and time consuming.
    3. The process exposes all of our missteps to the world, and that sucks.  No one would prefer to make their mistakes in front of a live studio audience.
    4. The nature of the beast is that you're putting undercooked systems and unbalanced tables in front of players.  As you know, this can often lead to experiences that are not fun. Managing expectations and keeping players happy is especially difficult under these conditions.
    All of that said, I apologize if it came across in any way as a swipe at you guys.  It absolutely wasn’t intended that way.  It can be hard to get feedback some times, but I want to make this game great for you and I fully recognize that we can’t do it without you.
    Next time, I’ll go get the funding lined up first and ask you for your feedback —without also asking for your money.  That’s all.
    Thanks,
    Todd
×
×
  • Create New...