Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Neil Brock

Official Football Manager 2015 Feedback Thread 15.3.0

Recommended Posts

Im Orient- small squad and injuries. Because of this I want to bring them back with match fitness via the reserves, as happens in real life and avoid more injuries. Logic. As I said they dont give us the tools (Ie the responses) to explain this and dont make the players aware of this.

There really is no need.

I do as I have always done which is throw them in to a full match from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There really is no need.

I do as I have always done which is throw them in to a full match from the start.

You might but this is a simulation, we have match fitness etc for a reason. Point is I should be able to 1) communicate this to the players, 2) the players should be aware that they arent just dropped in for their own good. Constantly in "too many injury) threads we are advised to (quite correctly) ease players in- so therefore we should be able to manage this accordingly. There is a need in a simulation to do this as it injuries when players arent fully fit is a factor to consider- its why we have the nice option to put players in for reserve games for X mins until match fit- its there for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there a reason why my .fmf and .tac files I used in 15.2 are no longer showing up for 15.3? The tac is not longer showing up in the archived list and the fmf is not longer showing up when i go to import it. Any way to fix this?

Bump. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never advised anyone to ease players back from injury and I constantly have less injuries than most on the forums.

Sub appearances do next to nothing for gaining match fitness, to improve significantly they have to play from the start and finish the 90mins. It might not be what happens IRL but it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is obviously a problem with players getting red cards, mostly those who are already booked, lost me the Italian Supercup against Juventus, when Marquinhos got red in 88 and Inler in 90+1, 2-2 FT, 5-3 for them after extra, me with 2 men down, also in Serie A fixtures there are alot of red cards given on every matchday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like this isn't supposed to happen in this game

133cbd48a6a12a977f767e0759b8a24d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Provide some details like which team are you playing, formation used, team instructions...

maybe post some screenshots of the 8-8 and 9-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extremely high shot and goal count matches are not that uncommon in my game. Just in the last two match days I saw Bayern beating Dortmund 7-1, and Liverpool beating Tottenham 8-0 (47 shots for Liverpool in this match, Balotelli scored 5 goals). No red cards. Scores like these should be extremely rare. When did Liverpool give Tottenham a beating like that last time? I am not sure 47 shots is even possible. That's like 1 shot every 2 minutes :thdn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Provide some details like which team are you playing, formation used, team instructions...

maybe post some screenshots of the 8-8 and 9-1

Dont worry about screenshots. PKMs would be infinitely more useful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also players signing for very low transfer fees, at Napoli i signed Marquinhos for 4.2 mil, while reading some news IRL where PSG is demanding 40 million for him at least. That was the case in FM before the patch also, with PSG demanding alot of money for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First game back on the update, started new career with Celta Vigo. Played 3 at the back, 1 striker and flooded the midfield. This was against Getafe, and the result ended 7-4! Although I won, to go in at half time 4-0 up made me quit the game immediately after the match finished. The Spanish league never has games like that, rarely even over 2.5 goals!

I think this game would be one of the best to date, if the amount of goals were cut out. I am echoing what most people have said on here, but does it really take 6 months to eliminate that? Quite poor on SI behalf, but hopefully you guys are working on a final solution soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what is worth I started a thread on the ME bugs forum about high scores, high shot count. Let's see what happens...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of users run on 'Attacking' or 'Control' for entire seasons, throw in Very Fluid/Fluid and you have a recipe for some high scoring games.

I do this, but then i don't moan when i get high scoring games, the Match Engine is merely reflecting my input as a user, which is good :thup:

I don't think in the real world any manager takes this approach, they may be attacking for certain periods in certain games but not for 90 minutes, week in week out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the whole Fluidity concept needs an overhaul. Instead, we should have separate instructions for vertical compactness, creative freedom (in some way, maybe not as it was earlier) and other instructions affected by Fluidity. Also, horizontal spread (narrow-wide) should be looked into, teams should still be able to play narrow formation (narrow 4-4-2, for example) without focusing the passes through the middle. Fluidity just isn't right. Instructions for controling space between the lines and width should be improved. Think of Sacchi, whole team in 25x25m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For what is worth I started a thread on the ME bugs forum about high scores, high shot count. Let's see what happens...

I think your theory about three man defences has some mileage.

I also think the team mentalities have been tweaked this version and seem to be one step higher than previous versions. Standard seems similar to what control was previously, counter like standard previously etc which overall leads to more direct play and more shots/goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that the whole Fluidity concept needs an overhaul. Instead, we should have separate instructions for vertical compactness, creative freedom (in some way, maybe not as it was earlier) and other instructions affected by Fluidity. Also, horizontal spread (narrow-wide) should be looked into, teams should still be able to play narrow formation (narrow 4-4-2, for example) without focusing the passes through the middle. Fluidity just isn't right. Instructions for controling space between the lines and width should be improved. Think of Sacchi, whole team in 25x25m.

+1 all agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For what is worth I started a thread on the ME bugs forum about high scores, high shot count. Let's see what happens...

The issue in Argentina with certain sides has been acknowledged as under review. There is also a comment about factors affecting shot counts in some situations:

Thanks for the report Andu. The problem specific to Argentina is known about and our Argentinian Head Researcher is going to look at the data to see where improvements can be made. If you have a look at the formations that Banfield have set in the DB, you will see that they use a flat 3-4-1-2 as their attacking formation and a flat 3-4-3 as their secondary formation. Both of these are extremely aggressive and will naturally create goal-fests. In reality, it may be that these formations are better represented by simply dropping the wingers back to wing-back positions.

Regarding the more general issue of high shot counts. In certain scenarios the AI tactical decision making process can leave a lot to be desired. When these circumstances combine, it is possible to see unrealistic levels of shots. Of course, once you get to 2023 and the human has overpowered the AIs squad-building capacity, extraordinarily strong human-controlled teams are able to further distort this by overwhelming the opposition. Making the AI 'smarter' is certainly something we want to do, but it's by no means an easy feat.

Any examples you have of matches which you believe to be outside the realms of reality, please upload them and they can help us to further investigate this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes Cougar the balance is off in this patch.

It's too easy for the big teams to finish games with 35+ shots per game against weak teams which can also result in ridiculos scorelines in some cases.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/421760-Too-many-goals-again

you can post examples of abnormal results in this thread...

With the relevant .pkm or save game evidence, please :thup:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/406157

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/405113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please continue the debate in the link posted by Andu1 if you have any examples to provide of high-scoring matches. I have never, ever, seen an 8-8 match, so I'd be particularly interested in seeing that!

On the Argentina issue, Banfield are an anomaly we're aware of. In particular, formations utilising three at the back with no DM or WB cover are asking for trouble. The match engine is playing out as expected. I may be mistaken, but I'd be surprised if any manager in real life would ever play in this way. Yet Banfield possess an attacking formation (3-4-1-2) and a secondary formation (3-4-3) lacking in this basic shape. It's something our Argentinian HR is aware of and he is going to reconsider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe part of the reason.

I take it you are managing in Argentina then or have set the league to "All"

What about cleaner?

In the same boat as you. It seems Andu1 is on to something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please continue the debate in the link posted by Andu1 if you have any examples to provide of high-scoring matches. I have never, ever, seen an 8-8 match, so I'd be particularly interested in seeing that!

On the Argentina issue, Banfield are an anomaly we're aware of. In particular, formations utilising three at the back with no DM or WB cover are asking for trouble. The match engine is playing out as expected. I may be mistaken, but I'd be surprised if any manager in real life would ever play in this way. Yet Banfield possess an attacking formation (3-4-1-2) and a secondary formation (3-4-3) lacking in this basic shape. It's something our Argentinian HR is aware of and he is going to reconsider.

Yes I used an attacking 343 wide diamond in the first season with Lazio. This created some high-scoring matches naturally, and as I expected, but there were some unexpected issues as well as expected ones:

Expected:

* Wide gap between attack and defense caused problems with getting out of defense in some matches (although I never managed to pinpoint exactly what made those opponents manage to do so while others didn't)

* Complete domination in some matches, but also a big risk of breakdowns

* Nemesis: 433 with attacking inside forwards crossing from one flank to the other (a little bit more nemesis than I hoped)

Unexpected:

* Many opponents used a 5-4-1 formation (or 3-3-2-1-1 if you want), and mostly I destroyed them because my wide midfielders dragged their defense apart - but sometimes they effectively stopped me. I don't know what caused these fluctuations, exactly.

* My friend's 442 tactic that he downloaded from somewhere effectively stopped me too. When he used an attacking 433 narrow formation I destroyed him 7-0, so he had to employ full backs to stop my wingers. Apparently, that 442 is set to Contain, but he still scores many goals. That was surprising...

Another thing I noticed was that using players who lacked match fitness was a real downfall. They moved the ball -so- slowly that they got caught in possession all the time. Once I realized that, I now let the reserve team deal with them until they are match fit - no exceptions. It is entirely possible that unrealistic football and inexplicable poor performances are caused at least in part by using players who have less than ~85% match fitness and/or who have not settled into the team yet. I suspect that "adventurous" tactics requiring quick, simultaneous movements and combinations to break down defenses are even more at risk when employing that kind of player than the more laidback tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come to think of it, I did notice something around 3 man defences in my save. I'm Lincoln, and my nemesis appears to be Gibraltar United over the years. They've often got my number. This season the matches took on extra importance as they got a lot closer to us in terms of quality, so I really paid close attention to the matches (I usually gloss over the domestic matches thanks to a hilariously good record in them). They usually play a flat 3-5-2, with me recently playing a flat 4-4-2 with concentration on attacking wide players.

They beat me in the first match 6-3, which ended a run of 294 matches without defeat in the league (no typo, as I said, domestic games were pretty easy). Three man defence there. Second time we met, I won 6-0. Again, 3 man defence. Third match, it was 3-0 to me at half time, with my wide midfielders and strikers having an absolute ball. Long switched balls into acres of space, and then into my strikers to score. Just looked so easy. They won 4-3, obviously without reply, with my side seemingly incapable of dealing with them.

Not sure what to make of that, other than the 3 man defence formations being ludicrously hard to predict, with wild swings in how the team plays. In those three matches, it was a pretty even split between those two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, we're not saying that a three-man defence should not work. However, I would argue that in real life, any manager employing three men at CB will also be using either two WBs (not MR/MLs) or one or two DMs to provide cover. Anything less than that is inherently aggressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to be clear, we're not saying that a three-man defence should not work. However, I would argue that in real life, any manager employing three men at CB will also be using either two WBs (not MR/MLs) or one or two DMs to provide cover. Anything less than that is inherently aggressive.

Would you say that Counter (no instructions) could realistically be used with a 343?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to be clear, we're not saying that a three-man defence should not work. However, I would argue that in real life, any manager employing three men at CB will also be using either two WBs (not MR/MLs) or one or two DMs to provide cover. Anything less than that is inherently aggressive.

I agree which begs the question why some AI teams/managers have set options using the likes of flat 343 or flat 352 :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please continue the debate in the link posted by Andu1 if you have any examples to provide of high-scoring matches. I have never, ever, seen an 8-8 match, so I'd be particularly interested in seeing that!

On the Argentina issue, Banfield are an anomaly we're aware of. In particular, formations utilising three at the back with no DM or WB cover are asking for trouble. The match engine is playing out as expected. I may be mistaken, but I'd be surprised if any manager in real life would ever play in this way. Yet Banfield possess an attacking formation (3-4-1-2) and a secondary formation (3-4-3) lacking in this basic shape. It's something our Argentinian HR is aware of and he is going to reconsider.

Just to be clear, we're not saying that a three-man defence should not work. However, I would argue that in real life, any manager employing three men at CB will also be using either two WBs (not MR/MLs) or one or two DMs to provide cover. Anything less than that is inherently aggressive.

I'm not sure if I am understanding you here Tony but are you saying that only Banfield are using a 3-4-3, 3-5-2 with no wing backs or any form of 3 at the back with no cover?

I only ask as I have played against quite a few teams playing 3 at the back with no WBs or DMs for cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to be clear, we're not saying that a three-man defence should not work. However, I would argue that in real life, any manager employing three men at CB will also be using either two WBs (not MR/MLs) or one or two DMs to provide cover. Anything less than that is inherently aggressive.

Let me just say, I don't know how many posts I wrote about this very issue, it's nice to see someone from SI agree with me. :)

Now, if you guys could explain the A-B-C of football to the researchers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm noticing an issue regarding contracts in my Iceland save. It has happened several times that when I try to offer a part time contract to a player on a non-contract, he rejects me and signs a new non-contract with his current team. That's all fair and square, but this happens with the same player many times within the space of a few weeks. His non-contract never improves (same appearence fee etc), but a message says a new one is signed regardless (accompanied by the "deliged to be working under [current manager]"

Maybe it's a bug, maybe it isn't. I just find it a bit illogical that a player signs a new and unimproved contract ten times in two weeks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree which begs the question why some AI teams/managers have set options using the likes of flat 343 or flat 352 :confused:

Formations selected are based on the formations set at a database level. It seems as if some of the formations set by some researchers are unusual 3-at-the-back variants with no DM and no WBL/R selected. It would be interesting to know how "newgen" managers select formations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure if I am understanding you here Tony but are you saying that only Banfield are using a 3-4-3, 3-5-2 with no wing backs or any form of 3 at the back with no cover?

I only ask as I have played against quite a few teams playing 3 at the back with no WBs or DMs for cover.

No, Tony means that Banfield are one known anomalous team which fall into this category of using inappropriate formations, and that the issue may well affect other sides whose database set formations are some variant of 3-0-X-X-X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Formations selected are based on the formations set at a database level. It seems as if some of the formations set by some researchers are unusual 3-at-the-back variants with no DM and no WBL/R selected. It would be interesting to know how "newgen" managers select formations.

I can tell a thing or two about how "newgen" managers choose formation.

Their formation is primarily chosen from the nation preffered formations for each nation set in the editor.

that being said, when they switch teams , they sometime change their formation either based on the previous managers formation or either based on the nation preffered formation( this part is still unclear to me though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, im the HR for Argentina Database. I have been onto this issue trying to figure out what is wrong.

Evidence seems to point to manager attributes and teams formation. What struck us at the beginning was that most of this info was already the same by last version, it wastweaked here and there. Particularly Banfield did not change much as they kept the same manager after promotion.

Despite these minor changes, the outcome with the ME was totally unexpected so I raised the flag with this at SI as Tony mentions.

Banfield is quite a beautiful example, as they have played 3-4-3 in real life with no WBs. They created lot of scoring chances during their stay at second division (and relayed on the fact that most teams did not punch back). And they struggled a little in first division and have now reverted to different formations after transfer window.

Im making a complete sweep of every manager and tactics formation for next version. I hope that will tone down the amount of goals per game.

Those who are interested in this issue and have been collecting info about games and tactis in the Arg League feel free to contact my by PM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be interesting to know how "newgen" managers select formations.

Maybe they could create more rigid sets of formations to choose from: standard, defensive, attacking. A manager cannot have, say, 3-4-3 as preferred standard formation, but it could be his preferred attacking formation. To be even more rigid, they could somehow link different formations, so that a manager whose preferred formation is 5-3-2 will likely have 3-4-1-2 as preferred attacking formation and 5-4-1 diamond as preferred defensive formation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, Tony means that Banfield are one known anomalous team which fall into this category of using inappropriate formations, and that the issue may well affect other sides whose database set formations are some variant of 3-0-X-X-X.

It must be down in part to how the AI manager selects roles and duties as part of the formation, as I used the flat 3-5-2 in my current save multiple times with no sort of effects like what we are seeing here. It was vulnerable down the flanks, yes, but it was no worse than any other 3 at the back formation in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, Tony means that Banfield are one known anomalous team which fall into this category of using inappropriate formations, and that the issue may well affect other sides whose database set formations are some variant of 3-0-X-X-X.

From what i've seen in my Palermo save, Sampdoria employ a similarly aggressive formation - typically seems to be 3-4-3 with 3 outright strikers. Predictably, they've been the free-wheeling entertainers of the competition (my gloriously fluent Palermo aside, of course...), registering several heavy wins (though nothing outrageous like 7/8/9 goal margins) and high-scoring draws. They're sitting in and around the Europa league spots in the 1st season, which seems fair enough given that their preferred front 3 are the gifted trio of Eto'o, Muriel and Éder....plus they have the irritating bonus of boasting on loan both the best goalkeeper (Viviano) and defender (Munoz) under contract to Palermo post-patch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all, im the HR for Argentina Database. I have been onto this issue trying to figure out what is wrong.

Evidence seems to point to manager attributes and teams formation. What struck us at the beginning was that most of this info was already the same by last version, it wastweaked here and there. Particularly Banfield did not change much as they kept the same manager after promotion.

Despite these minor changes, the outcome with the ME was totally unexpected so I raised the flag with this at SI as Tony mentions.

Banfield is quite a beautiful example, as they have played 3-4-3 in real life with no WBs. They created lot of scoring chances during their stay at second division (and relayed on the fact that most teams did not punch back). And they struggled a little in first division and have now reverted to different formations after transfer window.

Im making a complete sweep of every manager and tactics formation for next version. I hope that will tone down the amount of goals per game.

Those who are interested in this issue and have been collecting info about games and tactis in the Arg League feel free to contact my by PM.

Thanks Keyzer, my knowledge of Argentinian football is not the best, so it's interesting to hear the developments at Banfield and that they have since turned away from a flat 3-4-3.

It's never easy to balance research with the match engine. It's something that always has the potential to throw up strange situations and it's by no means the only factor in some of these matches with high numbers of shots on goal. We'll continue to look at any examples of these anomalous matches that you guys want to throw our way and that will help shape how we approach development of AI tactics in future. I do believe the current match engine has a nice balance though, and aside from these anomalies, it plays well and turns out realistic statistics.

I'd also like to highlight these real life matches. I'm in no way trying to deflect any valid criticisms, but it does show that these sorts of matches happen in real life too. In the first link PSG drew 1-1 with Ajaccio after having 39 shots on goal, while in the second Brentford (in the English 2nd tier) racked up 43 shots on goal in a league match.

http://www.ligue1.com/ligue1/article/week-2-review-psg-off-the-pace-despite-cavani-goal.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31498696

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone please tell me if its official that there will not be any more ME updates for FM 15?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could someone please tell me if its official that there will not be any more ME updates for FM 15?

It's official. Until it isn't.

There are no more planned patches - so unless something serious surfaces there are no more patches.

Also, note that hotfixes aren't patches in the same sense. There tends to be no formal plan for hotfixes, they're done on an as & when basis so if there is going to be any, they'll just more likely surface on Steam without any real notification - like with other hotfixes over the past couple of years.

You don't even get a note about hotfixes with Blizzard on World of Warcraft - as they can just make the changes server side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could someone please tell me if its official that there will not be any more ME updates for FM 15?

You'll never get an "official" answer either way. There will be an update if there needs to be one in SI's mind. There are none planned, but that doesn't mean there won't be any. Beyond that, no-one knows, not even SI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not bothered reading above posts, but hope injuries will be toned down big time in a hotfix.

2 games, 7 injuries

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not bothered reading above posts, but hope injuries will be toned down big time in a hotfix.

2 games, 7 injuries

I'm not sure that two games qualify as a big enough sample to make a conclusive judgement.

No changes were made directly to injury rates in the last update, and no further changes are planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not bothered reading above posts, but hope injuries will be toned down big time in a hotfix.

2 games, 7 injuries

They won't be because there's nothing wrong with injury levels,

Injury levels haven't been changed since release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patch 15.3 -

-The Goalkeepers trying to save shots but the ball goes into the net like there`s nothing there

-The Keepers keep parrying shots that are going way out

-The central defenders can`t mark

-The amount of wrong passing is astonishing

-Players keep running out of bounds even when there's nobody closing down on them

-The back pass to keeper was not fixed, most of them going outside and the other team has a corner kick

-The physical skills don`t matter, a player with 17-18 pace and acceleration can`t run faster than a player with 12-13 pace acceleration

-The number of CCCs does not matter, if the AI can`t beat you at normal play, they will score a few from 20-30 yardz

-The Mentality doesn`t work : the team will play the same, even if you select OVERLOAD, ATTACKING or COUNTER ATTACK

-The exaggerated number of injuries

-The exaggerated number of goals scored from distance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patch 15.3 -

-The Goalkeepers trying to save shots but the ball goes into the net like there`s nothing there

-The Keepers keep parrying shots that are going way out

-The central defenders can`t mark

-The amount of wrong passing is astonishing

-Players keep running out of bounds even when there's nobody closing down on them

-The back pass to keeper was not fixed, most of them going outside and the other team has a corner kick

-The physical skills don`t matter, a player with 17-18 pace and acceleration can`t run faster than a player with 12-13 pace acceleration

-The number of CCCs does not matter, if the AI can`t beat you at normal play, they will score a few from 20-30 yardz

-The Mentality doesn`t work : the team will play the same, even if you select OVERLOAD, ATTACKING or COUNTER ATTACK

-The exaggerated number of injuries

-The exaggerated number of goals scored from distance

Please provide .pkm's and post these in the bug forum if they are happening the way you say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall I quite enjoy the patch. It seems for me , unlike others , they scorelines are realistic. I'm not seeing any 8-8s , 7-0s , 8-0s or anything. I've only played a decent amount of time with Villarreal so far and a lot of my players are getting injured , however I'm not putting it down to the patch I feel it's because the players are quite light-weight and that probably intesifies injuries because it's always the same set of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patch 15.3 -

-The Goalkeepers trying to save shots but the ball goes into the net like there`s nothing there

-The Keepers keep parrying shots that are going way out

-The central defenders can`t mark

-The amount of wrong passing is astonishing

-Players keep running out of bounds even when there's nobody closing down on them

-The back pass to keeper was not fixed, most of them going outside and the other team has a corner kick

-The physical skills don`t matter, a player with 17-18 pace and acceleration can`t run faster than a player with 12-13 pace acceleration

-The number of CCCs does not matter, if the AI can`t beat you at normal play, they will score a few from 20-30 yardz

-The Mentality doesn`t work : the team will play the same, even if you select OVERLOAD, ATTACKING or COUNTER ATTACK

-The exaggerated number of injuries

-The exaggerated number of goals scored from distance

I agree with 3 points, keepers parrying shots that are clearly miles off target, too many goals from distance (inc.direct free kicks) and i am also getting a lot more injuries. (could be co-incidence)

Strongly disagree re physical skills, i've seen some insane bursts of pace from quick players leaving defenders for dead. Much more evident on this update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...