Jump to content

My View on the Skill System Vol1

Mc Draken

Recommended Posts

Good day! I wish to share my view on the changes of A18 regarding the skill system and technological progression of the player troughout the game. Also i wish to advise alternatives that are probably better, at least to my knowledge.



I advise to either use a CLASS system, or an ATTRIBUTE system. But not this half-assed mutant that posesses booth sides' negative aspects but fail to capitalize on their positives.


A CLASS SYSTEM is about picking one class, and with it, choosing a set of playstyle. They are usually made so, that they are worth to specialize and focus into solely one of them, becouse each of them exclusively unlocks their own aspects. (For example a berserker class unlocks high level axes performing good on their level. But divideing your points between a berserk and -lets say- a ranger tree means you will unlock booth mediocre axes and mediocre bows. So booth will underperform, but for the advantage of versatility. But they additively grant bonuses, not in a synergizeing form)


So class systems are designed so they are all balanced compared to eachother and they all can stand on their own.


Class systems has advantages like simplicity, straightforwardness, enhanced roleplay value but only on set roles(its easy to play as a berserker even if the player lacks fantasy, you just have to dump points into it). Usually coupled with fast gameplay, or other primary factors, next to an only secondary, complimentary skill system.


Class systems(or cast systems if restricted to one) are used by games that are usually focusing on how each different player in different classes work together as a group, instead of how different attributes within ONE player works out as an individual character. So mostly strict, medium sized COOP or Team pvp games with fast action(DeepRockGalactic, Killing floor, dead island, vermintide) are using clean class systems.


In Class systems its harder to handle utility, non-combat aspects of the game, except if the class is already a distinctively support type. (Thats why are you struggle at placing various resource gathering and technology perks between the "classes". For example, Mining is kinda required, if you place it at Str, str will be required. Its really hard to balance and work with. Also it usually heads into problems, like why would agility has anything to do with skinning animals. Well, Becouse agility would be weak without it. But this still doesent make it sensible. I will talk about Int and technology later)


AN ATTRIBUTE SYSTEM on the other hand, is about representing different character properties(either 1/1 or grouped into the attributes) and they all together can describe a character completely. They are usually designed in mind, so each attribute are easy to invest into at a basic level, but costly to specialize into. They are ususally mix and match together really well, synergizeing multiplicatively even on the same aspects. (Like str gives melee dmg, agi gives attspeed so they multiplicatively synergyze on the same aspect of melee dps. requiring booth for maximized performance. (Class systems are usually additive, giving only versatility))


Gaining a basic level on multiple attributes represents "learning the basics" to survive in the game world. Every character has some of each attributes as a must have(you can play niche characters like a dumb but strong fella, but solely for fun and enchanced roleplaying values, since obviously your dumbness will come out as a negative, that you have to overcome. Its not necessarily bad, usually these characters are the most fun), but not necessarily all of them required. Usually if a game works with a low amount of attributes(like 3, as agi/str/int f.e.), than each character possesses some of each attributes probably(like in warcraft f.e.). But in more advanced RPGs with 5 or 6 attributes(7days A17, fallout) its usually only necessary to have 2 or 3 of the attributes on some level for a healthy character versatility.


Later, after haveing this "healthy versatility" to begin with, and gathering the necessities to survive, the progression is about specializing into the more destinctive features as your choosen high level approach to thrive in the game(or in real life).


So again, easy to invest a bit, but costly to master it. The characters will start to distinctively differ from midgame, where they can accurately pick their approach. (But in 7days with 6 different attributes, even the early game have multiple options for the same aspect, its not a limiting factor, dont worry)


Attribute systems have the advantages of total and absolute freedom, the required complexity to be invested into it as a player, and the absolute preciseness of roleplaying while having an almost endless combination of traits. You can draw and create any character with pinpoint accuracy in a well made attribute framework.


Attribute systems handle support and utility aspects really well, has a higher potential roleplaying factor but struggle in fast-paced, action packed environments where there is no time to draw and paint your character carefully.


Games like fallout or kenshi use clean attribute systems, booth have a slower paced overall experience, with lots of non-combat oriented elements.


MIXING is usually a good idea, where the enviroment(the game) can purposefully use the advantages of booth approaches. Usually in larger scale, combat oriented games that require a high number of character variations(more than a class system could provide), but dont want to dive deep into a clear attribute system becouse the game isnt complex enough on this matter to justify it.

Like Proper MMO RPGS (here character variety is needed but its too combat and item oriented for a deeper role-playing experience). In these games you pick a Cast(its a restrictive class system, you technicaly pick one class at character creation, and you are restricted to it) but later you can fine tune it with attributes within the cast's boundaries. I dont think thats the case with 7days, so i advise against any kind of mixed system.


CURRENTLY 7dtd has a weird mixed system.


- Mutually exclusive skills restricted into a narrow category for each weapon type,

- "Classes" that you want to overally balance compared to eachother, and make them able to stand on their own.

- Simplistic approaches on combat perks. "Just pick one and go"

- struggled utility perks.


These are the traits of a class system.


- the main trees are actually attributes.

- the attributes are cheap to start but costly to max out.

- there are some general perks that gives bonuses for a wide range of items(Furry of blows, Run n Gun, etc) fit for an attribute tree, next to the category restricted perks(like skill).

- many important utility perks.


These are the properties of an attribute system.


Pls, pick one and stick to it.




I advise to either go with a Class system:

- rename your attributes into classes, something like WARRIOR/BRAWLER/SHARPSHOOTER/RANGER/TINKERER

- start to properly balance them out, while lower the potenty of the utility aspects(so classes without a mining bonus still can properly mine, but be a bit less effective at it) So cheap, 3 level perks with mediocre bonuses(30%) at max lvl.

- make the game a lot more interesting so players wont notice how shallow the perk progression is(without even the slightest of irony). Just need more action.

- Be sure to make all of them equally powerful(balanced coop pve/pvp) and each equally optimal for a playtrough(solo/coop).

- while each class has to be equally strong overall, not each perk necessarily has to be equally strong. (Since you are already deep into one class, you have to live with whatever perks you find there, the only important thing is, so the class overall is have to be equally useful compared to others, so your decision is justified.)


- OR, probably the better approach, to create a proper



- making sure each attribute is NOT enough versatile so they are optimal on their own, OR all of them are equally optimal.

- making sure its easy to grab the basic perks, required for general survival, giving a good sense of progression on the begining.

- making sure each and every perk worth its cost. No matter what attribute its from, all point spent should manifest into equal importance across the board.(like right now)

- make sure its costly to take high-tier perks, so booth jack of all trades and specialized characters are balanced. (Versatiles can pick a higher number of low lvl perks, specialized ones can pick fewer but stronger perks for the same amount of investment, making booth viable) (as it is right now)


Since 7days to Die is a survival game with (action driven but..)slower paced sandbox RPG with a "null" start(no starting set, your character progresses from blank, making space for a precise character building), with TONS of utility (like building, mining, crafting, support, heal) and oriented at booth coop and solo survival(either group/solo pvp or group/solo pve) with a non-competitive, free-to-die(not about scoreboards or K/D ratios) setting, im STRONGLY SUGGESTING AN ATTRIBUTE SYSTEM.


(7dtd, Its quite a personal experience, most enjoyable as a solo or medium group PVE game, the enviroment is dangerous enough so players usually arent after unwanted PvP. It has an amazing chill while building, mining, etc. Great roleplaying potential, an amazing walking dead simulator. Lets go for an attribute system really.)



Link to comment
Share on other sites

My View on the Skill System Vol.2



I already made suggestions in a previous wall of text about these, but here it is again.


Skills that are Mutually exclusive affecting the same aspect of gameplay(but in different form) are really bad progressionvise. What am i talking about?


For example, Light and Heavy armor skills are the exact freakin same skills, affecting the same damn thing but in a different, mutually exclusive form. So they grant the exact same bonus and booth provide it for armor, but for two different types of armor.


I would change those skills to give different bonuses, instead of be the clone of eachother for different forms of the same stuff.


Agility's Light armor skill should -lets say- grant the extra mobility and stamina regen, but for booth types of armors.


Fortitude's heavy armor should -lets say- give durability and effect resist, but for booth type of armors.


So when picking attributes you would not restrict yourself to certain item types but pick actual traits for any kind of form of that aspect.


Also that way fortitude and agility instead of being eachother's counterpart(you optimally either go heavy or light)on this aspect, they would have actual synergy and they would work great together, granting different traits synergizing with eachother.


I hope i clarified whats the problem. Instead of competeing eachother, they should synergize.


So the player could buy actual benefits that resembles the attribute it is tied to, instead of buying performance boosts for types of items that are seems to be tied to those attributes. Why would you tie and -with that-, restrict the build's item selection? This is just alienates Agi/Fortitude builds that could be otherwise fun.


Your job should be to make sure those attributes are working together as well as they possibly can, showing great synergy. Mutually exclusive stuff is the exact opposite of that.


And this is exactly the same with each weapon perk. Picking attributes are about actually picking weapon sets. Str wep perks have the same exact general bonuses as others (till lvl7) just for different weapons. That way, buying other weapon perks only gives variety(additive bonus) instead of synergy(multiplicative bonus) for the character overall. If i want to be varied i would pick perks for different, varied aspects, not the same perks for different things in the same aspects.


And these current perks are extreamly powerful, since they have a lot of bonuses, they give immense power spikes. So actually powerplaying(and i mean playing by common sense)is reaaaally boring. By purchasing ONE maxed perk, you actually reach the offensive peak of your character(even if with only one weapon, still.). You are good to go. You cant be stronger, only more varied. But an AK is versatile enough on its own to make any other perk needless.

Any additional perk purchase on weapons only gives you additional stuff to play with, if you got bored of the item that you used to rock with.


Thats just baaaaad for this game. Be openminded pls.




First of all, I suggest to rename Agility into Dexterity. That would really open up the possibilities of the tree. Its just a more versatile term. Agility has nothing to do with lets say skinning or lockpicking, but dexterous, nimble fingers can. Change it pls.


As a general rule of thumb, the attributes themselves should grant bonuses, that are hugely generic, and can be useful for a really broad spectrum of their main aspect. I think A17 was awesome on that department.


Different perks could consist bonuses like the following(Some of them isnt powerful enough to justify a skillpoint, so needs to be mixed with other weaker effects).:


STR.: Gives Melee dmg

- ranged recoil reduction

- extra javelin, bow and crossbow dmg and velocity.(he can draw bows and manually reload crossbows that are set stronger, can throw javelins with more power)

- javelin, bow, crossbow stun/knockback power.

- melee dmg(for blunt weapons?)

- melee stun power

- melee stam cost reduction

- melee block dmg

- carry capacity

- could be a requirement to wear heavy armors and weapons. Booth melee and ranged.

- smithing maybe

- melee armor piercing

- AoE melee effect.


PER.: Ranged dmg.

- aim time.

- ranged headshot bonus

- accuracy

- weapon zoom power.

- ranged armor piercing

- loot bonuses

- ore harvesting bonus(eyes for vein)

- enemy detection compass

- enemy highlight vision while sneaking. Even trough walls.

- sixth senses. Like a hud icon that shows if you are aggroad onto.

- Target info. Healthbar that shows enemy HP and injuries, buffs, debuffs.

- animal gutting/tracking

- cooking

- gun smithing

- sneak attack dmg.


DEX.: gives Stamina (or alternatively movement speed or stamina regen)

- reload speed

- reload movement slow

- hipfire accuracy

- bow/crossbow/javelin draw, reload and charge speed.

- melee dismember chance

- melee headshot bonus.

- melee attack speed.

- bladed melee damage?

- melee bleed chance.

- stamina regen.

- movement speed

- sprint speed

- looting speed

- lockpicking

- crafting speed by hand and bench.

- ore harvesting bonus(precise strikes)

- mechanical fine engineering.

- versatility focused armour-bonuses

- Stamina on kill(adrenalin)

- stamina regen on low hp(survival instinct)

- fletchery/bow making

- sneaking.


FORT.: Gives HP. (Or alternatively dmg resist)

- firearm recoil reduction

- damage/stun resistance

- food resistance/cons. Rate

- farming

- looting more food

- healing items, hp regen.

- defensive armor-bonuses

- brawling bonuses

- stamina on kill

- health regen on kill

- stamina on taking damage(adrenalin)

- stamina regen on low hp.(adrenalin)

- taunt ability


INT.: Gives extra tech points*. Or extra XP % bonus. (You learn faster) Maybe overall crafting quality with crafting speed.

- elemental effect(baton electricity, flame shaft burn) strength/duration.

- melee bleed strength.(anatomy)

- explosives damage.

- ranged dismember chance.

- salvaging bonuses

- crafting price reductions

- overall crafting speed.

- chemistry

- vehicle crafting

- medicines, drug heal power.

- electric engineering

- weapon durability(maintenance)

- weapon fire rate(calibration)


I have probably left out some aspects, but those are mostly at a good place already.


These changes would make sure that any combination of these attributes would be amazing, they would synergize well with eachother. Also since all the skills are affecting a broad range of their aspects but each of them giving only a defined but solid bonus, the progression per skillpoint ratio will be streamlined, it will go without immense powerspikes and the characters will always have something to go for, even within one aspect of gameplay.


Also, I suggest to gather all crafting perks on a separate page instead of distributeing them under the attributes, but ill detail this topic in the last part.



There are special, non-generic perks in the game, mostly weapon perks at Tier 3,4,5.


I think its a good idea to tie special gameplay mechanics to weapon types. But its not that good of an idea to tie them trough their generic skills.


Also i think on the other hand, those perk effects are cool potential skill bonuses, but without -or at least with a lot less- item type restrictions.


Lets talk about melee. Some of these effects are: the calculated strike for the club, aoe knock for the sledge, bleed for blades, and the knock back down effect of clubs/sledges.


Now i dont see, why these effects arent available for all weapons that would fit them. Club's special perk(every third attack does extra?) could work on any melee weapon. I absolutely can see how cool a machete could be with this perk. Even sledgehammers could profit from them. Let the player decide he wants that effect or not for their favored weapon.


Why would you restrict those effects to each weapon category? Make the melee more colourful and varied. Make restrictions ONLY when needed and only that much that you ulimately have to.


A good example is flurry of blows, that only works for One handed weapons, but at least isnt tied to sole weapon categories. (Altough, I cant see particularly why sledgehammers should not be affected by it, but lets thrust your sense of balance on that one.)


Those perks could work just like that. Like AoE knockdown only works for twohanded weapons(Like Bats, sledges, future swords, axes, etc.), not only for sledges.


That way players could reach a higher maximal efficteveness by hoarding every skill that makes their preferred tool more potent, but for a fitting price. So the Players could make either a really specialized build, or a mixed build if they want. The builds could be extreamly varied, the gameplay colourful and the players are free to invest in ways, they currently cant.


- WEAPON PROFICIENCY: To be honest, the "learn by usage" skill template is really popular, quite unique and i cant see why did you remove it. Your only job would have been to simply remove it from parts where its not fit. Like crafting, armour and whatnot. But for actual weapon prof, it works really well.


I suggest to bring it back, as an additional way of progression, also it could ease the weight on character builds. Since that way, the player could net some extra performance without direct perk investation. No matter what niche build hes using, even if the player is an Int/Agi build only, he can still rise his blunt melee performance a bit simply by practicing with the weapon.


Categories like blunt/bladed melee, cold-missile weapons, sidearms, rifles, shotguns, heavy weapons. Thats 7 proficiencies. Its enough, and can contain any weapon.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

My View on The Skill System Vol.3



(Im talking about perks that lets you craft advanced stuff, like grease monkey or engineer.)


There are different approaches.

- You either mix the technology into the skill system(like you did currently, the perks are listed mostly under the Int. tree, and they cost skillpoints) so the player have to decide, he either invests his skillpoints into character traits like higher combat potenty(f.e. melee dmg) or into unlocking new technology(steel smithing f.e.). (So booth unlocking tech, or buying lets say combat perks, require the same skillpoints to spend) Thats a fine approach to any RPG.


- Or you separate it from the skill system, creating a paralell progression line handling all tech advancements outside of character traits. So tech advancements wont cost from the same pool as personal traits, but uses a different currency (like... tech points?)


Okay now, You had a nice attribute system where INT gave most of the technology unlocks in A17.

The problem was, if a player already invested heavy amounts of skillpoints into the main attribute(INT) becouse one desired type of tech(lets say toolsmithing) it was the best approach to buy all the rest too(like electricity, grease monkey, etc) creating an outcome, where:

- INT was required. The whole tech progression was behind INT. At least one character in each group had to have Int.

- It was usually ONE character who did all. For best performance, one character crafted everything, instead of scattering the different trades within the group. It did not worth it to invest into 10INT for only one type of perk for each players, but one invested for all the perks, creating unfair player experiences.


You solved this problem, by adding a blueprint for every tech(findable by all) NEXT to still haveing(mostly) Int as a tech tree gate with the same problems.

Also you plan to distribute the technology perks between all the attributes more evenly, so it wont be gathered almost exclusively by Int. at least. This is not too elegant of an approach. (Its plain bad tbh)


My cheaper, but still more elegant approach would be:

- i would change the technology perks to either NOT require, or only require a little bit of Main attribute(INT f.e.).

- instead of high main attribute requirement, they would be tied to a Level requirement.

So even the highest level of -lets say- Engineering would require only some(4-6?) Int or even none. But its halted by a required character level(of, dunno 45?).


That way:

- people would still have to invest the same skillpoints into technology as they do with every other skill. Keeping this rpg advantage.

- but every player can decide freely which technology they want to unlock without investing heavily into it's attribute. So groups can effectively divide crafting trades within their playerbase equally.

- Also solo players dont necessarily have to imvest into INT(or any other attribute). solely for the Technology perks. They just pick them up, without investing into the main attribute.

- while INT would still be the attribute for crafting, its not a ptoblem of diversification, since INT(or any other attrobute) tree would only CONTAIN these perks but not require actual investments(or just a low amount) of the attribute itself. Effectively you can put them where you see fit.


So again, You can distribute the tech perks if you want(like putting chemistry under perception or smithing under STR), but the point is, dont tie them into the main attribute so everyone can pick them up(without unwanted attribute investment). It doesent matter what attribute tree contains the perks as long as it wont require(too much if any) points of it.


But my proper approach would be this:



Instead of letting Attribute trees contain Technology perks, lets gather them and put the bag onto a separate board.


So, i would add an extra page into the character book, between INT and Perk Books called something like "Trades", "Schematics" or "Technoloy" or whatever.


It would be filled up with perks that unlocks smithing, chemistry, mechanic, electric engineering, masonry, gunsmithing, fletching, armouring, farming, drug production, and whatnot. So players could absolutely freely pick up any trade they want, only costing skillpoints, but no attribute investment, AND without littering the proper attribute trees.


Inteligence can be made strong enough on its own without tech unlocks. With perks like enchanced elemental effects(longer burning and shocking from mods/battons) cheaper crafting costs(so int would really enchance tinkering, making crafting more efficient but not enabling it. Genius.), charisma, turret and healing perks, etc.


And for the love of god, no need for blueprints for every god damn thing in the game. Pls remove them. Finding a schematic of an engine wont turn you into engineer or a mechanic. Its a trade, it require investment. And generally never tie progression behind RNG, unless you are making an mmo and want people to grind for that 2% chance of finding what they want. Its just mean. The current approach is a bad approach. "Wheres your standards?" G.R.





As i said, If you want, you can entirely separate crafting tech from the skill system by adding in a different tech resource. So lets say, the player gains 5 Tech points with each level, that can be spent on unlocking tech.


You can make them little perks, like campfire crafting, cooking, arrow fletching, all types of smithing and other small bites different trades. Each for one or two techpoints.

Or keep larger groupings, like a 3 ranked greasemonkey for 5-10-15 points(for a total of 30). Its your call, i would go with the current, bigger groupings.


That way the player dont have to sacrefice character power for technology, only have to decide which technology he chooses to invest into, but every player could invest into something(since tech points only can be spent there).


It also has the advantage, that it can be extraordinary detailed as i said. You can put every recipe behind a separate unlock, like making campfires, each tool, weapon, arrows, anything, since each has its separate cost if you want.


Im not saying a separate tech system is necessarily better but it has its advatages. (This system would really shine in a game with massive populations with many Trade combinations. But in a game operating usually with smaller groups like 7dtd, probably a combined tech and skill resource is GENERALLY better.)


BUT, theres a problem with INT. It really dont have anything really worthy to give as an attribute. The current Headshot dmg for turrets and batons is just a joke, i dont even consider it a solution in any serious talk. I suggested extra XP rate, but ots not "that" good. So the biggest reason why i would use a separate Tech resource is to give INT a worthy main effect.


This way, INT could give lets say 5 or 10 Tech Points for each level as a main attribute. That would mean, investing into INT would give a tech advantage ower other builds. Its amazing, absolutely fits INT as an attribute.


So the player gains like 5 Tech Points per level, also if invested into INT, gains additional. I think that would be the best approach. Separate tech resource, and INT providing extra.



So this is my little essay about rpg skill systems and my reasoning why i would:

- create a PROPER attribute system.

- making all attributes synergize instead of compete with eachother.(no mutually exclusive perks for the same stuff)

- go with perks that are giving themed bonuses for a wide range of weapons instead of general bonuses for themed weapons for each attribute, so weapons and stuff would not be restricted to attributes.

- go with a separate technology tree to clean main attribute trees from these perks to spare the trouble of finding place for each of them.

- go with a separate Tech Resource to give INT a fitting purpose as a main attribute, and giving tech trees more freedom.

- rename Agi into Dexterity for better terminology.

- give back attributes their general bonuses instead of this nonsense headshot bonuses.


Sorry about the enormous walls, and hard readability. My knowledge on these aspects exceeds my ability to express myself in english by far. Ty for reading anyway.


Good luck TFP! Looking forward for A19, the Junk Sledge looks awesome.


As a lil extra:

- Motherload: i suggest to put motherload into agi or perception. Its too powerful to put booth mining skills under STR.


while its okay if str affect block dmg, harvest rate can be put elsewhere. Agility due to your finer striking precision lets you harvest more and waste less materials. Or perception grants you a better eye for veins. The point is, place Motherload elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


How about having only perks and no attributes? In fact, make those into perks, too. Each "stat perk" could affect several others like an increment or multiplier would (depending on perk affected).


For example, "Shorter Aim Time" could be affected by:

- INT (as in; you know what to aim for to do more damage),

- DEX (as in; easier to keep your hands steady) and

- PER (as in; better vision and noticing the aim spots faster).

None of those stats would be a requirement. Instead, you have a sinergy.


Actually, ever played Path of Exile? If so, there's a great and quite intricate skill system there. You can take some perks through a different path, not wasting many points in a stat you won't need for your playstyle.



No to classes! I hate being locked out of something. There are many great games which do this for the sake of balance. But there are some which allow you to truly roleplay as a character you envisioned for your current game.

For example, Dragon Age: Origins comes to mind... I played as a heavy armor mage. I put all my mana into a "reserved" state for defensive buffs so I couldn't cast spells, but I found it very fun. Definitely unintended combination.


In WoW (Lich King expansion, also Mage), my talents were sparse into Fire tree, mostly for crit chance. And after that, I went everything in Frost that increases frost damage. My bread-and-butter spell was Frostfire Bolt. Was unpopular at the time due to its long cast time, but I had ways to make it work:

As a mage, I had access to Mirror Image (decoy clones), Frost Nova (Immobilizes things around me for a few seconds), Blink (short-range instant teleport), Invisibility and I used Engineering for movement speed enchant. Specializing in Fire also gave me Dragon's Breath (cone-shaped disorient CC) and Blast Wave (knockback if something comes too close).


But as a Mage, I had no access to self-sustain in-combat. A MAJOR downside. Anything that touched me, did practically permanent damage (usually for 50%+ of my HP). That's "classes system".


If you recolor spells into weapons and mana into ammo, it worked as a squishy sniper with long charge-up time, but a lot of mobility and CC.

In 7d2d, I translated that into traps and a scoped rifle. I also always have a means of transport available and an escape route planned.



I started playing after "Learn by usage" got removed, but have heard from friends that it existed. I'd honestly prefer it.

To that, I say - Why can't we have both systems? You could gain progress by using something AND you coud invest the level-up points into anything of your choice.


Another game that comes to mind is Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. They solved it in another way - you recieved multiple points per level-up. Let's say 7. You could assign them into anything you wanted, but each stat had a cap you could assign into it. You could put up to 4-5 points into stats you used and only 1-3 into some you hadn't even touched.


Yet another is World of Tanks/Warships. You get XP for the vehicle you're driving and some "Free XP", which you can invest into any other available vehicle. ... But the ratio is horrible. And so is the grind in those games. They make you play something you don't like in order to progress. The same feeling as wasting materials for leveling up engineering-related stuff.

Early-game access to a weak version of what you like is much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...