|
Rome gets events when they conquer Judea to simulate that resistance. You can either try to force them to convert which leads to more events (national unrest, dead pops, forced conversions, and allegedly rebellions if they aren't converted in time) and also have the option to "Oh, give them their kingdom..." and release them as a client state. E: Also, re: tribesman having a base of 100% happiness, they also get a happiness penalty from the civilization value, while citizens and freemen are made more happy as civilization goes up. So in the boonies they're easy to keep happy, but in civilized provinces they become increasingly unhappy. Azuren fucked around with this message at 16:45 on May 13, 2019 |
#
?
May 13, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
Azuren posted:Rome gets events when they conquer Judea to simulate that resistance. You can either try to force them to convert which leads to more events (national unrest, dead pops, forced conversions, and allegedly rebellions if they aren't converted in time) and also have the option to "Oh, give them their kingdom..." and release them as a client state. I was writing a sarky reponse here but decided not to bother. Summary: The Culture mechanics should just handle this without having to resort to forcing it per nation via events.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
I do agree that large empires are generally too stable if you're diligent about culture converting, and you don't crazy overextend yourself from day one. Sticking to a historical timeline as Rome, I never got close to having any rebellions or civil wars at all, just mashing "culture convert" policy for a century until it's 100% and stacking garrisoned light inf until -5 unrest. By the time it was the second half of the game and I was blobbing at turbo speed and riding 80-100 AE, I already had 3/4ths of my provinces at any one time fully happy and converted.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 17:04
|
|
|
What're the penalties for going over 50 AE? Are they as bad as going over 100 OE in EU?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
An idea, If you appoint a governor of a province of that populations culture/religion give that province a loyalty bonus assuming said governor is loyal? Not sure if that is a thing already though. Seems like a reason to spare families other than just more bodies, and makes it less critical to always be converting pops to avoid melting down.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 17:22
|
|
|
It already works that way. Culture and/or religion penalty is much more benign when the governor has the right culture and/or religion.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
The entire conversion mechanic is anachronistic and I'll be happy when someone mods it out. Not just changed to a timer or policy, but almost completely gone. I could harp on about why the current system is bad and extremely far from history, but it'd be a useless discussion. Either way, I don't expect a fully realistic simulation and everyone has different thresholds and preferences when comes to the connection to actual history. I have fun with the game as it is now, and I'll enjoy it even more when the inevitable historical realism increasing mods roll around.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 17:53
|
|
|
The conversion thing works poorly from a historical realism perspctive but it's pretty nice for gameplay so I'm not exactly clamouring for a rework even though the end result is really dumb
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 18:42
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The conversion thing works poorly from a historical realism perspctive but it's pretty nice for gameplay so I'm not exactly clamouring for a rework even though the end result is really dumb 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
The interplay between AE and foreign culture unhappiness is one of the best single mechanics in any Paradox game IMO
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
PederP posted:The entire conversion mechanic is anachronistic and I'll be happy when someone mods it out. Not just changed to a timer or policy, but almost completely gone. I could harp on about why the current system is bad and extremely far from history, but it'd be a useless discussion. Either way, I don't expect a fully realistic simulation and everyone has different thresholds and preferences when comes to the connection to actual history. I have fun with the game as it is now, and I'll enjoy it even more when the inevitable historical realism increasing mods roll around. Hellenization and Romanization were real things, I don't know why you would consider them ahistorical. It would be more ahistorical to completely remove it, I think.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
Hellenization is incredibly not the same as "the entire population of the Seleucid Empire inexorably becomes Macedonian."
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
In game terms, what is incredibly not the same about it? How would you model Hellenization in the game differently?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The conversion thing works poorly from a historical realism perspctive but it's pretty nice for gameplay so I'm not exactly clamouring for a rework even though the end result is really dumb It's is the -only- way to play, there's no other to reduce risk of civil war or rebellion then to culture convert all and everything. Doesn't matter what options the provinces governors have, always put on culture conversion, even in your capital (because of influx of slaves) But it's fun to check the culture map, and see everyone is now one monopolistic culture, instead of all the flavors you have at start. When you push people to become roman or whatever, everyone lives happy ever after hehe =)
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
Family Values posted:In game terms, what is incredibly not the same about it? How would you model Hellenization in the game differently? Hellenization deserves a separate mechanic. It occured in Roman, Greek and Asian territories alike, and fits poorly with the current culture mechanic. It shouldn't be an imperial tool, but a more subtle and global effect, perhaps similar to institutions in EU. A big problem with the culture mechanic is the speed of conversion the design pushes the player towards. It took hundreds of years for romanization to fully take root even in the provinces right next door to the Italian peninsula.Cultural shifts did not occur within a few generations - and absolutely not in a couple months like in the current design. Combined with the weirdly passive tribesmen and how there are no repercussions to cultural conversion it feels incredibly gamey. It introduces a pseudo-requirement to culturally assimilate conquered territories, which is really a post-medieval view of conquest - conquer the territory and assimilate the people. I maintain it is anachronistic - the cultural dynamics of the period were certainly existent and important, but not like this.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Descar posted:It's is the -only- way to play, there's no other to reduce risk of civil war or rebellion then to culture convert all and everything. That's not true. You can use trade goods to boost happiness and province loyalty. You can appoint same-culture, same-religion governors. You can use governors which have traits that gives happiness or reduced unrest. In the current campaign I'm running I haven't intentionally turned on the assimilation or conversion policies (though they do sometimes randomly turn on when you appoint a governor I suppose), and I haven't had any revolts yet because I've been using governors with good traits and trade goods that increase happiness. E: oh and giving governors troops to suppress unrest. That's a huge factor too. Family Values fucked around with this message at 20:24 on May 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 20:19
|
|
|
Family Values posted:That's not true. You can use trade goods to boost happiness and province loyalty. You can appoint same-culture, same-religion governors. You can use governors which have traits that gives happiness or reduced unrest. Mashing the conversion policy is by far the most efficient way to play though and I agree that it's a problem since it makes selection of governor policy into a largely false choice.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Arrhythmia posted:What're the penalties for going over 50 AE? Are they as bad as going over 100 OE in EU? Not as bad, but the big effects are that you get a penalty to primary culture happiness (not just wrong culture/wrong group happiness) as well as a blanket increase to all power costs. Both are scaled to how far over 50 you are. However, the higher your AE is, the less AE you gain and the faster your AE decays, so the "optimal" way to play if you're mega-blobbing is to crank it as high as you can go, ideally while not spending any power points, then alternating with periods of peace where you let it burn off back below 50, then spend all your stockpiled points now that you aren't eating the power cost penalty anymore, then go on another conquering spree.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
Finally have a good and really fun run with Sparta going, after a half-dozen or so restarts I finally got lucky with how the early game played out. Started out nibbling at all my neighbors in the Peloponnesian peninsula, got lucky and played it by ear according to the alliance chains and who was at war with whom. Eventually I've consolidated the whole peninsula except for Macedon's Corinth and whoever their feudatory is that they start the game with just south. I rebuild the legendary Spartan Navy, invade Crete, eat half of it, notice that Macedon is in a prolonged war with some Greek minors and their manpower is in the toilet so I declare on them to snipe Corinth and their other city, leaving either straits or Phrygia between us. They couldn't get access so the ticking war score was enough to peace out for those two cities, leaving a short truce. At this point, Macedon had blobbed into every other Greek polity. Phrygia had some real bad revolts and halfway imploded (first time I've seen Phrygia melt down in any of my games so far) but still have half their land and all their feudatories in Asia minor. I set out to conquer the rest of Crete, and then notice that Egypt has a total of zero ships, so I declare on them and snipe the Aegean islands from them. At this point Macedon just fabricated claims on me so I panicked and shipped my army back home. Macedon has about double my pops, double my income, double my cohorts, and ties me for manpower. They declare, the two routes into my land are either over a strait onto a hill fort, or through the Corinthian chokepoint leading to a mountain fort. They send an 18 stack across the strait and besiege my hill fort, I let them eat attrition until they're closed to sieging the fort down, so I counter attack with my whole army (16 heavy inf, 6 archers, no one in Greece knows how to raise horses so we ride archers around to flank) and beat them easily. They retreat across the strait, I send my fleet out from port to block them, causing them to stackwipe. Macedon doubles down and sends their entire army of 30 onto the fort. I again wait for the timer to run down then counter attack with my 22 cohorts. The battle lasts a long time and losses are significant, I lose about 6k in the battle but Macedon is defeated and flees, again blocking the strait and wiping them. Now, Macedon has zero cohorts, I rush north and start sieging their forts and capitals. They hire a mercenary doomstack. Sparta, however, has been religiously beating up the other nerds in Greece and taking their lunch money, and refusing to invest gold onto frivolities like "statues" or "temples" or "philosophers" or "literally anything that doesn't give us more manpower or better soldiers" and I have a hefty warchest and bribe their mercenaries, who promptly turn around and behind sieging Pella. At this point Phrygia just DOW'd me so I quickly peace out with Macedon for better terms than even I expected, a healthy amount of gold, all their provinces in Greece and Epirus, and Thessaly, giving me access to sweet, sweet horses for the first time and pushing my borders to within spitting distance of Pella. Phrygia is bigger and richer than me but my troops are better, our navies are matched, and they'll struggle to reach me. Looking forward to seeing how it plays out 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
 I fixed the flag 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 03:45
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The interplay between AE and foreign culture unhappiness is one of the best single mechanics in any Paradox game IMO This doesn't exist because you trivially remove foreign cultures.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 15:32
|
|
|
I think cultural assimilation policy should only work in the home region; all other regions should get a different mechanic, say "culture acceptance" ? Or maybe something similar to separatism in EU4.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
Beamed posted:This doesn't exist because you trivially remove foreign cultures. Over time, yes. If you couldn't do culture conversions in a timely manner it would be a lovely mechanic. If they want to reduce the rate of culture conversion (which would be a good thing from a verisimlitude perspective) then they need to adjust the figures for a lot of the other systems to compensate. Hopefully we end up with something which is gameplay-similar to the current setup without turning half of the Near and Middle East into Macedonians.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 17:06
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Over time, yes. If you couldn't do culture conversions in a timely manner it would be a lovely mechanic. If they want to reduce the rate of culture conversion (which would be a good thing from a verisimlitude perspective) then they need to adjust the figures for a lot of the other systems to compensate. Hopefully we end up with something which is gameplay-similar to the current setup without turning half of the Near and Middle East into Macedonians. The current mechanic is a pacing mechanic, which favors cycling between mass conquest and "cooling off". It lacks: - Handling tribesmen. The historical boogeymen of Rome are oddly passive and just sit around providing manpower and money. They don't get unhappy until you hit high civilization levels, and by that point it's not likely to be a problem. - Garrisons. Maintaining military control of conquered territories and securing borders was seriously expensive and required massive manpower. This is a non-factor. - Actual colonization where you move Romans into local power centers to solidify economic, military and administrative control. Turning what should revolve around military and administrative resource expenditure and turning it into focusing on culture and religion is the problem. It's not just about maintaining historical flavor and not having anachronistic cultural map-painting. The game sorely lacks period-relevant empire management mechanics. EU: Rome was heavily based on EU3. That heritage is still the foundation of Imperator, and should IMO be replaced by more unique mechanics. CK2 and Vicky are great because they're not just EU in a different setting. You shouldn't need to juggle numbers to hit the sweet spot of culture conversion and AE for maximum expansion. You should need to prioritize military and administrative resources. You should need to worry about governors/satraps becoming too powerful, too independent or being too incompetent. You should need to worry about barbarian invasions, that are currently relatively harmless and not the oh-poo poo moments they could be. The entire foundation of the AE-foreign culture happiness interplay is a need to pace conquest of easily conquered neighbors. Even if it's elegantly balanced - it's still based on restraining the player from expanding too fast. It would be much more elegant if the challenges of keeping control of territorial acquisitions itself was the limiting factor. Expand too quickly and you can't keep up with the tribesmen rampaging around your new provinces - or you'll lack the legions to garrison your borders, and get flooded by barbarian raiders or even hordes - or you'll lack the strength to defend client states and lose their allegiance. The governor mechanics are moving in the right direction with 1.1. I hope culture, conquest and tribesmen do too, eventually. Otherwise I look forward to the mods.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
For cultural conversion, I think focusing on the families would be the better choice. Historically a lot of "culture" was mostly the focus of the ruling class who'd be significantly different from their subject peoples (like the Ptolemy dynasty, a group of Greeks ruling a bunch of Egyptians). Having a clear divide in culture for the ruling families can help, if you keep different cultural group guys, they can be better rulers for their provinces, but having a more integrated upper strata could give other buffs. For the pops themselves, having a slower drift mechanism would be a good choice, for a bonus you could implement a Stellaris style law system (to add to the existing laws) for deciding policies for people in your empire (for example like how the Romans wouldn't let "non-Romans" serve a main line units in the Legion, only auxiliaries). If anything, this could add a fun mechanism to expansion, as conquered places stay in your empire longer, the people begin to see themselves more as people of your empire and so want more of the rights that come with it (historically, this happened in Rome and caused a huge headache for the Romans "oh those dammed provincials are wanting tax rights, senatorial representation and the ability to serve in the legion!). With the new mechanic for power accumulation you could make a cool one two system for this. Nobles first start trying to convert so you have to figure out how to bring them in without diluting the powerbase of your closer core provinces. As their populations convert, they see themselves as your own culture, but see themselves closer to their own regional colleges (leading to situations like how the Illyrian Emperors came about. So instead of having cultural conversion be the desired effect, maybe make it something that happened naturally overtime, but it comes with its own set of problem (dilution of power, certain areas gaining disproportional amounts of influence).
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Over time, yes. If you couldn't do culture conversions in a timely manner it would be a lovely mechanic. If they want to reduce the rate of culture conversion (which would be a good thing from a verisimlitude perspective) then they need to adjust the figures for a lot of the other systems to compensate. Hopefully we end up with something which is gameplay-similar to the current setup without turning half of the Near and Middle East into Macedonians. Over time? You can just stockpile scrolls for the most part. Convert the pops enough that unhappiness isn't much of a thing, do the governor policy. I think the problem other posters are raising is closer to true, which is that the cultural conversion as the game portrays it..didn't really take place. And don't get me started on the religious conversion, which is a high priority thing in the game for Reasons.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
That is my prayer, my final cry - I pour it out with my own lifeblood. And you, my Tyrians, harry with hatred all his line, his race to come: make that offering to my ashes, send it down below. No love between our peoples, ever, no pacts of peace! Come rising up from my bones, you avenger still unknown, to stalk those Trojan settlers, hunt with fire and iron, now or in time to come, whenever the power is yours, Shore clash with shore, sea against sea and sword against sword - this is my curse - war between all our peoples, all their children, endless war!  Just finished my first full campaign as Carthage, after muddling around with a couple of other nations to find my feet. I had two goals for this: get the achievement for uniting Iberia as Carthage, and annex Rome. I succeeded in the former pretty easily, though I failed in the latter, mostly due to pressure from the pretty borders faction of the senate. I had a pretty good time, and I think after a few patch cycles this will probably be paradox's best game going. The map is fantastic: the always north projection thing they have going looks and feels great, and the small, easily conquerable thunderdomes meant that I had a tough endboss waiting for me in Rome without giving the Rome campaign a mindless beginning. And Rome made a really great endboss; just before signing the peace treaty of the first Italic war, there was a combined total of 1.9 million dead in total, and something like 300 pops enslaved each. Carthage proper became dominated by the Latin culture and Hellenic religion, just because of the sheer number of Roman slaves I had. The game isn't perfect though. Republics are far and away the most boring government type. Unlike the kingdoms I played with that had the looming threats of succession crises, or the loyalty fears in a tribe, the worst I ever saw as a republic was the occasional +20% power cost malus. Naval battles were also extremely boring at the end; I just had a 100 ship fleet that I set on "hunt down enemy ships" and then forgot about while occasionally clearing popups about naval battles. The army AI was a really nice boon to have, though it could naturally always use some upgrades. In particular, I would see it leave the last city I needed for the wargoal unoccupied while the rest of the province was painted green. In the end I still had a good time, and I'm looking forward to seeing what this game will become. I'm not sure who I'm going to play next. I'm thinking Maurya maybe. Not something super difficult, but a bigger start would be nice to try. Maybe Egypt. Arrhythmia fucked around with this message at 04:44 on May 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 04:40
|
|
|
Descar posted:It's is the -only- way to play, there's no other to reduce risk of civil war or rebellion then to culture convert all and everything. Having it much more difficult and longer process to culturally convert would make getting big more unstable and difficult, leading to civil wars and rebellions for the player and AI empires, making the game more interesting yeah. by the way, has anyone played the EU4 mod Imperium Universalis? How does that compare to this game? Saw it recently and it looks pretty good.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 14:37
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:Having it much more difficult and longer process to culturally convert would make getting big more unstable and difficult, leading to civil wars and rebellions for the player and AI empires, making the game more interesting yeah. I played it 18 months ago or so, and it didn't really get me hooked. As for the impact of making the cultural conversion process longer and more difficult, it doesn't necessarily have to be as you describe. It could be accompanied by making the penalties from other-culture pops much smaller or even non-existent - and relying on other mechanics to make expansion challenging to manage. Such as requiring military garrisons, more governor shenanigans and those darn tribesmen actually doing something. Having thought some more about it, that's actually the thing I find to be one of the biggest flaws in the game as it is now: passive tribesmen. Conquering a bunch of tribal pops should require active management of their existence within your borders - most of the tribes in this period were fiercely independent, militaristic and/or opportunistic. You should need to either expel them, bribe them, have strong garrisons in immediate vicinity, relocate them (although I think that was mostly done after the period of this game), etc. And tribesmen just outside your borders should also be a problem. The barbarians are rare annoyances and tribal nations are only a problem because of broken retinue mechanics. PederP fucked around with this message at 16:51 on May 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 16:41
|
|
|
PederP posted:
Once you start conquering fast enough mid to late game you reach a certain point where you don't have the time / civic points to culture convert all the land you are conquering and the only way to keep from exploding is garrisons. In the Macedon game i'm finishing up I've currently got 1M+ men in garrisons, and only like 250-300k in actual mobile armies.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
 "If."
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:Once you start conquering fast enough mid to late game you reach a certain point where you don't have the time / civic points to culture convert all the land you are conquering and the only way to keep from exploding is garrisons. In the Macedon game i'm finishing up I've currently got 1M+ men in garrisons, and only like 250-300k in actual mobile armies. True, the well-hidden provincial garrison functionality is very strong at suppressing unrest. But it doesn't affect pop happiness, so you'll be left with very unproductive pops all the same. City / province unrest in general feels like another very EU-like mechanic. You spend a resource to lower a number, so that bad stuff don't happen. There's a lot of number juggling (AE, spending points to convert pops, manage happiness) that wouldn't be necessary if tribesmen would just rise up and attack stuff if there are no armies nearby (and sometimes even then).
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
PederP posted:True, the well-hidden provincial garrison functionality is very strong at suppressing unrest. But it doesn't affect pop happiness, so you'll be left with very unproductive pops all the same. City / province unrest in general feels like another very EU-like mechanic. You spend a resource to lower a number, so that bad stuff don't happen. There's a lot of number juggling (AE, spending points to convert pops, manage happiness) that wouldn't be necessary if tribesmen would just rise up and attack stuff if there are no armies nearby (and sometimes even then). Tribesmen rising up and attacking stuff is literally what the EU system is for rebels and its really annoying and micromanagy but basically inconsequential after a certain point.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:Tribesmen rising up and attacking stuff is literally what the EU system is for rebels and its really annoying and micromanagy but basically inconsequential after a certain point. Granted, it is not an easy mechanic to make fun, but I do think it's possible. I am not asking for unavoidable whack-a-mole and certainly not something inconsequential/outscalable. The EU natives are closer to a good tribesmen mechanic. There could be policies as someone else mentioned: Whether to use them as a military resource, a continuous supply of slaves, bribing them, suppressing them, etc. Whether to institute new laws, mix laws, respect tribal laws, etc. But as I've said before it essentially boils to whether to focus on empire management or empire building (map-painting). The game is currently very MP-friendly, and the things I'm proposing would make it less so. They would also make the game more unfair - I don't think it should be possible to pace expansion and juggle the numbers so optimally that you can reduce risk to the degree currently possible. Rome and many of the regional powerhouses are very easy to play at the moment (without introducing numerical handicaps via difficulty) due to the ability to "pay the expansion tax". There are some good elements of unfair risk when it comes to governors, clans and generals - hopefully they will expand on these, and you'll end with a degree of random bullshit closer to CK2 (which I know can certainly be gamed into being risk free, but that takes a decent amount of skill at the game). TL;DR - I am not asking for rebel whack-a-mole, but for unavoidable oh poo poo moments involving conquered tribesmen.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 19:03
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Over time? You can just stockpile scrolls for the most part. Convert the pops enough that unhappiness isn't much of a thing, do the governor policy. If you have enough oratory points to spare to manually convert a significant proportion of your conquests then you're conquering really slowly. Agree with everyone saying that the cultural conversions are dumb and bad, I just think that they pace your expansion nicely and I'd choose an unrealistic but fun game mechanic 1000 times over a realistic lovely one. But there's no need for this to be one or the other.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 22:21
|
|
|
Building roads while playing tall owns. I have updated my GOG review from 4/5 helots to 5/5 helots accordingly. After spending a century consolidating the Aegean basin, the kings of Sparta discovered a newfound passion for infrastructure and spending the massive stockpile of military points, and spent several decades at peace, for possibly the first time.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
Roads rule but building roads sucks. Especially since I want to make sure every city has a road to every other city it touches. Real easy to miss a few in dense areas. I can understand why they don't allow the AI to autobuild things that cost power though. Maybe an option to have governors focus on roads? Or a way to select a province, see the total military cost and then decide if the AI being that thorough is worth the cost.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
I don't see why can't I build more than 1 road at a time. I have to look at my troops walking around and give them a new road to build as soon as they finish one section of it. Can't believe this UI is in the game as it is.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:I don't see why can't I build more than 1 road at a time. I have to look at my troops walking around and give them a new road to build as soon as they finish one section of it. Can't believe this UI is in the game as it is. Yeah, that's silly. At least it's slated to be fixed. I suppose the initial concern is that players would sometimes forget that they have that option selected, then give an army a long move order? I can't think of any other reason to make it this way.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
You could still have it say, only allow five roads from one order, and that would be a vast improvement and still not give TOO much risk of screwing over the player.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 22:31
|
|