Liberty is very hard...

Many issues with tradition, but the biggest is that the gold/happiness policy hasn't been tweaked for BNW's trade routes. Internal trade routes already add value to any +% modifier for food or hammers, which tradition has 2 at higher values to liberty's 1, honor/piety have zero. On top of that for external trade routes, tradition's policy counts as BASE gold! That means your capital becomes the best trade city. It's the equivalent for attracting and sending your own routes what 4 planted great merchants are by endgame. FOUR.

FOUR.

And that's only half of the policy!

Just wasn't well thought out.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 
Liberty is ok on the right map. there are 2 situations that come to mind:

1) peaceful opening with lots of free space and unique luxes around (pretty rare)
2) CB rush to clear out 1 civ which opens up land & unique luxes

Option 2 is more common, but with the warmongering penalties it's not good on Pangea. But if you are sharing a landmass with just 1 AI then it's a good opener.
 
1 is pretty common actually, minus the unique luxury part. Just be ready to pony up for the AI's luxes ASAP before they meet everyone and then follow that up with a mercantile CS.

I rarely play Pangaea, I prefer balanced maps. The most land I play is Pangaea plus, which is actually a lot more watery than Pangaea. It's almost like a mix of Pangaea and Fractal, with better CS placement (meaning harder to worker steal).

I think the Plus maps in general give you more room to expand, because they remove most of the the CS from the main landmass.
 
the unique luxury part is pretty important though. sometimes the AI are slow to hook up their luxes, or they trade with another AI before you get a chance...it's out of your control somewhat.

you're right about the plus maps, putting the CS on islands opens up more space & luxes. But then again, meeting all the CS much later is a big disadvantage.

large maps (not huge) tend to have more space between civs as well.
 
When I first started Liberty I struggle too. It does need a more adventurous play style. The key is to scout alot, and find Unique Luxuries. You will need Luxuries and Luxury trade to keep up happiness and gold. Because Liberty allows expansion so much faster, you can get alot of luxuries and strategics up and running in the first 50 turns. Don't focus on growing so much. Grow only your cap, but work more production tiles in your satellites. Watch your happiness and grow accordingly. The good thing about Liberty is by mid game you will have 6-7 great cities up and running. It is going to be much more productive than 4 cities even if has the growth bonus of tradition. Of course there are some civs that just works with Liberty so well, it will be much easier to do Liberty with them than other civs.

What I would do is, take Tradition opener first. Once you have scouted your surroundings, think about how many cities you can possibly place. Take into consideration of your neighbours and how aggressive/expansive they are. If you see a lot of land with alot of luxuries, go liberty. If you are crammed for space and have someone like Hiawatha around, continue with tradition. If you go liberty under any circumstance then of course you will run into bad situations.
 
Well, I think there is more agreement about where Liberty stood in G&K. I'll compare it to that. A lot of people would argue that Liberty was just as good as Tradition, or contingent on certain styles or starts. Meanwhile, others would argue that it was behind Tradition, whether by a little or a lot. Hardly anyone was arguing that it was better.

Since the only change to it in BNW was unlocking Pyramids, how did the changes to BNW gameplay affect how useful Liberty is?

Well, I think it's pretty clear that it got worse.

First and most of all, the turn number that a city got founded was the single biggest factor relating to the output of that city in G&K/Vanilla. Now with internal trade routes, it's much less related to that. Disregarding space issues, you can wait until after the National College to found any of your cities, use the added time to build up Science, Hammers, etc in capital, then use those resources directly to get subsequent cities grown. You've got the same end result at a certain turn window, regardless of when you founded. Those turns your early city exists over a later one are essentially wasted unless you have the ITR's and Happy to grow it. Consequently, the policies giving free Settlers/Workers got a lot worse. Buying those with Culture is not as great of a use for your policies as it used to be.

One thing was supposed to balance that out, but didn't. Due to Gold not being tradeable in lump sums without DoF, Settlers couldn't be rush-bought as early, and so the difficulty in expanding early under the Tradition or Liberty Policies was supposed to favor Liberty a lot more than before. It did. But in actuality, that doesn't matter. The benefits of founding a city this early are essentially reduced to zero in the first place. So now, it doesn't matter at all who has an advantage in it. It's not useful to do it.

Other than that as well, the religious benefit to expanding early shrunk. It used to be the case that expanding early carried benefits with founding a religion. Now, there are more Faith generating Pantheons. Piety is also available from the start, and there are food/culture related Pantheons to make it more viable in many cases than Liberty, precisely because it doesn't demand expansion.

Meanwhile, the list of things you can do just as well with one city grew. You will not be generating more Great Works by expanding, just conquering. And on a more basic level, the amount of culture toward policies you can get from additional cities went way down. Additional buildings now produce 1 Culture, and so Specialists in empire-unique guilds and Cultural CS's contribute a greater overall portion of your civ's drive for more policies. If anything, you are punished for expansion when it comes at the expense of being able to slot all your Artists sooner. Representation in Liberty used to be one of the most important policies for culture VC's, but now it's a lot less attractive.

Economically as well, there's less point to expanding in the way Liberty suggests to do it. Trade Routes are now the source of half to 3/4 of your overall Gold generation, and they are restricted by Civ, originating mostly from your most Gold-rich city. In that way, low city-count Tradition may actually outperform expansionist Liberty economically due to the base Gold from Monarchy contributing to Trade Route income, as adwcta mentioned. You are often just giving yourself more building maintenance to pay. At a certain point as well, one of the benefits to expanding becomes the ability to send an Food ITR to your Capital. And obviously, expanding in a way that curtails development in the Capital then becomes counterproductive.

I mean, I've no doubt that Liberty opener and Representation outperform Tradition culturally, and that Meritocracy outperforms Monarchy on Happy. In fact, I was on the side arguing this in G&K. I played a whole lot of Liberty games on Deity. But Liberty's strengths are just a whole lot less relevant due to the things that were added to the game in BNW, and the fact that nearly all the BNW features were added on an Empire-wide basis. I'm just not spending my first 3-4 policies in this game to get a Settler.
 
Liberty got nerfed a bit by BNW, but it's still a great tree. It does require you play differently, especially in the first 100 turns.

In a nutshell, here are (IMHO) the two strong points of each tree in the early game:

Liberty: Production, Tile Improvement
Tradition: Growth, Culture (especially cultural boundaries)

* You will have better production in the first 100 turns with Liberty, but you will have to build Monuments by hand. It's a trade-off.
* You will have better growth with Tradition, but you'll spend more than 3X as many turns building settlers to get 4 cities out, which limits growth. (2 at half-cost vs 3 at full-cost) It's a trade-off.
* You will have more happiness from the capital with Tradition, but you'll have more unhappiness from your other cities. It's a trade-off.
* You will have more culture from Tradition, but you'll pay more for policies. It's a trade-off.
* You'll get more money from Tradition, but you'll get at least one free worker from Liberty fairly early on, and a golden age to boost money, production AND culture.
* You'll get Faith Great Engineers later with Tradition, but you'll get a *very* early free Great Person of your choice.

Both policies are totally valid. Tradition is better for a tall capital. Liberty is better for getting cities out fast and is in many ways better designed for warfare. Faster tile improvements and happiness/city go a long way. The early GP can be a great scientist to boost you quickly to a medieval or renaissance war tech, or an engineer to get you macchu pichu, etc.

With the *IMHO* broken nature of pyramids pillage-repair, you can heal troops in combat while making tons of money. Thus, IMHO, Liberty is better for Domination, and IMHO better when you have to get cities and an army up fast even for defense.

I use Liberty when I war. However, for almost all peaceful VC, I consider Tradition superior.

Do not make the mistake of thinking that Liberty supports going wide. That was nerfed in BNW, and Liberty suffered the consequences. It's still better than Piety and Honor though. :P
 
* You will have better growth with Tradition, but you'll spend more than 3X as many turns building settlers to get 4 cities out, which limits growth. (2 at half-cost vs 3 at full-cost) It's a trade-off.

For me, it's gotten to the point where I never build Settlers in the capital after the first. I'm 1-city until I've got enough Gold to rush a Settler, along with a spare Caravan slot not being used for Beakers. Then I'm 2-city until such a point where I'm growing the 2nd city into 3-yield tiles. I'll produce Settlers there after that, up to a number that I have spare ITR's for. That's been optimal in BNW as far as I can tell. Expanding is just that low on the list of priorities.


It's still better than Piety and Honor though. :P

I'd argue that it's more on the same level as those two, if not behind. Piety can be good with certain civs and certain religious beliefs. As Poland for example, standard for me is to open Piety, get Organized Religion, then Tradition down to Landed Elite and Monarchy, then fill Piety. I also consider it for Civ's and situations that I don't need a Faith generating Pantheon for what I'm trying to do.

Likewise, Honor going Military Caste first is good for certain civs and situations, as long as you somehow know as you open it that you will get enough early kills. You'll virtually always want to supplement it either with Tradition, Commerce, or Exploration though, for reasons of Happy. Consequently, I'd only use it in games where I was basically sure I wouldn't need Rationalism. But I am not considering Liberty in that spot. I can't think of which spot I would consider Liberty, either.
 
With a bad non-coastal capital... Liberty will hit spaceship first. We've already established that Liberty will win CV more securely than tradition, due to more tourism, liberty can also make more of early game military conquests (even if its harder to pull off) and let's you field/support a larger late game army. It will also generate more late game gold if you trade post most cities (which you should do anyway going for diplo, for the science push to satalites and gold).

So, it's actually better than tradition at almost everything, given certain starts. Also, its better for like half the civs' UA/UBs for extra synergy.

Honor requires you to be all in at war for most of the game. Piety is just broken right now, only good in theory. Both Honor and Piety mix well with later trees (and liberty), but they're very very situational. Liberty is IMO the most flexible tree. If you adjust well to your surroundings, it's really better than Tradition, given a poor start.
 
The Mayan UB replaces the shrine, is maintenance free, and gives extra science. Build those first in each city and it helps counter the science penalty for going wide.

Mayan Pyramid is not maintenance-free -- costs 1 gpt maintenance, just like a regular Shrine. But it gives twice the faith as a regular Shrine, plus the two beakers, so it is well worth the maintenance.
 
Lets put it this way. Liberty is stronger in the long run. Tradition is safe for all occasions. I guess as the difficulty level increases, Liberty becomes stronger. Tradition is all about making your own money at first, but Liberty allows faster land/lux grab which you can use for trade early.
I think people focus on the counters on top too much (gold per turn and happiness) and relate that to how well they are doing. The hidden benefit of Liberty is often ignored (+1 hammer and reduced culture cost)
 
:lol: obviously these people saying liberty is better don't play CV deity that often (where success is based on size of capitol above all things); you can only have one NVC anyway so the extra few landmarks you get from your larger empire will hardly offset the wonders a tradition capitol can snag. It's actually the contrary: the higher the difficulty, the better tradition is. Liberty is better than tradition maybe up to prince or chieftain and that's about it :lol:

Try expanding early on deity next to a not-so-peaceful neighbor.... (doesn't have to be Shaka, just Dido or Caesar is fine) when your capitol is still taking 8-10 turns for archers.... and you will see why.
 
:lol: obviously these people saying liberty is better don't play CV deity that often (where success is based on size of capitol above all things); you can only have one NVC anyway so the extra few landmarks you get from your larger empire will hardly offset the wonders a tradition capitol can snag. It's actually the contrary: the higher the difficulty, the better tradition is. Liberty is better than tradition maybe up to prince or chieftain and that's about it :lol:

Try expanding early on deity next to a not-so-peaceful neighbor.... (doesn't have to be Shaka, just Dido or Caesar is fine) when your capitol is still taking 8-10 turns for archers.... and you will see why.

I do it every time. 0% war. Shaka is the only special case. The closer you get to them, the more they want to trade with you and cozy up and attack their other neighbor.

Liberty IS worse on Deity though, just not for that reason. It's worse because the game is shorter. Whereas on Immortal, you can safely hang out to turn 350, on Deity, not winning before turn 300 makes things very dicey. On emperor, I'm not sure the AI actually even ever builds a spaceship (turn 400+?). Liberty "catches up" on science to Tradition on a bad start around turn 270, and a good tradition start not until turn 320. Turn 320 rarely exists for a Deity game, so in many cases (where your capital is in a good spot), liberty will never pay off if you're going for a science victory. You can still win, obviously, but your turn time will be slower than Tradition, and you'll have to do a lot more work.

That still doesn't mean Tradition is ALWAYS better.
Have you.... tried Deity liberty culture victory? I mean, really tried, tested strategies, worked on it, etc. It's really much smoother than Tradition CV on Deity.


Things like extra slots for great works and extra landmarks are pure bonus resources wide gets over tall. Think of it this way, assuming you go aesthetics, Uffizi is worth less in tourism (even with NVC) than one extra city with a landmark (and the extra city's slots can be filled with artifacts, no need for artists). It's actually worth almost 10 tourism less. If you have 8 cities instead of 4 (totally feasible to fill them), you can miss Uffizi AND Louvre (which also saves you a SP), and still come out 30+ tourism ahead, that's base, pre-internet, pre-hotels, pre-airport giving it actually 120+ tourism. Multiplied by the GMs, that's a VERY large bonus. That one culture runaway that comes around once every 2-3 games that you just can't crack? Never an issue if you went wide.

Heck, even Deau (who wrote the deity culture guide) admits liberty may be the better opener for culture. He spices some Piety into it to guarantee a religion. Another guy plays by delaying the liberty finisher until post-internet to get an extra GM for the endgame (he probably lost enough culture along the way for 1-2 SPs, but there's only so many SPs that do anything for CV, and you're running great culture all game anyway).

If we're conceding Liberty oftentimes > Tradition for Domination... and it oftentimes > Tradition for Culture... and I'm not sure how to judge Diplo, but a fully trade-posted out wide empire certainly generates more gold than a 4-city tradition empire (and you only need to reach satellites to trigger the vote, so no ridiculous amount of science needed... you don't even need labs), but Liberty's certainly more secure than Tradition at holding CSs. . . . Then in everything but science, Liberty can at least hold its own in Deity, under fairly common (~50%) circumstances. For science, it can beat tradition's turn time if you get a bad starting location and aren't using a science-civ (~15%).

Hard to say Liberty's that bad on Deity. People just don't know how to use it well in BNW (and it IS objectively harder to use, because you have to do more things).

This is Liberty we're talking about here. It's not Piety, which just sucks. It's not Honor, which is VERY situational (need the right civ, the right start, fairly inflexible). Liberty is the most flexible start and if you're good at adjusting to your environment, instead of like Tradition just blindly following a build order, Liberty will pay off big time in the end game.

Now, IMO, Liberty should have a larger payoff, because it's so much more work (the same way military does). So, I would change the bonuses to -50% extra city culture cost, -40% extra city science cost. And then conversely nerf Tradition by changing it to +1 happiness every 12 citizens in city, and +1 happiness/gold per 3 citizens in capital (possible compensation with +3 food in capital instead of +2 on the other policy to balance out the large early game happiness boost Tradition rightly gets). I am pretty sure that would achieve balance between the two opening trees.

But, even as it stands, it's hardly broken on Deity as you suggest.
 
Things like extra slots for great works and extra landmarks are pure bonus resources wide gets over tall. Think of it this way, assuming you go aesthetics, Uffizi is worth less in tourism (even with NVC) than one extra city with a landmark (and the extra city's slots can be filled with artifacts, no need for artists). It's actually worth almost 10 tourism less. If you have 8 cities instead of 4 (totally feasible to fill them), you can miss Uffizi AND Louvre (which also saves you a SP), and still come out 30+ tourism ahead, that's base, pre-internet, pre-hotels, pre-airport giving it actually 120+ tourism. Multiplied by the GMs, that's a VERY large bonus. That one culture runaway that comes around once every 2-3 games that you just can't crack? Never an issue if you went wide.

You are speaking about peaceful deity CV?

So you are sayig that you can make 7 landmarks(one for each expo) and dig least 16 artifacts on standard size map? Otherwise you cant fill all museum slots on 8 cities. So thats at least 15 archaelogy dig outside of your borders. AIs dont get mad do you for digging so many?

Uffizi generates at least 36 tourism with NVC, aesthetics and cultural heritage sizes. How can you build 7 expos which all generates at least 36 tourism?
 
Currently playing a liberty game on diety standard sized pangea as Maya trying for a quick science victory. At turn 98 at the moment, 5 cities 6 CS allies. Liberty all filled up and got to the extra science policy for city states (forgot it's name). Messenger of the god as pantheon and founded a religion. Generating 128 science/turn and all of my cities now has or are close to finishing aqueducts and just finished civil service to be able to grow my cities. 3 of my city states allies are culture so I get a 56 culture a turn at the moment.

I have 7 sugar within my borders generating an insane amount of gold as I have 3 friendly AI:s and I am at +14 happiness thanks to my city states allies. This is one of the more successfull games I had in a long time and probably the first time I started pure liberty (I normally always start pure tradition). I still have room to expand more and will probably do so once my capital has finished circus and aqueduct.

You don't need unique luxury resources to build cities. You just need some resources, be it strategic or lux to sell to the AI and buy out city states for happiness. Of course, my religion will help a bit as well once I get it going since I picked some happiness help there as well (+1 happiness for every 2 cities, mosque as Pagoda was taken and +1 happiness from shrine).

Will be interesting to see how this game finishes...
 
You are speaking about peaceful deity CV?

So you are sayig that you can make 7 landmarks(one for each expo) and dig least 16 artifacts on standard size map? Otherwise you cant fill all museum slots on 8 cities. So thats at least 15 archaelogy dig outside of your borders. AIs dont get mad do you for digging so many?

Uffizi generates at least 36 tourism with NVC, aesthetics and cultural heritage sizes. How can you build 7 expos which all generates at least 36 tourism?

Bad math... very bad math...
36 tourism if you include cultural heritage, fine.

Say a landmark is 7 base culture (splitting the difference between an ancient one and a medieval one). Then, say, we went Freedom (the CV ideology of choice, although I'm more of an Order guy myself, Order's benefits are less easy to see, so we'll do what a typical tall tradition CV would do for a 1:1 comparison), and new deal is +4 culture. Then, say instead of cultural heritage, we do historical monuments for +4. That's 15 BASE culture per landmark. This is without using the two great artists Uffizi takes up. Those, go into the museum, which, with aesthetics is +8. Then, of course, we have a great work of writing, for +2. Hotel/Airport doubles the GW part, gives 15 for the landmark

This adds up to 35, for an expansion with ONE landmark.
There are always a couple of "free" artifacts in no mans land. You can have settlers built before (or immediately after) archeology triggers. AI always targets their own digs too, so you can be 20 turns later than the AI to archeology and still be able to found these cities.

For 8 cities (or hell, let's say 10), you'll need 21 great artists / artifacts to fill everything up. You get 1 free great artist. You'll generate at least 7 from the game before hitting internet. Faith buy 1, because 1k faith is nothing for a wide empire. That's 9. That's 12 artifacts you need to get. Assuming you have only 4 cities pre-archeology, because you screwed up, bad... then you'll have all the dig sites within 3 rounds of archeologists. 2 rounds if you have 6 cities like you damn well should. You can steal 1 from each civ without diplo consequences. As soon as you hit the tech (which you can Oxford if you need), you can send your soldiers (or workers, or missionaries) to squat on sites until your archeologists get there. It's not hard to pick up 12 artifacts. In a tradition game, you're encouraged to pick up 9. 3 more is not that much more.

Now, you're right, not EVERY city will have a landmark. In fact, you have zero control over your first X cities that you found, pre-archeology. But, ideology comes right after archeology, so you'll soon have a TON of happiness (happiness that scales per city no less), and in the meantime, a couple of city states and building zoos everywhere will do the trick and let you found the cities you need. If you have a 6-city start, go 10 cities (they don't have to be great cities). If you have a 4-city start, go 8 cities. In any case, you should easily end up with +4 cities working landmarks from what you would have had with a 4-city start.

Sorry, I underestimated and said 120+ before.
The real answer is: 35 x 4 = 140.
And, if you go 4-city then expand post-archeology, you can even still catch the AI for at least one of those wonders with a GE.

Try it sometime. Once you learn to manage happiness + expansion and "second/third wave" expansion while preserving science parity, you'll see that wide-CV is much easier than tall-CV. Remember, you're probably also picking a civ that has wide-friendly bonuses, and you're probably getting a religion with wide (there's something like a 65% chance now that a non-start bias start will have a faith pantheon available to you), to help out even more.

Now, the REAL question is whether this type of play benefits more from Tradition or Liberty start. This is actually debatable, because Tradition does give you more happiness and gold. But, liberty gives you fast workers (very important post-fertilizer, esp if you are building certain buildings), more culture, and +1 hammer.

edit: actually, do hotels multiply the theming bonus as part of the great works bonus? or is it just +1 tourism per GW? If the later, that's +31 instead of +35 per city... and so the final result is actually ~ +120, like my original claim. I knew I got that number from somewhere...
 
This is one of the more successfull games I had in a long time and probably the first time I started pure liberty (I normally always start pure tradition).

...

You don't need unique luxury resources to build cities. You just need some resources, be it strategic or lux to sell to the AI and buy out city states for happiness. Of course, my religion will help a bit as well once I get it going since I picked some happiness help there as well (+1 happiness for every 2 cities, mosque as Pagoda was taken and +1 happiness from shrine).

Will be interesting to see how this game finishes...

Glad it's working out for you!
 
People jonesing on Liberty seem to be just confusing it with wide empire size. Not the same thing at all. You can found however many cities you want under each policy tree. You have to look at the benefits of each tree under each style - wide/tall.

Through all of this recent discussion, notice that most of it has had to do with the benefits of wide v tall, and little if anything to do with SP's. Tradition-wide might outperform Liberty in certain spots. Meanwhile, Liberty tall is going to be really bad. So you're not comparing what's better out of wide or tall, you should be comparing how each tree performs under Wide. And Tradition actually outperforms Liberty in a lot of situations that could be called Wide.

Lets put it this way. Liberty is stronger in the long run. Tradition is safe for all occasions. I guess as the difficulty level increases, Liberty becomes stronger. Tradition is all about making your own money at first, but Liberty allows faster land/lux grab which you can use for trade early.
I think people focus on the counters on top too much (gold per turn and happiness) and relate that to how well they are doing. The hidden benefit of Liberty is often ignored (+1 hammer and reduced culture cost)

Essentially, Liberty's heavy-hitting policies are Representation, Republic and Meritocracy...

Since it only gives happiness, Meritocracy compares pretty directly to Monarchy and Aristocracy. The happiness it gives is 1 per city and 1 per 20 population. The happy Tradition gives is 1/2 population in capital plus one per city of > 10 pop. So Liberty's advantage here is to be found where a lot of cities are under 10 pop, and the Capital is very, very small. With a size 8 capital, we are talking about 4-5 cities with average pop of 4-5 each. That's the break-even point. After that, and particularly after 10 pop in each city threshold for Aristocracy, the Liberty empire needs to grow by 20 pop for every 2 pop in capital. For 5 cities, that's 4 pop growth in each city, and it's not until 10 cities that 2 growth in each one equals 2 in the Capital. That's an order that's almost impossible to fill. So while Tradition has advantage in small city count, it also has advantage in all cases that you keep your capital growing faster than a 10 city empire.

Republic's best comparison in Tradition is probably Aristocracy. On total Hammers over 300 turns, Republic far outproduces Aristocracy or any other Hammer-related policy. But the question is what's a more important competition point out of Wonders and Buildings. Wonders are important now for Culture VC's due to the Cultural Heritage Sites resolution, and a few early era ones can be game-breaking. An empire without republic will build those buildings eventually, but a boost to Wonder production early on while your Capital is low on Hammers can snowball quickly, and may even allow you to get a Wonder you couldn't get otherwise.

Representation is easier to hold out as a benefit against Tradition because there's just nothing in Tradition, or any SP tree for that matter, than helps you out this much in getting Social Policies. It will probably lead to 1-2 extra in the late game. But the question is, what's the use for those late-game policies/tenets? They're no longer related directly to any VC. I don't think any empire is hurting to fill 2 trees and the ideology late game if it makes effort to do that.

Sure, there are isolated hypotheticals where at a given turn you're getting more from Liberty than you would have Tradition. But those hypotheticals mostly correspond to situations that don't matter. Along with the fact that early benefits may outweigh late benefits due to the snowball effect.
 
Moriarte has an excellent walkthrough on opening Liberty here. It's geared for domination, but you can tailor it pretty effectively for other types of victories. Tradition is too boring for me-- I go for Liberty generally every time now.

I'll go Tradition if my :c5production: sucks, or if there's a dearth of luxes I can expand to. (Not a good idea to go for the rapid expansion if you tank on :c5happy:, right?) But most of the time, neither of these are true. I see it as the difference between soccer and chess-- you have to make the same decision with the same accuracy, you just have to make one a lot quicker. Of course, I find soccer a lot more fun to watch. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom