Recommend
156 
 Thumb up
 Hide
187 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] | 

Fallout» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Fallout: An Enthusiastically Conflicted Review (primarily for Euro-gamers) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Armand
United States
Los Angeles
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Disclaimer: If you are not primarily a Euro-gamer, or if you already own and love Fallout, or if you love great game mechanisms so much that you happily ignore imbalances, or if you love RPG-lite stories and don't care if randomness determines the winner, if any of this is you... respectfully, please consider not reading any further. You're not gonna like what I have to say. And I’m glad you love Fallout! And I totally get why you love it! I might even end up loving it, too...

But if you are primarily a Euro gamer, or if you believe that all games - even dudes on a map with variable player powers - should at least try to be somewhat balanced, and if you are considering buying Fallout, I have some thoughts for you to consider before you buy.

Fallout is a remarkable achievement in game design, but unfortunately it has a flaw (ok, if you’re still here, non-Euro gamer, a ‘feature’…) that I think will probably make it very disappointing to many Euro-gamers.

A Euro game, pretty much by definition, does not exclude one or more players from victory due to random events that take place before the game begins.

In Fallout, you are given an Agenda card at the beginning of the game. This is a pretty standard endgame scoring card, a feature of many (most?) games these days. The Agenda is worth 1 VP by default, but may be increased to 3VP, or possibly more over the course of the game by meeting conditions.

16 of the 23 Agenda cards give the player holding them points for advancing the goals of one of the game's two warring Factions. The 7 remaining cards give up to 3 pts for doing other things in the game.

Let's look more closely at the 16 Faction related Agenda cards. If you kill a Faction A-Monster, for example, Faction B will gain one step on a simple, 7-step track. If one of the Factions gets to the end of the track, the game ends and players that hold an Agenda card for that Faction will gain points according to the differential on the track. If Faction A is four steps ahead of Faction B, anyone holding an A card gets 4 pts.

So, here's a perfectly likely scenario. Prior to the first turn of the game, the Agenda cards are dealt. P1 gets Faction A. P2 also gets Faction A. P3 gets Faction B. P4 gets a non-Faction card.

As a starting point in this game, P1 and P2 will be working toward the same end, knowingly or unknowingly, it doesn't matter. They will be advancing A on the track. P3 will be advancing Faction B roughly half as fast as P1 and P2 advance Faction A. It's perfectly likely that their Faction A cards will be worth 4pts to each of them, but they may be worth more.

P3's Faction B card will be worth at most 1pt, since Faction B will almost certainly end up behind. Player B is heavily handicapped before the game begins.

Now, at this point, Fallout lovers (if they’re still reading, Lord help them…) will be clamoring "What if's". What if P3 gets great gear and ends up being stronger than P1 and P2 combined? What if P3 draws another Agenda card that turns out to be a Faction A card while P1 and P2 both draw Faction B's? Basically, "What if randomness undoes the mess that randomness has created?

All I can say to that is: it was still a mess. Great game design doesn't start with a mess and hope things work out. And in this case, randomness is just as likely to make the situation worse, as it did in our session last night.

Because in our session, the above situation didn't happen. The random distribution we encountered was actually slightly less likely statistically, but even worse in its implications: P3 didn't have a Faction B card. He had a Faction A card, too.

And then he drew another.

He had two Faction A cards! So three players had their interests aligned, but two of them were going to reap half the rewards that the third would reap. At game end P3 got 8pts from two Faction A Agendas, P1 and P2 got 4pts from one Faction A Agenda each.

And what about P4?

P4 was me. I got an Agenda that could score me up to 3pts for leveling up my character all the way. At the end of the game, it was worth a single point. It would have taken me another 30XP to get to 3VP (for those who know how leveling up works, I drew tiles and counted to arrive at this figure), which would have meant, for example, killing ten more of the toughest monsters in the game. Basically, it was going to take me quite a while to improve my last place finish. I couldn't have gotten out of last place.

Why? Because the second Agenda card I drew was Faction B, which was dead, 1pt max. The third was a card that gave me potentially 3pts for having an Agenda card from each Faction, A and B. I had the B card so it was worth 2 pts, through no effort on my part. It just as easily may have been worth 1 or 3, and there is no way that amount could be influenced by my actions other than:

1. Draw more Agenda cards, which of course I would be trying to do anyway, and
2. Drawing the 'right' Agenda card, which is random

Ok, so that’s the problem with Fallout in a nutshell. Now for the really, truly, massively frustrating and annoying part of this review.

Fallout, other than the (admittedly huge) fact that you can be effectively eliminated from competition before the game begins, is a fantastic game, for several reasons:

1. Continuity: There is a huge problem with story driven, skill test, Arkham Horror-style games:

You walk deep into the dark Woods... (you draw a card...) you enter an Ice Cream Parlor... (you draw a card...) you find a shotgun... (you draw a card... you make a skill check) you become insane..."

Each card makes sense in and of itself, but drawn randomly all continuity and any sense of story go out the Ice Cream Parlor porthole and land in the Indian Ocean. Does this wreck those games? No, but it's goofy, it's a flaw of all the games in this genre from Eldritch Horror to Tales of the Arabian Nights, and Fallout solves it.

The stories make sense! There are multiple plot-lines and they all advance coherently. I was actually shocked to see that with a simple pyramid structure of numbered plot cards Fallout generates an actual story!

2. Dice that Work: Fallout features dice-based combat, another pitfall of the AH genre. If you're a primarily Euro gamer like me, you may appreciate the spooky flavor text, but the game design you are going to summarize succinctly: "Roll 5's and 6's and win!"

Fallout solves this problem, too. One set of three custom dice (always three, thank God) determines offense, defense, and the difficulty of the monster. It's brilliant, it's quick, and it's fun. You also, in many encounters, have the option to roll the dice for a big gain or take a smaller gain without letting chance play a factor. You decide whether to push the random-button, (like in the wonderful Lords of Vegas), and it's again, freaking brilliant.

3. Tight Level-Ups: And then there's the leveling system which is, again, brilliant. I’m not going to go into great detail, but it creates a super simple ramp that increases your abilities without increasing the amount of crap on the table. You don’t gain a spell, summarized on a card, elaborated in a rulebook, clarified in a FAQ. You gain a letter, which makes your gear better. I think it might be the cleanest, most clever leveling system I’ve ever seen.

4. Great Map: Hex maps are better than grids, for obvious reasons, but they sometimes have a problem with evoking a sense of place, unless the game is set in a beehive, or on the tiled floor of a bathroom. The flip (explore) the hex tiles in Fallout, you see that the map is all jigsawed up into different shapes. This makes the map look like a map, and gives it a ton of regions while keeping it from spreading endlessly across the table. Yep, brilliant, too!

In fact, every bit of this game was fun, satisfying, totally engaging every step of the way. It fires everything from Arkham to Firefly for me, and it should be an unmitigated triumph.

But then Fallout reaches into the wayback machine of game design, roots around in the oh-so-aptly-named coffin-box of Twilight Imperium, and steals the very worst part: completely unbalanced, totally broken, often impossible VP cards.

I simply can’t tell you what a massive bummer it was to realize, at the end of our wonderful three-hour wasteland scramble, that the whole thing was rigged from the start.

So… What I’m telling you is that you shouldn’t buy Fallout, right?

Well… not quite, because I’m actually thinking of buying it myself! The good is that good, although the bad is truly horrendous. I don’t think I’ve ever bought a game knowing it would require house-ruling for me to enjoy it. But I may be doing just that. And I may be recommending that you do the same, contingent on this question:

Can you figure out how to fix it?

Because that’s not going to be a very simple thing to do. Here are some possibilities:

1. Cap Agendas: Maybe you can cap Faction Agendas at 3VP each.

2. Cap Duplicate Faction Agendas: There is a thread here on bgg discussing a video in which they state that duplicate Agendas are capped at 1VP. The discussion is inconclusive, no one there found verification in the rulebook, nor have I. This wouldn't solve the problem, but it might mitigate it, unless it makes it worse… You could be capped at 1vp for drawing dupes while others scored 3's for not drawing dupes... but at least you would solve the ‘double-dipping problem’, that a player with two matching Agendas gets twice the points for doing half, or a third, or possibly even a quarter of the work of advancing that Faction.

3. Even Teams: Maybe you can deal out 2 A's and 2 B's at the start and toss the rest? And never play with 3 players?

4. Shared Agenda System: A game called ‘Argent, The Consortium’ has a similar problem, and a variant I’ve played with may solve the problem here, too. Briefly, in Argent you have to discover what the endgame scoring criteria are. It’s a worker placement game, and one of the actions is to peek at one of the 12 or so scoring cards. In practice (and with apologies for a tangent at the end of a long review) it often looks like this:

“Ok, ‘Most Blue Spells’… well, that’s not gonna happen…”

or

“Ok, ‘Most Blue Spells’… sweet, I’ve got that locked! I had it locked before I knew it was important, and I’m not gonna do anything differently now that I know it’s going to score me points… but now I know I’m gonna get those points which I would have gotten anyway whether I knew about them or not…"

You take the 'peek' action looking for a sense of direction, a way to score more points. In both cases, due to baked-in randomness, you would gain none.

The solution I liked best for that was to simply leave all the scoring cards face up. We replaced the ‘peek’ action with ‘gain a token in your color’. At the end of the game, if you had four tokens, you could make yourself eligible for four scoring categories of your choice by placing your tokens on those cards.

This would translate pretty directly to Fallout. Instead of gaining an Agenda as a reward, you would gain a token that would allow you to activate an Agenda. This would mean there would be 9 face-up Agendas in a common bank for everyone to work towards: the two Faction Agendas and the 7 non-Faction-related Agendas. Although actually, I think it might work best to combine #3 above, Even Teams, with this and just put the 7 non-faction cards in the common bank. That way you wouldn't have everyone jumping on the bandwagon of the dominant faction instead of fighting to advance their own.

Or maybe, if you decide to buy Fallout, you can borrow other solutions from the last two decades of Euro game design, or come up with your own, to balance the game after set-up. If you do, please post your solutions in the Variants forum. I’ll be thrilled to try them.

It would, in my opinion, be well worth the effort.


  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexandre Santos
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
This was a quite unusual, thoughtful and very entertaining review. Thanks for the write up!

It certainly made me more interested in the game, but also curious in knowing how things will shake down.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael R

Heidelberg
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
doctoryes0 wrote:

16 of the 23 Agenda cards give the player holding them points for advancing the goals of one of the game's two warring Factions.

Oh wow, I've read and watched a lot about the game, but this part is new to me. It sounds really troublesome. Then again, if it's that big of an issue, I am sure people will come up with some good variants. Your review already lists a couple that sound reasonable. Great, nuanced review by the way. Probably the best I have seen so far!

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Norris
United States
Blacksburg
Virginia
flag msg tools
Insert witty and self aware quote here
badge
Show how culturally relevant I am by writing a well written joke or meme reference
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I can GUARANTEE this will be fixed with the first expansion. That’s why FFG releases games with one big flaw, right?
34 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kain
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
If you're a hardcore euro gamer, you shouldn't buy fallout, feels like saying anything otherwise is simply dishonest. Same reason I wouldn't tell someone who loves zmbicide games they should buy Lesboa because it's almost a dice chucker
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daily Grind
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tricil wrote:
doctoryes0 wrote:

16 of the 23 Agenda cards give the player holding them points for advancing the goals of one of the game's two warring Factions.

Oh wow, I've read and watched a lot about the game, but this part is new to me. It sounds really troublesome.
I just ran into this and it's pretty troublesome. At least in the Commonwealth scenario the only way to even get agendas seems to be progress the quests, and if 1 player happens to get 2 of the same faction right away, they have a clear advantage over a player who gets one of each faction. Sure, you can cycle cards out, but there aren't enough opportunities to acquire new agendas by the time the quests have necessitated you back a side.

The capping suggestions don't work, because (at least with 2p) there aren't enough NON-faction agendas to achieve the 10 pt goals if the agenda only scores 1 influence.

As it stands right now, I really only see this game working as a solo experience.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I completely agree with the duplicate agendas issue. I consider it an almost game-breaking flaw in the design. I'll be playing that duplicate agendas are only worth 1 VP each from now on.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daily Grind
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
I completely agree with the duplicate agendas issue. I consider it an almost game-breaking flaw in the design. I'll be playing that duplicate agendas are only worth 1 VP each from now on.
How will you get enough influence to win? With 2p, there are only 5 agenda that aren't factions. You'd have to be the lucky player who gets 3 of them, and completes them at 3 influence before the factions hit max.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.C. Hamlin
United States
Medina
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
We had a game last night, our first game, and played four players. One of the players, the Brotherhood, within the first 4-5 rounds of the game got two more agendas. Through our actions the Institute had moved two steps ahead (it was much easier to advance the Institute the first two steps than the Railroad, but I won't explain why that is due to spoilers). The Brotherhood's character had two Security agendas (worth 3 points each since shield was ahead of star by two), and the one that gives 2 points for having 2 points of armor, and thus had 8 influence and won. We had barely gotten maybe 4-5 rounds into the game.

The rest of us scrambled to get every chance at picking up influence cards that we could, but to no avail. The rest of us finished with one influence card each.

The game mechanics were enjoyable, but the victory conditions seem totally random and wrong. We mine as well roll a 4-sided die and hide it under a cup, play for a few hours to get some depth into our game, and then reveal the die after a few hours to see who won.

As the original poster said, almost everything about the game is enjoyable, except the totally random way of scoring and winning. That definitely needs an overhaul. I like some of the ideas, after we've played a bit more, we might have to try adopting some of those ideas, and maybe make a few more publicly available agendas, or somehow dramatically reduce the power of the Freedom and Security agendas, especially the power of duplicate ones.
29 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Day
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree 100% with your take on the Agenda cards as I experienced the exact same problem. In the game we played yesterday, the first five Agenda cards were Faction related. I thought that was a fluke until I saw just how few non-Faction victory cards there were. It's kinda pathetic since this was one of the main features the promoted in the pre-release hype.

As for a solution, I'd really like to see about half of the Faction Agenda cards replaced with non-Faction ones. I might try this myself.

It also might be more RPG-feeling if each player selected a set of victory conditions at the start of the game. Drawn Agenda cards would simply add one extra to this.

In either case, it's a major undertaking.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Marley
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have not played yet, but I noticed this is well. 16 of 23 influence cards as faction cards seems like way to much.

I guess it forces everyone to push the story, but it seems too powerful if someone gets a matching set.

I would be interested in seeing the rational for this choice.

Game seems great otherwise.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Australia
flag msg tools
I’m really an okay guy.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Brilliant review!
Highlights and flaws explained well. Thank you!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hector Cornejo
United States
Orange
Ca
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ugh not happy to hear this. Thanks for adding possible solutions to your review though.

Maybe if a person draws a duplicate agenda they just get +1 VP total to their total as a solution. No multipliers, just a +1 bonus. Still doesn't solve the runaway at the very beginning but does reduce the crazy bonuses that get out of hand.

How the heck did this get through play testing? I mean, it seems like a pretty glaring issue they should have managed to phase out early in the process.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelly Hansen
msg tools
I have to say that I think the "unbalance" of the agenda cards seem to be blown a little out of proportion in this review. There are several things put in place that counteract a runaway faction that the reviewer neglects to mention. First, the rewards, progressions, and success conditions get crazier the further along a faction is. Also, the losing faction will typically have more enemies on the board (to which if you're behind, you can pledge loyalty to them and they'll ignore you). Now, maybe it's not enough to make a difference (I've only played a couple times) just wanted to point out it is not as clear cut as it's being presented here.
12 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin H
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
I do think it was intended that extra faction cards don’t stack. This would help the balance issue pretty well. I have only played three 2 players games so far though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Armand
United States
Los Angeles
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cafin8d wrote:
tricil wrote:
doctoryes0 wrote:

16 of the 23 Agenda cards give the player holding them points for advancing the goals of one of the game's two warring Factions.

Oh wow, I've read and watched a lot about the game, but this part is new to me. It sounds really troublesome.
I just ran into this and it's pretty troublesome. At least in the Commonwealth scenario the only way to even get agendas seems to be progress the quests, and if 1 player happens to get 2 of the same faction right away, they have a clear advantage over a player who gets one of each faction. Sure, you can cycle cards out, but there aren't enough opportunities to acquire new agendas by the time the quests have necessitated you back a side.

The capping suggestions don't work, because (at least with 2p) there aren't enough NON-faction agendas to achieve the 10 pt goals if the agenda only scores 1 influence.

Agreed, or rather, the capping suggestions won't work alone.

What I'm relatively sure of so far is:

1. Due to the content of the Agenda cards, they cannot be awarded randomly

2. There can be no duplicates, even if they are capped

3. With those changes implemented, the point total necessary to win will probably have to change, too


p.s. Thanks for all the positive feedback! I hope we get some quality variants out of the discussion.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cafin8d wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
I completely agree with the duplicate agendas issue. I consider it an almost game-breaking flaw in the design. I'll be playing that duplicate agendas are only worth 1 VP each from now on.
How will you get enough influence to win? With 2p, there are only 5 agenda that aren't factions. You'd have to be the lucky player who gets 3 of them, and completes them at 3 influence before the factions hit max.

I'm also planning on playing with a house rule that the game only ends once one of the faction power tokens reaches the final space of the power track. Another (rather major) flaw we've found with the game is that it just *ends* suddenly in what feels like the middle of game, and in every game we've played with the original rules so far it's left a really bad taste in the players' mouths. The reason for this is that I don't think I've ever played any other adventure game where a player can win without the main storyline being completed. So playing until a faction reaches max power should fix this and mean that the main storyline should be completed around the same time that the game ends.

With this rule, players will have more time to gain influence, and so the target should be much more attainable. Probably it also won't be necessary to vary the amount of influence needed to win for different player counts either, and it can just be a set amount of either 8 or 9 influence (depending on whether you want an easier game or a harder game).

It's a shame, because as the OP says, the rest of the game is really well implemented. It's just the scoring system and end game that's really, really awful.
18 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Gerlicher
United States
California
flag msg tools
To me, some of this faction/agenda stuff is balanced out by the fact that if the game ends (one factions reaches the end of the track) and no player has adequate influence points, every one loses. This encourages players to try to move the factions forward without moving them too quickly so that they lose. I played yesterday and my friend and I were teamed up against my wife. But, we were forced to find other ways to score the last few points we needed to actually win. In the mean time, she started gaining lots of points and almost caught back up.

Also, yeah... I don’t think duplicate agenda cards count. All other copies just score 1 influence.

Great write up, generally agree with everything. Doesn’t spoil ANY of the fun for me. I take it more like a chill adventure game.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Coniff
United States
Springfield
Missouri
flag msg tools
Check me out on Instagram: @WisdomForWizards
badge
"Behold, a treasure more valuable than gold."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
First of all, I really enjoyed this review. It presents an interesting "feature" that I was unaware of, but in a very constructive and helpful way. There's often too much negativity without enough brainstorming on how to fix things.

I am absolutely still excited for this.

I definitely find myself squarely in the camp of a Fallout fan/Ameritrash gamer that this issue won't really bother. Since my game group comprises of people who love games like Talisman and Wiz-War, I'm equally confident it won't be an issue with them either.

With that being said, I really think you're on the right track with your suggestions to fix this issue. Once I get my copy I'll have to sit down and see what can be done to fix it for my play group (even though I could play it as is and nobody would really mind).
3 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Marentette
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
How about if you draw a duplicate agenda, discard it, draw another and then shuffle the discarded agenda back into the deck? Or maybe I am missing something as I don't own the game and read the rules once.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mikemarentette wrote:
How about if you draw a duplicate agenda, discard it, draw another and then shuffle the discarded agenda back into the deck? Or maybe I am missing something as I don't own the game and read the rules once.

There are not enough agendas for that.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tyler Stratton
United States
California
flag msg tools
I cannot agree more about what Chris has said. I've only played one game but I'm certain that the winning condition will always bother me. Everyones running around doing stuff and then STOP! One person suddenly has more points then anyone everyone else and wins?

That's like playing fallout 4 and half way through your game the game freezes and says Game over. For no real reason.

First FFG game I played that I instantly said well...need the expansion to fix this.


I like the idea of finishing the faction quest. Longer game, but at least everyone can see it coming.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Ewing
msg tools
Sounds like the agenda issue could be easily resolved with a houserule. The one that sounds best to me is several public open agendas that are not faction related that everyone can work towards and then each person gets a hidden agenda that is faction related. I think I will almost always play this with four if I got it, so there wouldn't be a problem of unbalanced teams.

I really do want to get this game as the first two Fallout games and New Vegas are some of my all-time favorites and I like the idea of the story cards.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
RIK FONTANA
United States
St. George
UT
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Excellent Armand! I play mostly Euros, but am intrigued by this title.
Your informative and entertaining read has helped immensely with the decision.....
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daily Grind
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheJames wrote:
Sounds like the agenda issue could be easily resolved with a houserule. The one that sounds best to me is several public open agendas that are not faction related that everyone can work towards and then each person gets a hidden agenda that is faction related. I think I will almost always play this with four if I got it, so there wouldn't be a problem of unbalanced teams.
But it reduces the agenda deck by 7 cards which shortens the game timer and causes the factions to progress faster. It also shifts the balance of which enemies trigger.

You'd need to make pasteups of the public goals and keep the cards in the deck.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] |