• Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:

      -showui

      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Battlefront.com

Status update on "Black Sea"

497 posts in this topic

"War is merely the continuation of policy by other means." - Carl von Clausewitz

When a conflict breaks out somewhere in the world it seems that most people react to the news with surprise, perhaps even outright shock. However, there are those that are not surprised in the least. Are they gifted with a crystal ball or second sight? No, of course not. The answer is actually much more mundane... they were simply paying attention. Not just to the news of the day, but deeper into history. While even the most careful and enlightened students of history can not accurately predict the future, they often get fairly close. At the very least they aren't as surprised as the general populace when something goes wrong.

Since Battlefront is in the business of making wargames we make it a priority to understand the history of the conflicts we portray. When it comes to conflicts in the near future we have to go a step further and make a guess as to what may come to pass. In 2005 we started working on our first modern era wargame based on a conflict in Syria, which many told us was unlikely to happen since Iran was the hotspot of the day. Although Combat Mission: Shock Force's exact premise didn't come to pass, it was closer to the mark than we were given credit for at the time of release. Definitely a situation where we are glad to be wrong, though unhappy we weren't totally wrong (i.e. no conflict at all in Syria).

After the success of Shock Force our customers logically asked us what was coming next. In 2009 we made it public that a conflict between Russia and NATO in the Ukraine was to be the next modern warfare setting with a release sometime after returning to WW2 subject matter. Starting in 2012 we began the process of making the artwork and TO&E for the game with a detailed 18 page backstory being finalized in the Fall of 2013 (ahead of the Kiev protests). This thread is to discuss where the game is at now and how we will proceed with it's development during a time of great uncertainty.

Normally we would not release this sort of information ahead of the game itself. In this case we feel compelled to because of the events in the Ukraine today. It's important to us that we show customers and non-customers that we are not throwing together a game to capitalize on the problems of others. In fact, the game is largely done and testing is slated to begin in a few weeks for a late Spring release. By that time we hope everything is resolved peacefully. Believe us when we say that this is not something we want to be right about.

Battlefront.com

March 6, 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very much looking forward to the game.

Will it include Kindergärten units for the Germans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What follows is the basic premise for our game. It was supposed to be a pure work of fiction designed to create a "setting" for a ground based conflict in the Ukraine between Ukrainian and NATO forces on one side and Russian forces on the other. While we absolutely based the story on real life conditions, we did shape the overall story in such a way as to preclude the possibility of a non-military resolution to the crisis. This is fine for a hypothetical wargame where nobody gets hurt, but totally undesirable for it to happen for real.

Some of what we wrote has actually come true in some form or another. I can not stress how strongly we hope that in the coming days, weeks, months, or even years we are proven wrong about everything else. We wish the people of Ukraine the best, regardless of their ethnic, religious, or political affiliations. You deserve to live peacefully.

What follows is the primary storyline as written in the Fall of 2013 (except for one typo I just noticed!)

------

Prelude to War:

As Ukraine's disputes with Russia over trade agreements, energy prices, and free trade agreements with the EU continue, the Ukrainian government and popular sentiment begins to move back towards the West. This movement culminates in 2015 when a new coalition of pro-West parties forms, and its leader wins the Ukrainian presidential election.

The new Ukrainian government begins three developments that considerably chill Ukraine-Russia relations:

1. Ukraine cancels the controversial 2010 Kharkov Accords that extended the Russian lease from May 2017 to 2042.

2. Ukraine demands that by May 28, 2017, the Russian military must leave their facilities in Sevastopol.

3. Ukraine announces their plan to join the EU and NATO as soon as possible.

Russian Escalation:

Russia strongly denounces the Ukrainian government's actions, stating that cancelling the Sevastopol lease is illegal, that Ukraine's joining NATO is a direct threat to Russian national security, and that Ukraine joining the EU would throw the region into chaos. Russia condemns NATO for their aggression by attempting to expand their influence to Russia's borders, and declares that if Ukraine were to enter NATO or the EU, Russia would consider the treaty that defines the Russia-Ukraine border to be void. Russia further states that they will take any steps necessary to protect Russians living in Ukraine.

Russia ratchets up economic pressure on the Ukrainian government in order to convince them to back down via a number of abusive trade policies, especially during the winters of 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 by hiking the price of natural gas. This is coupled with a political encouragement of anti-Ukrainian and anti-Western sentiment in Russia, the Donbass region, and Crimea.

NATO Escalation:

NATO and EU members react positively to Ukraine's new goal of NATO membership, seeing an opportunity to expand their influence eastward and further weaken Russian influence on Eastern Europe. With the help of NATO advisors, the Ukrainian military begins reforms in order to qualify for NATO membership. This process includes joint training exercises between Ukrainian and NATO forces, some of which take place on Ukrainian soil. NATO also lays the groundwork for including Ukraine in their joint development programs for military hardware.

When Russia responds by piling economic and political pressure onto Ukraine, NATO increases their preparations for Ukraine to join NATO, including more and larger joint training exercises. NATO also sides with Ukraine over the Sevastopol lease controversy, warning that if the Russians remain in Crimea after May 2017, they will be committing an aggressive act against Ukrainian sovereignty.

Donbass Region:

The alarmingly rapid Western influence on Ukrainian government policy stirs considerable political unrest in the southeastern area of Ukraine, where the local governments are pro-Russian and the population primarily identifies as Russian. Resistance to the pro-Western government is especially strong in the densely populated southeastern Donbass region, including the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces that share a border with Russia.

In response to the upcoming Ukrainian NATO and EU membership, a separatist political party forms in the eastern regions of Ukraine, calling for a separation from Ukraine and a reuniting with Russia. These movements have both local political and popular support from a largely sympathetic population, fueled by economic hardship and a pro-Russian/anti- Ukrainian media saturation campaign. With the Donbass region politicians, media, and public railing against the Ukrainian national government, the pro-West government moves in police forces from other regions of the country to maintain order. The Ukrainian government accuses the Russian government of instigating the civil unrest and covertly supporting the separatist movements within Ukraine.

Crimea and Sevastopol:

The issue of the cancelled Kharkov Accords lease becomes a standoff in Crimea, as the Russians state that they have every right to use their facilities until 2042 and have no intention of leaving.

As Ukraine's government moves towards NATO membership, civil unrest grows in the Russian-identifying communities in Crimea. As the situation heats up, protests occur against the new Ukrainian government and NATO, eventually turning into riots in Sevastopol. Like the Donbass region, the Ukrainian government moves in national police forces to help contain the civil unrest.

The Ukrainians respond by stepping up police presence in Crimea and especially Sevastopol, with the areas around Russian military installations being especially targeted. Russian military members based in Crimea complain of constant harassment by Ukrainian police. Civil unrest soon reaches critical levels in Sevastopol, and the Ukrainian government deploys paramilitary and military forces in southeastern Ukraine and Crimea. Curfews are imposed. As the deadline to vacate rapidly approaches during the spring of 2017, the Russians still show no signs of leaving.

Critical Incident:

The spark that ignites the conflict begins in Sevastopol. Martial law is enacted in Sevastopol after a pro-Russian demonstration turns into a large riot. During the resulting confusion, Ukrainian and Russian forces in Sevastopol clash in a gunfight that leaves multiple dead and many wounded.

In response, government opposition in southeastern Ukraine reaches the level of outright rebellion as separatist Donbass region and Crimean politicians formally request that the Russian military provide security for them. Russia obliges by demanding that Ukrainian forces vacate the Donbass region and Crimea within one week, so that Russian can provide for their security. The Russian fleet stationed at Sevastopol leaves port and join up with a heavy naval and air escort for Russian ships containing "security" troops heading from Novorossiysk towards Sevastopol. In response, the Ukrainians blockade Sevastopol.

On a dark night in May 2017, Russian forces cross the border into Ukraine in the Donbass region, while Russian naval infantry move out of their bases into Sevastopol.

Russia's Goals:

Russia's goal is to take Crimea and southeastern Ukraine and either annex them or install a satellite government. Accomplishing this will visibly punish Ukraine for joining NATO, install a buffer between NATO's influence and Russia's borders, retain Russia's access to the Black Sea and the Crimean military facilities, and uphold their image as being protective of their people and lands.

Russia's plan is to send what is labeled a humanitarian/peacekeeping force into the Donbass region and Crimea, with the stated intent of restoring the peace. In a best case situation, the Russians hope that the Ukrainians quickly cede the territory without a bloody fight, but they are prepared to eject the Ukrainians forcefully if needed. At the worst case, the Russians realize that they may need to exert extremely heavy pressure against Ukraine's major cities in order to force their acceptance. This worst case scenario, which also carries the high risk of NATO involvement, is only barely acknowledged by the Russian government who think that the Ukrainians will roll over after a display of military might by Russia. (I'm sure we can all think of half a dozen nasty conflicts where the politicians wishfully thought that the fight would be a pushover)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Starting in 2012 we began the process of making the artwork and TO&E for the game with a detailed 18 page backstory being finalized in the Fall of 2013 (ahead of the Kiev protests). ..... In fact, the game is largely done and testing is slated to begin in a few weeks for a late Spring release."

Sounds great! Any more about the detailed 18 page backstory that can be released?

"...we are not throwing together a game to capitalize on the problems of others."

Regular customers realize that Battlefront is NOT out for blood bucks. It is wise to state the history of Black Sea development up front as after CMSF and what went and is going down in Syria... it would be easy for some to make irresponsible comments.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Russia (RL today) has achieved half of her (CMBS) goals - acquiring the Crimea - without a shot. Fighting realistically only to be expected - maybe - in Eastern Ukraine, but at the moment the Kiev government doesn't seem to display much force in the East.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a war-game with little of everything in CM Black Sea. Russia, NATO, rebellious ethnic groups, naval components, etc. This will be using Engine 3.0?

Spring is real soon so Late Spring should be.... May?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this story going to be continued so that you'll tell us how you intend the Western Armies being deployed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Initial military forces are:

1. US Army

2. Russian Army

3. Ukrainian Army

"Uncons" are also planned, though I am not sure there will be much (if any) of that in the Base game release.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds great! Any more about the detailed 18 page backstory that can be released?

We are keeping the balance of the document on ice for now. We are waiting to see how this resolves itself. The document detailed military movements, forces involved, and a basic progression of the war for the first 6 months. This will need amending or we may just go ahead with the original story as written. That has not been determined yet.

Regular customers realize that Battlefront is NOT out for blood bucks. It is wise to state the history of Black Sea development up front as after CMSF and what went and is going down in Syria... it would be easy for some to make irresponsible comments.

Our thoughts exactly. You guys know who we are, but the Internet allows people to jump to conclusions within seconds. We feel it is important to have some information readily available to them for those few seconds.

So Russia (RL today) has achieved half of her (CMBS) goals - acquiring the Crimea - without a shot. Fighting realistically only to be expected - maybe - in Eastern Ukraine, but at the moment the Kiev government doesn't seem to display much force in the East.

The big difference in our story from real life is we saw the real life events being predicated on a peaceful changeover from Yanukovych to another government. If that had happened Russia would not have acted as quickly as it did in real life. It would have been more progressive, and as such any incursions of Ukrainian soil would have been harder to achieve without armed conflict.

But even in our story we predicted that the initial Russian forces would not be immediately embroiled in combat. We did predict the expansion of control over the Crimean almost exactly as it has played out, with two exceptions:

1. Russia would not be attempting to hide it's actions

2. Someone, either Russian or Ukrainian, would start an isolated shootout

So far we are happy that nothing significant has happened in terms of live firing (there were only two instances of shooting in the air we are aware of).

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks interesting though I would still have liked a winter war option. A Fifth Battle of Kharkov fouught between Russia and Ukraine fought on the same ground as the 1943 Third Battle of Kharkov at the same time of year.

For expansions I would like Polish, Germans, French, British, Hungarian, Roumania, Belorussian. Possibly Baltic States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our story's timeline starts out with the initial phase of the war happening in the Fall of 2016, extending through winter 2016/2017. The major NATO counter attack happens in Summer 2017, which is where the Base Game picks up.

The Module and Pack concept, coupled with Upgrades, allows us an unlimited theoretical list of forces to include. For sure there will be a variety of NATO forces added to "Blue Forces" as there were for Shock Force. Unfortunately as with Shock Force, the "Red Forces" will remain fairly static throughout the various expansions. This is because Russia has no military allies to draw into the story.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are keeping the balance of the document on ice for now. We are waiting to see how this resolves itself. The document detailed military movements, forces involved, and a basic progression of the war for the first 6 months. This will need amending or we may just go ahead with the original story as written. That has not been determined yet.

Our thoughts exactly. You guys know who we are, but the Internet allows people to jump to conclusions within seconds. We feel it is important to have some information readily available to them for those few seconds.

The big difference in our story from real life is we saw the real life events being predicated on a peaceful changeover from Yanukovych to another government. If that had happened Russia would not have acted as quickly as it did in real life. It would have been more progressive, and as such any incursions of Ukrainian soil would have been harder to achieve without armed conflict.

But even in our story we predicted that the initial Russian forces would not be immediately embroiled in combat. We did predict the expansion of control over the Crimean almost exactly as it has played out, with two exceptions:

1. Russia would not be attempting to hide it's actions

2. Someone, either Russian or Ukrainian, would start an isolated shootout

So far we are happy that nothing significant has happened in terms of live firing (there were only two instances of shooting in the air we are aware of).

Steve

There might well have to be some rethinking of the back story depending on how this crisis ends. For instance if, as looks probable the Russians secure their hold on the Crimea the flashpoint will have to be moved to the Donbass/Eastern Ukraine with a new crisis such as a Kremlin sponsered uprising against Kiev being used as an "excuse" to intervene by Russia.

Russia's goal is now to take thee Donbass Region and, if that goes well to topple the Kiev Government and bring the country back into Russian orbit.

However, after the events of 2014 there were secret talks between NATO and Ukraine giving a gauruntee that the Alliance will intervene in he event of a Russian invasion. NATO has made it clear that it will act if Russia invades and now acts on that threat

This effectively starts World War 3. NATO's initial goal is to repel the Russian invasion. After this is acomplished a decision is made to destroy he Russian army as an offensive force and change the regime in Moscow. NATO begis a full blooded counter offensive. Objectives Moscow and St Petersburg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our story's timeline starts out with the initial phase of the war happening in the Fall of 2016, extending through winter 2016/2017. The major NATO counter attack happens in Summer 2017, which is where the Base Game picks up.

The Module and Pack concept, coupled with Upgrades, allows us an unlimited theoretical list of forces to include. For sure there will be a variety of NATO forces added to "Blue Forces" as there were for Shock Force. Unfortunately as with Shock Force, the "Red Forces" will remain fairly static throughout the various expansions. This is because Russia has no military allies to draw into the story.

Steve

It would be nice to include the initial phase in a mdule to iclude winter warfare. For Russian allies can I suggest Belarus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Module and Pack concept, coupled with Upgrades, allows us an unlimited theoretical list of forces to include. For sure there will be a variety of NATO forces added to "Blue Forces" as there were for Shock Force. Unfortunately as with Shock Force, the "Red Forces" will remain fairly static throughout the various expansions. This is because Russia has no military allies to draw into the story.

Steve

Should make for some very interesting wargaming especially as Modules and Packs roll out to complete the game experience. CMSF stand alone was fun but the CMSF Bundle is much more fun. Modern Black Seas using the new CM engine will be rocket fast and look fantastic. Real Time is going t Rock!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be nice to include the initial phase in a mdule to iclude winter warfare. For Russian allies can I suggest Belarus.

We have concluded that Belarus would sit it out, though would give covert support to Russia. In fact, part of our storyline's details is they allow Russian special forces to infiltrate into northern Ukraine (west of Kiev) through Belarus' territory.

NATO would not likely want to start a war with Belarus as it would have it's hands full in the Ukraine. Belarus, on the other hand, wouldn't want to risk Poland and the Baltic states taking their own form of action for which Russia would be of no help.

No, as I see it Belarus would likely want to stay out of a direct and overt role in the conflict.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve, I think you can take comfort on the moral front with the maxim that "Prediction is not the same as control."

We can predict all sorts of outcomes based on the corruption of our political systems (particularly when the knowledge of such is coupled with the understanding of positive feedback loops and the power of human stupidity). Given that quite a few of our problems stem from the inculcation of dependence on the state and the acceptance of someone else's simplistic viewpoint on affairs, it behooves us as intelligent, empathetic individuals to make decisions for reasons that make sense to us, not necessarily to others. BF needs to survive as an entity that provides a living for yourself, Charles, etc. The product it delivers is entertainment, not politics. You need to avoid the losses to market exposure inherent in the exploration of topical and controversial subjects. Given the current state of affairs in the political scene in the US (as I see it), there are some aspects of a probable and accurate story that cannot make it into the storyline. Such a set of circumstances requires you do you best to salvage your market, but you're up against systems and events of a size that could quite possibly see you squashed flat.

You are capable of negotiating this minefield and arriving at the other side in good shape. Pretty much the same sentiments apply to everyone involved in the brouhaha in the "real world" - at least in your circumstances there aren't parties looking to cash in on your failure.

All the best and, as MikeyD would say, "Embrace the suck."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Timing of the NATO build-up seems to be covered (though I think armour from the US might be in short supply for a period if a ship or two was sunk in mid-Atlantic.)

How is the use of EMP devices going to be covered? As I see it, this is where one of the biggest problems lies given that Russia can set off a nuke in it's own airspace and not be morally decried for the adoption of asymmetric tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh... I wrote "Soviet" up above by mistake! This will no doubt happen a lot since we are coincidentally also making a WW2 game set in Belarus and Ukraine :)

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be curious to learn how your COA wargaming concluded that NATO would actually be able to project forces (particularly heavy forces) into Ukraine. If we are talking about a shooting war starting before NATO is even really mobilized I could foresee the Russians launching a major air and sea campaign to keep Ukraine isolated, giving them time to consolidate and strengthen their positions in Ukraine (we all know how the Russians love their improved fighting positions). Of course, such a campaign could escalate the fight way beyond Ukraine, all without a single pair of Belleville boots setting foot in Crimea.

I suppose if I am patient and wait, I shall find out... but do I really have to? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The timeline is that US started prepositioning forces ahead of the conflict because the warning signs were there already and NATO was getting nervous. At that point there was no shooting so transport was unhindered. But when the "spark" set off the war between Russia and Ukraine NATO wasn't in a position to do anything at that time. Other than send a small force in to plug some holes in the Ukrainian lines and to offer assistance with directing air support.

This is why the NATO counter offensive did not come until the following campaign season. It simply couldn't draw it's forces together faster than that. We examined the US' logistics air and surface heavy lift capabilities and figured 3-5 months was a reasonable timeframe for a determined effort to reposition heavy forces in Europe.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks for not making me "hurry up and wait."

I would recommend (and you may have already done this) go back and look at the time lines for deploying an armored corps (mostly from Germany) to Saudi in 1990 (when we were still on our Cold War footing) and the timeline for pushing two mech divisions to Kuwait in 2003. Keeping in mind that even in 2003 our lift capability was better than it is now and there was at least a brigades worth of equipment already in kuwait, I think your estimate is a little optimistic. But what the hell, it's just a game.

I noticed you said "reposition in Europe" in there a stipulation that we would have a significant armored force still in Germany?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, thanks for not making me "hurry up and wait."

I would recommend (and you may have already done this) go back and look at the time lines for deploying an armored corps (mostly from Germany) to Saudi in 1990 (when we were still on our Cold War footing) and the timeline for pushing two mech divisions to Kuwait in 2003. Keeping in mind that even in 2003 our lift capability was better than it is now and there was at least a brigades worth of equipment already in kuwait, I think your estimate is a little optimistic. But what the hell, it's just a game.

Yup, I do understand we're being a little generous :D I will say that the buildup for Iraq 2003 was not peddle to the metal. Forces were moved around in such a way as to not raise much suspicion. I remember when a Congressional delegation went to Afghanistan many many months before OIF and the troops said they were leaving. The Congressman asked "where to?" and the soldier replied "Kuwait". The Congressman probably had an "Ooooo Really?" expression on his face since officially there was no policy for a buildup against Iraq at the time.

Anyhoo, I think we could push a lot more a lot quicker if we felt WW3 was about to start. You'd see commercial airliners doing a lot more work, that's for sure.

I noticed you said "reposition in Europe" in there a stipulation that we would have a significant armored force still in Germany?

The storyline is similar to what I just said about the shift of forces to Kuwait. And that is someone decided to hedge some bets and moved 1x battalion of armor back into Europe for "an exercise" and kept it there. They would go in with the first wave of NATO troops along with a single SBCT and a couple of IBCTs. Most of the heavy armor would be provided by the Germans, British, French (who would join in the fight), Italians, and the mix of armor from other European nations.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" I think we could push a lot more a lot quicker if we felt WW3 was about to start. You'd see commercial airliners doing a lot more work, that's for sure."

Would TSA make the servicemen and women remove their boots if WW3 was about to start? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While discussing the intricacies of the backstory, it's also worth remembering the big picture: this is a tactical game, and what happens before the player gets his forces to play with on the battlefield is essentially a minor detail.

The operational/strategic backstory must fit the needs of the tactical CM battleground... not the other way around. We've got a game to make here, not a novel to write. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is about a game? Oh damn, I got my Conplan 2015 forum mixed up with my Battlefront.com one again. Sorry Guys!! :)

Just playing a little what if Chris. Not trying to one up you guys or second guess. Its an interesting tactical problem, is all. Its like catnip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0