|
Ever since the patch that nerfed Barracks by increasing their build time by 5, the issue of 15 OC vs 16 OC has been nagging me. For those of you who don't play Terran, let me explain.
Before this patch, the barracks would finish at the exact same time as SCV #15, thus allowing the building of the Orbital Command Right away. There was never any question - 15 OC was the best way to go. And it made the OCD part of me happy because of how perfectly it lined up with the barracks timing.
Now, since the barracks has an additional 5 seconds of build time, the nagging question is - do you stop at 15 SCVs and build the orbital right when the barracks is finished, or do you make a 16th SCV and build an orbital once it is done? The first option is 15 OC, and the second is 16 OC.
With 15 OC, you get faster MULEs, but you have 5 seconds of idle CC time. With 16 OC, your MULEs come out a bit slower, but your CC has constant production. I've been wanting to actually test which is better for a long time, but haven't done so until now.
Every time I watch a Terran stream, one of the biggest things I look for in build orders is whether the Terran does a 15 OC or a 16 OC. There isn't any set standard - I've seen different players do different things. My guess when the patch was first released was that eventually all Terran players will settle on one or the other, so I delayed actually testing it. I always did the 16 OC variation simply because the OCD part of me can't stand the 5 seconds of idle build time on the CC. However, to this day, there is no set standard, which surprises me.
I finally decided to run some tests on which is better to settle my mind.
Here are the results:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/43kLx.png)
The top graph is the total mineral value in the 16 OC build minus the total mineral value in the 15 OC build. The bottom graph is simply the total mineral value of both the 15 OC and 16 OC builds. (The total mineral value is the current number of minerals + the cost of each building + the cost of each SCV, including the one currently in production). The bottom graph shows that the difference is surprisingly tiny. The top graph reveals, however, that the 16 OC build fares slightly better in the long run even though the income from MULEs comes a bit later. With 16 OC, you also get faster full saturation.
So, even though the difference between 15 OC and 16 OC is quite small, 16 OC is the better option and it should become the Terran standard. (Note: there are some cases in which the slightly earlier influx of minerals from MULEs matters, such as an allin).
tl;dr 16 OC is slightly better than 15 OC in terms of longer term economy and it should become standard.
EDIT: I did not run many tests - only 3 per build, so the data is not definite as to the amount of minerals gained. But it is true that the 16 OC is, by some small margin, better than 15 OC in the long run. The earlier MULE from the 15 OC can be used for some sort of allin or a slightly faster 1rax expo. So, in the case of a 1rax expo, 15 OC is probably better. Either way, it'd still be nice to see some standardization.
EDIT 2: I decided to do some follow-up work that is more theoretical - just based on SCV build times and orbital build times and the such. (40 minerals/minute per SCV until 16 SCVS, after that the income is an average of experimental data since it no longer increases linearly, 9th SCV sent out to build and never brought back).
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u4E5P.png)
The second graph is based on the first graph. You can see the expected income differences in the first graph and how they translate to being very close total mineral counts in the second graph.
Here is the difference between the two graphs (positive means more minerals in 16 OC, negative means more minerals in 15 OC):
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jE6he.png)
You can see that the first spike shows that the extra 16th SCV is making some more money, and then the mules kick in for the 15 OC but the 16 OC catches back up. The total theoretical difference/advantage is about 9 minerals in favor of 16 OC. Not a very large difference, but there you have it.
 
|
Can't argue with the numbers.
I'll do 16 OC from now on.
|
Nice, always wondered what was better.
Thank you, Sir.
|
whoa thanks for this! I've always wondered this myself but never actually bothered testing it.
|
Thank you, will do 16 from now on
|
Great work!
Can you do more tests?
- How does sending the SCV scout affect the results? Even though both openers will have scouts, my guess is that the SCV scout will affect the 15OC more.
|
how did you test this? might need confirmation cause of possible variances  still awesome.
|
What about 13 barracks 16 OC?
|
|
|
So basicly what this means is do 15 if you want to all-in (like a 1-1-1 for example) otherwise go for 16 scv. I think 16 scv could also be better when oppening reactor hellion since there seems to be a very small mineral "gap" where you have the 100 gas but not yet 150 minerals therefore delaying your factory by a few seconds. This is obviously very minor stuff but i think it can help your mental game quite a bit if you know your build order is, at least in theory, perfect.
|
Good that someone did some testing.
What was your methodology of testing? I imagine this was done on the same starting position on the same map over at least a dozen or so tests? Did you do the standard deviation and confidence interval testing? What makes you sure that your data is proof that one is better than the other?
|
Pretty interesting. Thanks for sharing your test.
|
On December 31 2011 13:39 Shalaiyn wrote:
What about 13 barracks 16 OC?
Uh... What about it? You're perfectly timed with 16 OC when going 13 rax.
|
On December 31 2011 13:39 Shalaiyn wrote:
What about 13 barracks 16 OC?
why 13 barracks?
(if you are referring to the small amount of time that can be lost between scvs on a 12 rax, if you double up on close patches you can easily manage to keep it going consistent)
|
Thank you very much for putting this info out there for us to see. Does this mean that Liquipedia should be edited to say this for a standard opening now?
|
thanks for this, ive been wondering this myself for a long time, I always hated cutting the scv.
|
On December 31 2011 13:38 nttea wrote:how did you test this? might need confirmation cause of possible variances still awesome.
I touched SCVs only once - when I did my 3/3 split. Then I just kept the CC rallied on the same spot. I rallied my 9th scv to make a depot, then a rax, then another depot, then back to mining. Other than that, I just made SCVs and let them do whatever - no mineral stacking, etc.
|
On December 31 2011 14:05 darthcaesar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2011 13:38 nttea wrote:how did you test this? might need confirmation cause of possible variances still awesome. I touched SCVs only once - when I did my 3/3 split. Then I just kept the CC rallied on the same spot. I rallied my 9th scv to make a depot, then a rax, then another depot, then back to mining. Other than that, I just made SCVs and let them do whatever - no mineral stacking, etc.
Unfortunately, most builds do not work like that until 7 minutes.
|
Can you talk a bit more about your methodology? Was this over multiple trials? Scouting? Etc... Cheers!
|
Thank you for this! It's obviously not a big difference but a difference nonetheless. I have always done the 16OC variation since the patch and will continue to do so now that I've seen this!
|
I'm curious to see how much impact the maps and positioning of SCVs affects this as well.
Most maps have different mineral lay out and angle to the CC and have very minor differences in mining speed.
Also focusing your SCVs on closest mineral has an impact on the numbers.
All of those are quite small, but when you are comparing such tiny differences already, it seems like they can skew the results somewhat.
If you could be more specific on your testing method and process, it would be interesting.
|
On December 31 2011 14:25 Sadistx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2011 14:05 darthcaesar wrote:On December 31 2011 13:38 nttea wrote:how did you test this? might need confirmation cause of possible variances still awesome. I touched SCVs only once - when I did my 3/3 split. Then I just kept the CC rallied on the same spot. I rallied my 9th scv to make a depot, then a rax, then another depot, then back to mining. Other than that, I just made SCVs and let them do whatever - no mineral stacking, etc. Unfortunately, most builds do not work like that until 7 minutes.
The most important thing is for the two tests to be consistent to one another. Anything you do to one you do do the other and so on. That's the philosophy I used. As long as the two tests are consistent with one another, then you can still tell which one is better relative to the other.
|
I tried it out a little bit.
Another thing that comes into the equation is the actual build you are doing.
While this might open up an option for newer and different builds, it also delays tech builds like banshee, which a 10-20 second delay can be very devastating to, regardless of how many extra mineral you might get.
At least this is trying to do the same standard builds, just delaying the OC. There might even be better ways to do existing builds with this, just a question of which ones.
For example Gas first cloak banshee has always been pretty standard 16 OC and works out very well as such (even before the 5 extra seconds to rax build time).
|
On December 31 2011 15:04 MrCash wrote:
I tried it out a little bit.
Another thing that comes into the equation is the actual build you are doing.
While this might open up an option for newer and different builds, it also delays tech builds like banshee, which a 10-20 second delay can be very devastating to, regardless of how many extra mineral you might get.
At least this is trying to do the same standard builds, just delaying the OC. There might even be better ways to do existing builds with this, just a question of which ones.
For example Gas first cloak banshee has always been pretty standard 16 OC and works out very well as such (even before the 5 extra seconds to rax build time).
well any gas first build you're gonna get a 13 rax and 16 OC. actually the rax change time smoothed this out a bit.
As for the OP, the results are intuitive, like he said its quicker Mule vs greater income. I may keep doing 15 OC in a high pressure bunkering 2rax.. those 30 mineral returns make all the difference and getting each one of them 22 seconds sooner is huge.
|
On December 31 2011 15:08 gogogadgetflow wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2011 15:04 MrCash wrote:
I tried it out a little bit.
Another thing that comes into the equation is the actual build you are doing.
While this might open up an option for newer and different builds, it also delays tech builds like banshee, which a 10-20 second delay can be very devastating to, regardless of how many extra mineral you might get.
At least this is trying to do the same standard builds, just delaying the OC. There might even be better ways to do existing builds with this, just a question of which ones.
For example Gas first cloak banshee has always been pretty standard 16 OC and works out very well as such (even before the 5 extra seconds to rax build time). well any gas first build you're gonna get a 13 rax and 16 OC. actually the rax change time smoothed this out a bit. As for the OP, the results are intuitive, like he said its quicker Mule vs greater income. I may keep doing 15 OC in a high pressure bunkering 2rax.. those 30 mineral returns make all the difference and getting each one of them 22 seconds sooner is huge.
In that case, this would be my explanation to the OP as to why it never became standardized to either 15 or 16 OC, which is, the slightly better income did not justify delaying the tech or expo for some builds.
|
On December 31 2011 15:13 MrCash wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2011 15:08 gogogadgetflow wrote:On December 31 2011 15:04 MrCash wrote:
I tried it out a little bit.
Another thing that comes into the equation is the actual build you are doing.
While this might open up an option for newer and different builds, it also delays tech builds like banshee, which a 10-20 second delay can be very devastating to, regardless of how many extra mineral you might get.
At least this is trying to do the same standard builds, just delaying the OC. There might even be better ways to do existing builds with this, just a question of which ones.
For example Gas first cloak banshee has always been pretty standard 16 OC and works out very well as such (even before the 5 extra seconds to rax build time). well any gas first build you're gonna get a 13 rax and 16 OC. actually the rax change time smoothed this out a bit. As for the OP, the results are intuitive, like he said its quicker Mule vs greater income. I may keep doing 15 OC in a high pressure bunkering 2rax.. those 30 mineral returns make all the difference and getting each one of them 22 seconds sooner is huge. In that case, this would be my explanation to the OP as to why it never became standardized to either 15 or 16 OC, which is, the slightly better income did not justify delaying the tech or expo for some builds.
I've tried to see if players do the build for a certain reason, but I've only seen players sticking to the same timing in all of their builds. I don't think anyone actually plans to use it one way or another yet. It seems that players just prefer one style over the other.
|
15 for cheese 16 for standard game. Got it.
|
|
|
bout time someone explored this.
Thanks!
|
what explains the sharp drop around 280? is that when the 16OC mule dies but the 15OC mule is still going?
|
Can you include a second graph where you normalize the data in difference against the total number of minerals mined at that time? Basically take the mineral difference and divide it by the total number of minerals collected by whichever method has collected the most minerals in total at that time.
This will give a graph which is more representative of the game impact of the two different methods at each time, as obviously 20 extra minerals at 1 minute is worth more than 50 extra minerals at 5 minutes.
If you want to be more accurate, you can normalize it instead against the number of "free" minerals at that time, taking into consideration only the mandatory buildings each build must produce (orbital, depot, rax). Technically there is a difference between different builds but that's probably too minor to consider.
|
whoa, that's cool. I need to keep this in mind then.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36946 Posts
16 OC it is. Awesome blog!!!
Why did they extend Barracks timing by 5 seconds though? Seems like an unnecessary change....
|
On December 31 2011 16:45 Seeker wrote:
16 OC it is. Awesome blog!!!
Why did they extend Barracks timing by 5 seconds though? Seems like an unnecessary change....
They change bunker rushes somehow in every patch because they still think it's too strong.
|
On December 31 2011 17:11 xmShake wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2011 16:45 Seeker wrote:
16 OC it is. Awesome blog!!!
Why did they extend Barracks timing by 5 seconds though? Seems like an unnecessary change.... They change bunker rushes somehow in every patch because they still think it's too strong.
No one would notice the difference if we changed back, well except the terran players who'd have perfectly lined rax and cc timings :p
|
*Puts on statistician hat* What methods did you use? Did you get a bot to replicate the results over and over? Did you do the build yourself over and over? Did you do it with and without optimal mining? I see the graphs, but I don't know what information produced the graphs, you didn't say how you got it or why I should trust it to hold up when I do it.
There is more I could say, but I'm not convinced that this debate is well settled based on these graphs with the accompanying explanation. There should be more information describing why your conclusion is valid based on your data gathering methods because I'm not convinced it's thoroughly analyzed. Especially not to the point to say unilaterally that 16OC is the best and should be the standard.
<3 Mip (MS Statistics)
|
16 OC might be slightly better in the long run but you're not looking at the complete picture. The 15 OC is probably better for defending rushes or putting on early pressure as you can get those first marines and hellions out a little faster. Also you might be able to get your FE up sooner with 15 OC, so its not clear cut.
|
Nice, but the change won't happen overnight.
Only in the most recent season of GSL has Nestea/Losira/Korean Zergs started to go 14 hatch instead of 15 and 16 hatch, and Nestea was extractor tricking every single time even well into this year (Losira learned 9 overlord was better earlier than he did, it seems, but he used to extractor trick too).
So I suppose that means you are saying that you know better than pro players?!? Post reported!
|
Thanks, I will do this.
But is the main reason for the long-term investment because of the timed-life of the mule? I think a small decision like this should only really be considered for the first 10~ minutes of the game... 15OC is better, right?
|
Nicely done! Just a thought though on supply timings for various builds. I have to test this but say you go 2rax with reactor after the first marine. Here the second supply depot is built after the second barracks and you just barely don't get supply blocket at 19. With an extra SCV I think you do, but again, this needs testing.
|
At one point in your op you say :
"With 15 OC, you get faster MULEs, but you have 5 seconds of idle CC time. With 16 OC, your MULEs come out a bit slower, but your CC has constant production. I've been wanting to actually test which is better for a long time, but haven't done so until now."
You pretty much point it out right there . 5 seconds of idle cc time is the same as having 1 worker not getting minerals for 5 seconds. Which is probably the entire difference between the 2 graphs.
|
kuhuhuhuhuhu....
this makes me feel better for always going 16oc
^__^
|
On December 31 2011 17:19 Mip wrote:
*Puts on statistician hat* What methods did you use? Did you get a bot to replicate the results over and over? Did you do the build yourself over and over? Did you do it with and without optimal mining? I see the graphs, but I don't know what information produced the graphs, you didn't say how you got it or why I should trust it to hold up when I do it.
There is more I could say, but I'm not convinced that this debate is well settled based on these graphs with the accompanying explanation. There should be more information describing why your conclusion is valid based on your data gathering methods because I'm not convinced it's thoroughly analyzed. Especially not to the point to say unilaterally that 16OC is the best and should be the standard.
<3 Mip (MS Statistics)
mule = constant income while building scvs = steadily growing
15 oc = cut scvs for earlier mule
16 oc = no scv cut
Therefore, 16 oc gets every scv slightly earlier than 15 oc while catching up on mule income (minus the whatever less energy it gets) immediately. Does that explanation make sense? You don't really even need testing for this one outside of whether 15 oc fits some builds better because they need the first mule trip.
|
|
|
Thanks! Will use 16 OC from now on, makes more sense also if you take a sooner gas.
|
thanks for doing the testing and math, I will switch to 16 OC also. Numbers dont lie
|
I think going 1 rax expand should also be tested with 15 and 16 OC... I have a feeling that early mule helps you build your CC faster.
|
Ok I just did some math and while this is only theoretical and worker pathing and junk probably break the math, bascally we can break the situation into 3 time periods where either build has accumulated more money than the other.
Using the start time of the finishing of the 15th SCV, the 16 Orbital will have an economical advantage until t + 40 seconds.
Then from t + 40 to t + 89 seconds the 15 Orbital will be ahead.
From there on however the 16 Orbital will take an economic lead for the rest of the game.
The reason the 16 Orbitals effect takes so long to kick in is that the early mule actually makes up minerals that surpases the gathering of the early 16th scv - which has been mining the entire time - in the 12 seconds before the other orbital is finished. It is not until around the time of the production of the 18th SCV from the 16 Orbital build until the effect of the delay in production actual starts to show.
Note: I counted mule income as 4 x SCV income for sake of these calculations.
|
Everyone keeps saying 16 OC, but isnt it technically a 17 OC since the marine starts before the orbital ?
|
Sweden164 Posts
If you do the 15 OC, the extra minerals you get from that tiny bit earlier mule often gets you a faster expansion, which makes up for the lost scv production because you can produce 2 scvs at a time a bit earlier than with 16 OC. From my personal tests 16 OC catches up to 15 OC somewhere in the middle of the 5th minute (around 4:30 +- 10 seconds). So if you plan on expanding earlier than that I would suggest a 15 OC.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
|
I supposed ill work the 16 OC into my macro build styles and the 15 into my 1-1-1 vs every protoss 
|
Good work, I'm gonna 16OC from now on. Hopefully, in the future, we can use this to tell an early push from a macro based build
|
On December 31 2011 20:24 DD.Beaver wrote:
Everyone keeps saying 16 OC, but isnt it technically a 17 OC since the marine starts before the orbital ?
This is the thing I've been wondering! <3333333
Whenever I try testing out getting an OC with or without SCV cut it also means getting the marine before or after your OC, meaning the orbital falls on either 16 or 17 supply.
Unless of course you choose to not build a marine until you have made your OC, which just seems silly, as there is no reason not to.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Wait, wouldn't it be 17OC if you are making a marine from your barracks before?
Interesting find nonetheless.
Gahhhh someone beat me to it.
|
Thank you It's finally been answered.
|
Unless u literally play in grandmasters, this difference wont do anything noticeable to your game. Maybe MVP would notice the difference, but a regular player will have some seconds gap eventually in his scv production anyway, and this isnt a big one.
People need to understand this before going gung-ho about how everyone should use 16OC.. And this as stated in comments, is without all the other early game trickery anyways.
Tapppi
|
I'm interested in knowing how 11 rax 15 oc works out for your economy. the timing from rax finishing to oc is pretty spot on and your rax is some 5 sec earlier placed.
|
Did you account for the supply that the extra scv takes up? I'm not completely convinced that it's worth it...
|
I've always done 16 OC even pre patch lol ^^
|
Seems kind of pointless. The same thing was proven for the most efficient time to make overlord/if extractor trick was more efficient, and to this day, some players do the less efficient way anyway, given the change in income is so marginal.
|
|
|
What league u are? If ur not High master, stop being worried about this kind of stuff and improve your macro.
|
Thank you for the stats ! was wondering when someone going to do this !
|
thanks for doing the math
|
really well written, thanks for the info. this kind of theory crafting is what will make the early game airtight in years
edit: it gave me a stupid clown face for my smiley, i took it out
|
On January 01 2012 00:40 NicoakaD wrote:
What league u are? If ur not High master, stop being worried about this kind of stuff and improve your macro.
This is a very easily implemented build order fix, anyone of any skill level can improve themselves with this without any training time.
|
Brunei Darussalam41 Posts
I actually did not know you build the OC at 15 before. Always thought it was 16.
|
On December 31 2011 20:30 Thorzain wrote:
If you do the 15 OC, the extra minerals you get from that tiny bit earlier mule often gets you a faster expansion, which makes up for the lost scv production because you can produce 2 scvs at a time a bit earlier than with 16 OC. From my personal tests 16 OC catches up to 15 OC somewhere in the middle of the 5th minute (around 4:30 +- 10 seconds). So if you plan on expanding earlier than that I would suggest a 15 OC.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
I had only originally considered this in light of adding on rax for an allin, haha, but this is just as true and the faster double SCV production makes another small difference.
On January 01 2012 01:45 Kwon wrote:
I actually did not know you build the OC at 15 before. Always thought it was 16.
Well, it depends on when you build the marine, but most people called it 15 OC afaik. Some people pointed out that the "16 OC" variation is actually 17 OC because of the marine, which is true, but I've heard it called 16 OC most often so I stuck to that.
|
I don't find this to be conclusive due to the poor build-order choices made immediately after the OC, which throws such statistically marginal differences out the window until a proper test can be done.
(If curious, I'm referring to building rax/2nd depot with the same scv, as well as not optimizing mining)
|
Brunei Darussalam41 Posts
On January 01 2012 01:46 darthcaesar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2012 01:45 Kwon wrote:
I actually did not know you build the OC at 15 before. Always thought it was 16. Well, it depends on when you build the marine, but most people called it 15 OC afaik. Some people pointed out that the "16 OC" variation is actually 17 OC because of the marine, which is true, but I've heard it called 16 OC most often so I stuck to that.
Oh, its like that. Thanks for clearing that up!
|
On December 31 2011 13:39 Shalaiyn wrote:
What about 13 barracks 16 OC?
No reason not to make a 12 rax because it doesn't cut workers or anything.
|
I updated the OP with some more info!
|
On December 31 2011 17:50 Mowr wrote:
Nicely done! Just a thought though on supply timings for various builds. I have to test this but say you go 2rax with reactor after the first marine. Here the second supply depot is built after the second barracks and you just barely don't get supply blocket at 19. With an extra SCV I think you do, but again, this needs testing.
It's unclear unless you do some tests yourself. If you 15 OC, the 16 OC guy gets that extra SCV while the 15 OC guy is offline, but after the 15 OC is done, the 15 OC guy is building an SCV while the 16OC guy's CC is offline. Seems like the two builds will more or less converge. I'll have to test reactor/tech 2 rax, but my intuition says that it's unaffected
On January 01 2012 02:24 Lebzetu wrote:No reason not to make a 12 rax because it doesn't cut workers or anything.
The SCV building the rax gets an extra trip, so 13 rax should be VERY SLIGHTLY richer. If you played TvP in BW, it's similar to how people wait til 250 min and get gas/rax at the same time. The SCVs mine a few more trips, and you don't need the rax so early anyway so they might as well be an extra 24 or so minerals richer
|
Wow! well done man. Looks like OC at 16 is the way to go! Thanks for results =)
|
I even did 16 oc before the patch lol because you get 1 more scv for gas on tech heavy builds.
|
On December 31 2011 20:30 Thorzain wrote:
If you do the 15 OC, the extra minerals you get from that tiny bit earlier mule often gets you a faster expansion, which makes up for the lost scv production because you can produce 2 scvs at a time a bit earlier than with 16 OC. From my personal tests 16 OC catches up to 15 OC somewhere in the middle of the 5th minute (around 4:30 +- 10 seconds). So if you plan on expanding earlier than that I would suggest a 15 OC.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
If you want to be greedy you can do a 16OC, build one marine, land your expo, supply and start scv/marine production. Bomber does that when he 1rax FE in TvT, it just cuts half a marine if I remember correctly. He scouts after the rax, but anyway scouting in tvt on a map with more than one spot for the opponent, I don't see many good player (0?) doing it atm.
|
On January 02 2012 22:30 4Servy wrote:
I even did 16 oc before the patch lol because you get 1 more scv for gas on tech heavy builds.
You should only have 3 SCVs on gas, lol. The only thing you'd get pre-patch is an extra SCV on minerals. And that's not worth it because you could instead get faster MULEs. But those times are now in the past. Good times.
|
|
|
The reason I like the 16 opening is because when you do the delayed orbital your likely to be dealing with scouting issues so all you have to worry about is turning the command center into an orbital when the scv is done. The other way if your scout is getting attacked or a probe is bugging you its possible you'll be even more delayed on upgrading the orbital as you have to watch for when the rax gets done. I just feel 15 opener has more room for errors so I try to avoid it however I find myself sometimes doing it just because I expect to be able to build the oc right away from doing it the old way for so long.
Here's one I'd like to see answered with colorful graphs how much do you gain from taking a slightly delayed gas
I already know from my own recent testing that it's a large amount because of a snowball effect from something that happens so early on. Amazing what keeping 3.5 extra workers on minerals for a few seconds can do for your econ. That to me suggest that the extra minerals in your example could end up making a larger difference then your graphs suggest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
