Introduction: After TPW Antiga Prime, I really wanted to try something that was totally out of my way: a beach themed map. LSPrime was my inspiration when I thought of making a beach map, and at first TPW Ohana was almost the same as Bel'shir beach (because that's what we think of when we think of a beach map), but then I thought it was too original and too generic. With my team's support and feedback, and my own created tileset, I created a beach that was more rugged and dry, and that's what TPW Ohana represents!
The pathing was a little tricky, so I resolved most of it by adding canyons around the edges to better define where the pathing will end when units are in the water. All water inland is pathable and buildable.
Players: 2 Bases: 10 (no golds) XWT: 2 (center) Size: 128 x 135
Really like this map, Easy to take thirds, long rush distances but not insanely long, if pros were to play this I think this map would dish out some great games!
Map looks really good. Originally my valley of legends map was going to be a beach like map but ended up trying to go a different route since more and more people seem to be doing the beach type. That said your map does look really nice.
Since you know how I love to throw my suggestions towards you whenever you make a map, I've decided I will do that.
I think making the 3 & 9 o clock bases a little more open will allow you to move thru them much easier. Right now it's a little tough to not move thru the map without going into the XWT. It reaches about 1/3 of the ramp to those 3 & 9 bases and then if you do go thru that path there's only a single wide ramp. I'd think adding another ramp to the base, moving where the minerals are & making the single wide ramp a double wide could add some more flow to the map.
With that said, the expansions by your main that are kind of out of the way almost seem impossible to take. You could take them for your 3rd but I feel it's a long distance to get troops from your nat to that 3rd & it's such a huge choke that defending it might be a problem. For that I suggest putting up a high ground pillar in the middle (the black boxes) and LoS blockers from that pillar to the high ground in the main & the 3/9 bases (the orange lines). I think then it could be more of a "hidden" base for the player and thus will make people scout better.
Again, great map, love the overall flow of it (although I would like the sides to be opened up a bit more) and the aesthetics of it look great. Maps are getting nothing but better from you bud!
Nicely done! The aesthetics seem pretty ripped off from Bel'Shir Beach, but I'm not against that :p Looks really cool. I like how you added in the yellow grass to some areas. Some more trees might be nice just for more of a lush feel, but it looks good right now.
My main concern is that the natural is too open (hmm... same problem as Bel'Shir beach). I realize that you can wall off from the ramp-natCC, but it really won't work with two wide open chokes. I suggest raising the main and natural, and then trying a backdoor style similar to Peaks of Beakdu from Brood War. It would use rocks instead of minerals though- something like this.
I guess the only issue doing this is that there will no longer be an overlord scouting pod in the main. You can add one behind the natural to scout expansions, but scouting the main is pretty difficult. You might move both gas to the same side (near the lowground 3rd) so that overlords can scout the gas and determine the build.
I also drew in a couple high ground pieces to choke off the open areas. Right now it seems very difficult for a smaller army to defend without being surrounded. Adding a pillar or trees would allow forcefields and tanks to control the space easier. I'm not sure exactly where to put them, but I think they would be a good balance addition.
On August 01 2011 11:56 EcstatiC wrote: this looks waaaay too much like belshir beach. even though youve adjusted a few things, it still has the same basic layout
Mmmm.... its really not similar at all. The only thing is the crescent moon 3rd. Other than that and the split pathing, there are really no similarities. The aesthetics are what make the two maps look similar.
On August 01 2011 09:47 monitor wrote: Nicely done! The aesthetics seem pretty ripped off from Bel'Shir Beach, but I'm not against that :p Looks really cool. I like how you added in the yellow grass to some areas. Some more trees might be nice just for more of a lush feel, but it looks good right now.
My main concern is that the natural is too open (hmm... same problem as Bel'Shir beach). I realize that you can wall off from the ramp-natCC, but it really won't work with two wide open chokes. I suggest raising the main and natural, and then trying a backdoor style similar to Peaks of Beakdu from Brood War. It would use rocks instead of minerals though- something like this.
I guess the only issue doing this is that there will no longer be an overlord scouting pod in the main. You can add one behind the natural to scout expansions, but scouting the main is pretty difficult. You might move both gas to the same side (near the lowground 3rd) so that overlords can scout the gas and determine the build.
I also drew in a couple high ground pieces to choke off the open areas. Right now it seems very difficult for a smaller army to defend without being surrounded. Adding a pillar or trees would allow forcefields and tanks to control the space easier. I'm not sure exactly where to put them, but I think they would be a good balance addition.
Hmmm, that is a good point with the Xel'naga tower. It covers both main attack paths. While a map should have key points to control, i think that may be to much.
Perhaps removing that tower, and using two. One at the farthest right expansion and one at the farthest left, so that they watch over one attack path each.
What to do with the center then is the weird spot, perhaps a large crater with water, similar to xel'naga caverns.
K now it seems like im trying to emulate xel'naga caverns... lol.
edit: just noticed the above post with the revised natural. I like it, definetly favores a quicker expansion.
second edit: looked again and noticed the bit of beach south of the natural, can tanks get onto that?
I'm all for changes when it comes to the natural. The natural on this map scared me when I finished it. I thought about adding rocks to the 3rd ramp (like scars of aiur) but that was too weird and generic again. I personally like monitor's suggestion, and may end up using the main/nat setup he introduced. I've been wanting to change it anyways. It hasn't been tested yet so I got nothing to lose.
On August 01 2011 09:47 monitor wrote: Nicely done! The aesthetics seem pretty ripped off from Bel'Shir Beach, but I'm not against that :p Looks really cool. I like how you added in the yellow grass to some areas. Some more trees might be nice just for more of a lush feel, but it looks good right now.
My main concern is that the natural is too open (hmm... same problem as Bel'Shir beach). I realize that you can wall off from the ramp-natCC, but it really won't work with two wide open chokes. I suggest raising the main and natural, and then trying a backdoor style similar to Peaks of Beakdu from Brood War. It would use rocks instead of minerals though- something like this.
I guess the only issue doing this is that there will no longer be an overlord scouting pod in the main. You can add one behind the natural to scout expansions, but scouting the main is pretty difficult. You might move both gas to the same side (near the lowground 3rd) so that overlords can scout the gas and determine the build.
I also drew in a couple high ground pieces to choke off the open areas. Right now it seems very difficult for a smaller army to defend without being surrounded. Adding a pillar or trees would allow forcefields and tanks to control the space easier. I'm not sure exactly where to put them, but I think they would be a good balance addition.
How is this?
That looks good to me! I like it. You might add an overlord scouting area behind the natural, in addition to the one in front.
I dislike how you can put a pylon on the 3rd highground and warp into the natural. You should either move the rocks, or make enough of the highground unbuildable by the rocks so that you can't warp in units beneath the rocks.
After roughly 4 test games with diamonds and masters, it seems I need to re-design the 3rds. Does anyone have some ideas how to layout the high ground 3rds? I'm kinda all over the place with it.
1) The back-door to the natural (next to the 3rd with rocks) was re-worked and can no longer allow pylon warp-ins into the natural from the high-ground 3rd.
New Back-door with rocks - can no longer warp-in units from the high ground into the natural:
2) XWT range reduced by 2 and can no longer peek onto the high ground ramps in the center.
I forgot about the main issue one of my maps had (it had the identical main/nat/third setup). That was that the third was too far, and wasn't possible to hold because it was so far away and open to attacks. I think the solution would be to add an easier expansion, but keep the current third. Maybe put an expansion against the main?
On August 03 2011 04:35 monitor wrote: I forgot about the main issue one of my maps had (it had the identical main/nat/third setup). That was that the third was too far, and wasn't possible to hold because it was so far away and open to attacks. I think the solution would be to add an easier expansion, but keep the current third. Maybe put an expansion against the main?
This is a consideration. I was thinking of transforming one of the bases into golds, but if not I will add one near the main base facing the center, only problem is it will be close to the low-ground base.
On August 03 2011 04:35 monitor wrote: I forgot about the main issue one of my maps had (it had the identical main/nat/third setup). That was that the third was too far, and wasn't possible to hold because it was so far away and open to attacks. I think the solution would be to add an easier expansion, but keep the current third. Maybe put an expansion against the main?
This is a consideration. I was thinking of transforming one of the bases into golds, but if not I will add one near the main base facing the center, only problem is it will be close to the low-ground base.
True. You could put it on the low-ground between the natural and third, and make that tree area smaller?
Now, it's very close 4-base play, but this could be resolved if I block the entrance to the high ground 3rd/4th (like shattered temple).
That looks pretty good. I would adjust it a little bit, something like this so that the low ground expo is easier to hold, and the high ground expo is harder to hold. It would also make it slightly less awkward (less moving your army around in weird spots).
@monitor: I tried 2 ramps and it looks funky, not to mention how easy it would be to park tanks and fire across the low ground into the other base, so I edited the ramp a little, as well as the minerals and moved them closer to the nat ramp and came up with this:
This is similar to Shattered Temple, where you must destroy the rocks to take the base. The 3rd on low ground is designed to encourage more expanding because of limited resources, so you have a choice for a hidden base (near the main), or a high ground base but can take time to get to.
My only big worry or concern is that this could be too easy to defend on 4-base play.
On August 04 2011 03:47 IronManSC wrote: @monitor: I tried 2 ramps and it looks funky, not to mention how easy it would be to park tanks and fire across the low ground into the other base, so I edited the ramp a little, as well as the minerals and moved them closer to the nat ramp and came up with this:
This is similar to Shattered Temple, where you must destroy the rocks to take the base. The 3rd on low ground is designed to encourage more expanding because of limited resources, so you have a choice for a hidden base (near the main), or a high ground base but can take time to get to.
My only big worry or concern is that this could be too easy to defend on 4-base play.
Mmmm.... I donnu. I don't really like it that it's an island (it'll be easy for Terran, and a pain for Zerg), but I guess it could work out. If you just broke down your backdoor rocks, wouldn't that make it pretty easy to turtle on 4 bases?
[edit] I would keep the ramps like they are in the OP.
The 3rd is the main issue right now. Unless, I take that low-ground base and shift it to the right of the main natural ramp? Or I could just do it the easy way and remove the larger rocks and extend the ramp out so it's a little further to get to, leaving it more open.
I don't know what you mean 'keep the ramps like they are in the OP', could you elaborate?
Ok, I did a quick change and personally this feels like the only way to go if there's going to be a low-ground base there:
In this picture, the larger rocks are removed, but the ramp is pushed out more, making it a longer distance to actually get to the high ground base (to reinforce or saturate) unless you break the back-door rocks down. Now, you still cannot warp-in from the high ground into the natural, and if your low-ground 3rd is being seiged, you can attack them by running up the ramp. I think this is the best option personally, as there is flow to every way of playing around it.
On August 04 2011 04:02 IronManSC wrote: Ok, I did a quick change and personally this feels like the only way to go if there's going to be a low-ground base there:
In this picture, the larger rocks are removed, but the ramp is pushed out more, making it a longer distance to actually get to the high ground base (to reinforce or saturate) unless you break the back-door rocks down. Now, you still cannot warp-in from the high ground into the natural, and if your low-ground 3rd is being seiged, you can attack them by running up the ramp. I think this is the best option personally, as there is flow to every way of playing around it.
Alright I spose that's fine. I'll try to give it some more thought, you might have to rework that 3rd/4th area completely to make it work though.
Is there a reason you want that little low ground area to seperate the nat & the 3rd? Why not just keep it lowground & put the third closer to the natural and add some high ground & rocks between the 3rd/4th.
Orange = lowground, green = highground, brown = rocks, blue = places for minerals
I was more so thinking get rid of the rocks on the ramp, move that 3rd closer to the ramp & put rocks right beside the ramp. kind of by the ramp & that tiny little pillar you put in.
I would do something like this for a few reasons. Primarily, it goes more options to where you take a 3rd, and makes each option very viable. Here is a drawing I made:
Basically you've got the option of taking an aggressive third, that shortens the distance to the opponent, or you can take one that makes the distance farther. Each base leads to another base- the middle bases are gold to encourage taking them as a 4th.
I adjusted a lot of ramps slightly (yes, it wasn't just me being sloppy- I actually meant to move them) to make the expansions easier to defend and harder to attack into. However, I opened up some of the middle area to make aggression easier for Zerg. I also adjusted the minerals on the lowground side expo (you'd take it as a 4th base) so that its more vulnerable to air harass, and isn't protected by the main.
[edit] My numbers are all screwed up because I labeled the natural 1...
except the problem with his initial draft is that taking a 3rd causes you to spread out far too thin and therefore if you aren't a zerg you will have a hard time getting a 3rd and are better off just sitting on 2 base and doing some type of all-in.
Let's say it's a TvT or a PvT that gets end game and you both have 3rds, then it's going to be hard to get a 4th since you either take one of the bases in the middle of the map or take the one to the side of your main but then you have to hope it doesn't get scouted because trying to move forces from that base to your 3rd is a huge distance plus there are no chokes what so ever to help.
I guess I don't see a problem if it is more cramped with bases because then at least the bases are easier to take and therefore means the game will most likely get off 2 base and be much more interesting.
On August 04 2011 07:11 dezi wrote: The whole area is already cramped. I liked his initial draft. Somestimes feedback is just bad and can be a hindrance.
Lol. Feedback is never bad. Period.
No matter what, it's up to the author what he does with the map. Feedback offers different perspectives on a map- sometimes good suggestions, sometimes bad suggestions. The author has the final say on what he does-- he has to pick the good feedback that uses specific examples and explanations to why to make a change.
So in the future, give feedback using very specific examples and reasoning behind changes. To help map judging, play the game more and/or look at some of the good and popular maps.
That being said ---
I agree that having 5 bases there is too cluttered because holding them all is very easily by controlling a few chokes, and then you can just turtle up. It'll make games pretty boring with few back and forth battles and harass.
I've been breaking my back over these changes to the 3rd all day yesterday, so I will leave it be (current version) for several more tests and see where it goes from there. I don't think revamping the entire 3rd (and even adding an extra base) is necessary.
On August 05 2011 02:33 IronManSC wrote: I've been breaking my back over these changes to the 3rd all day yesterday, so I will leave it be (current version) for several more tests and see where it goes from there. I don't think revamping the entire 3rd (and even adding an extra base) is necessary.
Alright, good decision. Add me on NA @ Pawp 693 if you want me to test it, I'd be glad to.
1) The mains were slightly increased in size, allowing a little more room to build.
2) An additional Xel'Naga Watch Tower was added in the center, but both towers are not placed elsewhere to give each player defensive/offensive advantages.
3) The primary ramp into the natural was reduced from 3-width to 2-width, and can now be walled off.
4) The 3-width ramp to the 3rd base was moved over slightly toward the natural.
5) Map borders extended.
6) Textures, water, lighting and foliage polished.
Map looks really interesting, I'll have to give a try. My question on the XWT, it seems like taking a XWT is easy in this map. Both players can take theirs and be safe as opposed to the original design which had one XWT which players fought for. The player who had it, had a significant advantage in terms of vision. Why the second one with both in close proximity over the center of the map?
On August 08 2011 05:30 Arnfasta wrote: Map looks really interesting, I'll have to give a try. My question on the XWT, it seems like taking a XWT is easy in this map. Both players can take theirs and be safe as opposed to the original design which had one XWT which players fought for. The player who had it, had a significant advantage in terms of vision. Why the second one with both in close proximity over the center of the map?
Due to several master games (mostly master randoms), we've seen a lot of TvT matches that showed the tower being in favor of whichever terran used it. This gave immediate map-control to whoever took it.
With two towers, each player has a particular zone of vision, so one cannot be totally caught off-guard. Games often appear as "stalemates" when you control your own tower, but it further promotes the necessity to change up the strategy and counter act what your opponent is doing, whereas having a single tower in the center literally limited the defendant and pushed him back on 2, mabye 3-base hoping to not get attacked, and not knowing when he would get attacked, because with a single tower, whoever doesn't have it has no real scouting capabilities whatsoever.
Now, you might say that all a person has to do is send a unit or two toward the tower and see what units he has, but a single tower in the center would be covered by LoS, which again is limiting on scouting capabilities for the defendant (or, the one who doesn't have the tower). His units trying to scout the tower would be shot down by ranged units, and you can't see very much of what you're attacked by --- it leaves you guessing --- let alone they are covered by LoS.
The other reason was that a single tower often limited the games to 2-base play. Without a proper scouting zone in the defendant's favor, taking a 3rd is extremely risky because he won't know when it will get attacked, and if he can't prepare for it, he will lose the investment. This is the other reason why 2 towers were added. The defendant can now see his opponent coming and prepare accordingly if he's on 3+ bases.
I wonder if this happens to anyone else, where the image is so large it just cuts off horizontally? Makes it hard to analyze the map without just playing it, which I have incidentally. I like the feel of the natural setup, but the 3rd took a bit of effort to secure. Perhaps the latest change has altered this.
On an aesthetic note: this and Beach have me wanting to do something similar, but also a bit different. It's a great looking map, and lots of the stuff I'm seeing really serve as cool inspiration.
Destructible Rocks leading into the 3rds are now reduced from 3 to 1 armor, and 2000 to 1000 health. This allows a quicker opportunity to take a safer 3rd.
OP updated. Map has become a finalist in the TL Map-Making Contest. If you are interested in play testing it, search [TLMC] on battle.net. All comments, suggestions, and feedback are appreciated!
On November 10 2011 04:03 IronManSC wrote: OP updated. Map has become a finalist in the TL Map-Making Contest. If you are interested in play testing it, search [TLMC] on battle.net. All comments, suggestions, and feedback are appreciated!
Hey IronMan, congrats to you and your team on becoming a finalist with this map! It is a great one and let's hope you get chosen for the winner.
@Eatthepath: Yes I was extremely skeptical of the 3rd for a long time. Eventually, I just left it the way it was, and in my opinion it paid off quite well for me, thanks to the TPW team for convincing me lol.
@TheAmazombie: Thanks! I hope to talk to you shortly and mabye we can get another show going soon
On November 17 2011 16:53 horsepire wrote: Saw your map on NASL tonight and I just had to pop in and say congrats, it looks beautiful!
Thanks! ^^ You can expect some minor changes to the middle. I will be reducing the amount of trees to make sure the FPS is working and that it doesn't cause players to lag.
Overview Image updated in the OP. Pathing was re-worked a little. Some trees in dense areas were removed to increase FPS for some players. The rocks at the 9 and 3 bases were positioned on the opposite ramps to give the defendant a more viable 4th option.
Hi guys, if anyone participated or watched this map being played in the TeamLiquid Map Open Contest tournament, I would highly appreciate any feedback if you discovered any flaws, or if you just have any ideas! Thanks!
Now, I honestly don't understand much about finer points of map balancing. I did however think this map was the far superior one in terms of beauty. I hope to see many games played on this map in the future.
I remember looking through the maps when the finalists were chosen and this one was the only one that stuck out to me when it came to making a strategic choice of where and how to take your third base. Definitely my favourite! Awesome job!
I have been taking Ohana and making a separate copy for NASL's season 3 map pool and have been working on Ohana RE. This version (in the spoiler) will be exclusively for NASL. You can expect the RE version to be up tomorrow.
On December 16 2011 14:05 wrl wrote: I think the changes suck and its indicative of NASL's poor choices of judgment. The original is a far superior map.
This is the worst feedback anyone could receive about anything. Care to elaborate instead of making snap judgements pete?
I'm curious as to what prompted you to make an 'NASL' version of the map... Do they stereotypically 'prefer' different map types? Or is RE just an improved version of your original map?
For the RE versoin, are the mineral patches for the base below the upper left main supposed to be facing the main? they aren't for the bottom right position.. and the left gas for the base above the bottom right main is very close to the cliff edge it seems, maybe something you just forgot to edit.
Aesthetics are excellent. Not sure about moving the 5th closer to the main to become more of a fourth... In my amateur opinion, the central area seems rather open (and thus slightly zerg-favoured), and having that contested fifth made it more difficult for zerg to secure since it was very close to the opponent's side of the map. Defending 5 base as zerg on RE seems a lot easier, which no longer counteracts the middle openness. I may look at some more replays from the TLopen to see if my argument makes any sense... how was the win % for zvt and pvt in the open? I remember seeing it posted somewhere but I can't find it anymore
I realize the little things you guys noticed. I worked with it a little more tonight and fixed a bunch of stuff. To avoid further confusion, i've added the "suggestion" feedback that NASL gave me. In the first screenshot below, this is what NASL requested:
NASL REQUESTED THESE CHANGES:
WITH NASL'S SUGGESTIONS, I CREATED OHANA RE
As for answering your question Loweryder, NASL has told me they wanted to use this map, but they want it to be balanced appropriately for their needs apparently, so they gave me a heads up about it and drew out their balance suggestions. Ohana RE is the finished product for their request. It should be ready mid-friday. Also keep in mind the original version of Ohana will remain the same. This is just a changed version under NASL's request.
This is indeed a beautiful map. I am not map expert and I am only a platinum players so I can only judge this map from my limited experience. I think the original Ohana is more interesting. I can understand if NASL wants a more standard map with the bases being more nit tight together and sort of making it more split down the middle type of map to create "balance". And I say balance carefully because we all know it is a most subjective opinion. But I like the original because it brings a different kind of game play, The thought behind the map is technical play right? So making it more standard is a little boring in my view, yet I am really impressed about the dedication of map maker IronManSC and his talent to stay to the concept despite the changes that NASL wanted to do. A sign of a great map maker for sure.
On December 16 2011 20:04 diLLa wrote: I think i like RE better than the original one, good job
Thank you ^^ Hopefully NASL likes it hehe
On December 17 2011 00:44 MachineGunPanda wrote: This is indeed a beautiful map. I am not map expert and I am only a platinum players so I can only judge this map from my limited experience. I think the original Ohana is more interesting. I can understand if NASL wants a more standard map with the bases being more nit tight together and sort of making it more split down the middle type of map to create "balance". And I say balance carefully because we all know it is a most subjective opinion. But I like the original because it brings a different kind of game play, The thought behind the map is technical play right? So making it more standard is a little boring in my view, yet I am really impressed about the dedication of map maker IronManSC and his talent to stay to the concept despite the changes that NASL wanted to do. A sign of a great map maker for sure.
The original version of Ohana is designed to create technical play. I know that people really admire the first version of ohana, which is why you can rest assured that the original version of Ohana will be still be published as TPW Ohana on battle.net, while Ohana RE will be for NASL's season 3 map pool. They gave me changes and I applied them to fit their needs. This is the job of a map maker.
As time goes on, one of these versions will become the most popular, and chances are in that particular time, that version will be the official, but it is not final at this point as to which version of ohana will be used for everything.
I do really like some of the changes made in RE, specifically moving the main back a bit and separating it from the 4th (now 5th i guess). However, I thought the way you incorporated the destructible rocks as the backdoors into the expansions on the original map was very cool and unique. I suppose the 5ths were a bit to close to the opponent's 4ths... I'm quite surprised at the overwhelming zerg winning % in ZvT on the original map though. Of course, 16 games is too few to draw any conclusive estimates, but a 75% win rate in a matchup is still pretty high. We'll see how the RE map affects the balance, I'm really excited!! Don't want to jinx anything, but congratulations in advance!
I'm not a big fan of the RE version. I dislike two entrance ramps right next to each other on the natural, even if one has rocks it still can become a pain.... I don't really like the way the double ramp looks either but that's just me nitpicking :p
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5Is8i.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Xi7Z1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/loW9w.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eJQgW.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tet2Z.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jzVUj.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s3P1t.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yFXrz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AeW1j.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/a5gRL.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u3qj5.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9Www0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/A6ctz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/89xdS.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RqSKV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fwjaI.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QZW5W.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JfAU2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mVoz9.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dOkmR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DOvNa.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/767C5.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Gg2Cp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dbT3H.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zddcF.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OxRUD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u1UL6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ubKBb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UU5IY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oIP7e.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oToah.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/m8nes.jpg)
