|
Hi,
For some time while the beta has been down I've had lucid and very vivid mushroom dreams about SC2. And in one of them I had a thought.
Why couldn't Protoss go something similiar to Terrans 1/1/1 build? Now I'm no high level diamond player by any means, in fact I never played SC1/BW and only played the SC2 beta a while but got top gold or so.
Since in general playing reactively seems like a good idea why not open up with a broad variety of choices?
What would make terran more suitable to go 1/1/1 than protoss?
I could see a mid game push with some units from each building structure working quite fine (something like zealot/immortal/phoenix).
Anyway, was just curious what you all thought of it.
Cheers.
PS. I Know, different races, different strategies. Doesn't mean we shouldn't experiment.
|
1/1/1 takes too long to get for protoss. Terran can wall off and defend with bunkers/marines into siege tanks.
Protoss would die with only 1 gateway. Late game i personaly go 2/1/2 (1 being the stargate). However this is after a natural.
|
All right yea, I mean there is nothing that says it can't be a 2/1/1 or whatever. I mean it's not like terrans stop making unit producing structures either 
But I see your point, of course. But maybe it could be a transition from a standard 2-gate opening into 2/1/2 as you suggested and thus gaining a little of each instead of one teched up way..
|
nice mushroom trip but naah wouldn't work
User was warned for this post
|
United States47024 Posts
The success of 1/1/1 banks on the versatility of the buildings involved, and the Starport in particular. Specifically, depending on scouting, it can contribute a fast Viking, fast Banshee, or fast Raven, all of which which are strong responses to robust midgame compositions that Protoss can choose, even those that are heavy on lower-tech units. A tech opening means that your army is going to be weaker, but 1/1/1 works because the Starport units can pull their weight in a fight.
The problem is the same can't be said of the Stargate units. Void Rays are poor at fighting low-tech bio compositions on open ground, and Phoenixes would almost be dead weight.
|
Yeah Protoss cannot be as diverse as other races. You will not have enough gas to support all that tech.
Plus this so does not meet the strategy forum guidelines.
|
1/1/1 works so well because of the versaility of the banshee and the marine.
For protoss, void rays and pheonix are both bad in small numbers. However, if you go 1/1/1 vs a terran 1/1/1 you have the following.
Pheonix - negates banshees really well
Robo - obs for the banshee and immortals are great to kill the tanks. with pheonix to lift them anyway
Gateway - small amount of zealot/sentry enough to take down a few marines with guardian shield
1/1/1 +forge +1 armour might be a really good theory. I'm going to test it when randoming ladder when beta comes back.
Starport complements robo really well in this specific case because you have an extremely cost efficient way to deal with both banshee [obs+pheonix, pheonix do like triple dps vs light than stalkers and can outrun banshees] and tanks [lift+immortal clean up the rest]
But I wouldn't bet on it vs a standard macro build. Pheonix works well in large numbers if you want to use them vs a standard army and immortals/obs/robo drain too much gas off 1 base I'd reckon.
|
Slayer91, that was kind of what I was thinking. Pheonix is a pretty good unit. Especially vs mech imo, since it can lift up tanks and help your ground army advance.
iCCup.Diamond, oh.. how so? Was it not specific enough perhaps? Sorry if that's the case.
TheYango, indeed the versatility of the terran starport is higher than the protoss variant. However, I think that with a supposed "1/1/1" you would have access too immortals/warp prisms along with phoenix to provide some fast movement and harass options, possibly allowing more map control.
|
On July 08 2010 22:57 Ullis wrote:
iCCup.Diamond, oh.. how so? Was it not specific enough perhaps? Sorry if that's the case.
Rule #1 and #4
As for the strategy there is no way you can have the gas to support that. You would have to expand before this build could function. But you would still want to get 2+ Gateway's before you add in the third tech tree.
Gas is key for a Protoss and you need 3-4 gas geysers to support all three tech trees.
|
I thought part of the versatility of the 1/1/1 for Terran is that all three buildings can share addons. That way you can mix and match reactors and tech labs to do whatever you want. Allows you to pump double units or tech units out of any of the structures allowing for a really varied response.
|
On July 08 2010 23:01 Takkara wrote:
I thought part of the versatility of the 1/1/1 for Terran is that all three buildings can share addons. That way you can mix and match reactors and tech labs to do whatever you want. Allows you to pump double units or tech units out of any of the structures allowing for a really varied response.
This is a good point too. Switching tech patterns is REALLY hard for a Protoss. For Zerg is gravy (everything comes from Larva), and for Terran have add-ons to allow extra production when needed and quick tech switches.
|
Protoss units and robotics factory + robo bay are more expensive than terran units and buildings, making 1-1-1 will spread your forces too thin and the functionality of your army can not make up for it. Its a good concept, but it dies to anything not 1-1-1 from the other side (ie my game vs Kawaiirice when I went voidray-dt and he just 4-raxed attack moved me and won.
|
More of a timing problem then anything. You're going to need more then one gateway's worth of units while waiting for your core THEN robo/stargates to finish as well as committing 350/250 into the robo/stargate fairly early in the game, you'd be behind in forces on 1 gate and hard pressed to operate 2 gates while teching like this.
For many reasons, I see toss sticking primarily to multi-gates and robo plays early on. I haven't seen stargates and stargate units massed to any major extent so far, largely due to the harass nature of the pheonix, cost of voidray, and general uselessness to the rest of protoss air. I'd love to see some replay if those are availible.
It's at least a good thing that the primary gate/robo plays can be fairly diverse.
EDIT: Stargate not starport, I'm retarded.
|
The ability to swap add-ons onto the newly completed building is also one of the reasons it works for Terran. You are able to start building your tech units immediately without the addition of an additional structure (not that there are THAT many for Protoss).
|
On July 08 2010 22:30 Ullis wrote:
Hi,
For some time while the beta has been down I've had lucid and very vivid mushroom dreams about SC2. And in one of them I had a thought.
Why couldn't Protoss go something similiar to Terrans 1/1/1 build? Now I'm no high level diamond player by any means, in fact I never played SC1/BW and only played the SC2 beta a while but got top gold or so.
Since in general playing reactively seems like a good idea why not open up with a broad variety of choices?
What would make terran more suitable to go 1/1/1 than protoss?
I could see a mid game push with some units from each building structure working quite fine (something like zealot/immortal/phoenix).
Anyway, was just curious what you all thought of it.
Cheers.
PS. I Know, different races, different strategies. Doesn't mean we shouldn't experiment.
1/1/1 takes too long and too much resources to build up as P compared to the T build. You'd end up being too vulnerable to pushes. Not only this, P's tech trees are more specialized than T's.
|
On July 08 2010 23:10 Paramore wrote:
Protoss units and robotics factory + robo bay are more expensive than terran units and buildings, making 1-1-1 will spread your forces too thin and the functionality of your army can not make up for it. Its a good concept, but it dies to anything not 1-1-1 from the other side (ie my game vs Kawaiirice when I went voidray-dt and he just 4-raxed attack moved me and won.
Exactly. Additionally, protoss, more than terran or zerg, NEEDS tier 3 units (colossi/high templar) to compete in the mid to late game. Delaying these techs by getting all the tier 2 stuff first exposes the protoss to terran bio-rape and zerg hydra-rape.
|
I think this is about
/thread
Appreciate all the replies though. I'm going to play around with it and see if I can come up with anything substantial..
|
you cant blindly decide I want such and such upgrades at such and such timing. You have to look at how effective that is. For example in BW, each +1 weapon made a tank do +5 damage, with splash, this was fucking huge. And since vultures do full damage to shields and zealots, the 26 damage there doesnt hurt at all. Basically upgrades are super effective for terran vs protoss ( and terran vs zerg too), but its less important for protoss to upgrade vs terran. A protoss out upgrading terran is something you dont often see in BW (The most you see is the flash build counter of keeping pace in upgrades and going for large 200/200 fight with arbs and storm.
A more specific example. zealot in bw kills a ling in 3 hits. zealot with +1 weapons kills a ling in 2 hits (THIS IS A BIG FREAKING DEAL - entire builds are based around it)
You want to look for either timing exploits (If I get this upgrade before him, I can do a really strong timing attack since I need much fewer hits to kill his units) or just abusing the absolute power of the upgrades themselves (BW Terran Mech).
I havent played enough protoss to know whether its worth upgrading for timing exploits or just for general strength of the upgrades, but this is something you need to seriously consider before incorporating this into your main build. You could have made collossi or immortals or another expo with that money instead.
Final point. When you finish a crucial upgrade, ATTACK. If you sit in your base, and let him catch up in upgrades for free (with a better econ because he researched later) you are being DUMB. If you plan to do this, just gg 5 seconds into every game.
|
i play 1/1/1 very often in pvp and win maaaaaaany games with that, its great and strong. me gosu
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On July 09 2010 03:07 Urbanspaceman wrote:
i play 1/1/1 very often in pvp and win maaaaaaany games with that, its great and strong. me gosu
You have a lot to learn about TL..........
Either way 1/1/1 is not feasible without a fast expand which would not really make it a 1/1/1 cause it would be so late.
|
Protoss units are extremely gas intensive and specialized. You cannot heavily invest in 2 tech paths off 1 base.
|
Because Protoss gateway units are already very versatile and can be mass-produced, a 1/1/1 just isn't necessary. The reason why there's a "3 gate robo" build is because you can effectively produce enough units, get out detection, and generally adapt to your opponent's play.
Robo, stargate, gateway won't be enough, because gateway units are the only strong, stable, and feasible units you can get out early enough. By the time you get out your robo and stargate, you probably won't have much gas, and more importantly, you just won't have enough units. You might have a few zealots and stalkers, but the two other production buildings likely drained your resources, and your immortal or air units will be coming out too late to support your staple (and stable) gateway units.
A reactionary type of play with 1/1/1 wouldn't be possible, because you wouldn't have the time and resources to get out enough units to react. You'd get steam-rolled by anyone who scouts your build or creates a decently-sized army.
|
It's not needed since gateway units are the staple of protoss' army and all the other unit-producing structures make support units. Zealot/Stalker/Sentry is an incredibly versatile army composition that can tackle many threats and because of this protoss isn't really a "reactionary" race of hard counters. They are more about making the right mix of core gateway units and sprinkling in some of those higher tech support units.
|
Also an important point to note is that Terran 1/1/1 usually relies on the incredible versatility of the marine, who is very powerful as soon as stim is researched. Stim is also available incredibly fast, whereas all the upgrades for Protoss core units (stalker and zealot) isn't available until tier 2 on a building that's quite a ways away from a Protoss 1/1/1.
In addition, the defensive power of Terran, namely the tank, enables Terran to turtle up to the point where their 1/1/1 is really able to kick in. Protoss doesn't have that same defensive capability that early in the game.
EDIT: Another point to bring up is the fact that the Terran tech tree is very linear. Barracks opens factory opens starport. On the other hand, Protoss tech is more branched out and specialized. Gateway opens up cybernetics core which opens up three totally independent tech routes. The resource and time commitment to tech those routes are too heavy for the early game where a true 1/1/1 would exist. Later in the game, it is completely feasible to have multiple tech trees being used, but that's only because the existing production/resource harvesting mechanisms are already in place.
|
More importantly, 1/1/1 terran allows the player to respond to any number of early threats, and then adapt into whatever response is appropriate. It seems like too many of these posts imply that terran doesn't need to or won't go beyond three unit production buildings. Once you've figured out what the other guy is doing, you can respond appropriately.
|
protoss are built around the gateway being the primary production structure.. Tech adds support to this, not to mention the delay in getting both tech structure.
Terran - Barracks -> Factory -> Starport allows you to produce units as each structure gets up. you almost have your entire tech path available to you, so it is super easy to transition by switching reactors/tech. It open so many opportunities. and if you use tanks it's easy to get second cc up with a smaller force. I think it's strong because terran has 2 viable main army production structures. Bio/Mech with one support building being the starport
protoss - Gateway -> Core -> robo/star.. It's a bit ugly because as the gate finishes you have to make an entire other building before you can drop the tech buildings to even make units. it limits your unit count too hard to expand confidently. Protoss has 1 main army production building(gateway) with 2 support structures.
I feel like the 2 or 3 gate robo is more stable and actually accomplishes a similar goal of being very adaptable.
|
I am very interested in this 1/1/1 Build aswell (although my train of thought to get there was another one).
In my opinion the key to this consideration is to substitute Stalkers with Immortals.
By comparing the two units I noticed that:
1. 1 Immo has equal costs as 2 Stalkers
2. 1 Immo has nearly same DPS vs unamored Units as 2 Stalkers and around 75% more DPS vs amored Units than 2 Stalkers
3. 1 Immo has indeed 20 HP (absolute) less than 2 Stalkers but this is imho compensated by the fact that vs High Dmg (>10) Hardened Shield grants more EHP (effective HP) and vs Low Dmg the greater pool of nonshield-HP benefits more from 1 Armor
4. 1 Immo takes just 55 sec to build, while 2 Stalkers take 84 sec to build with Gateways and 64 sec even with Warpgates, in addition chronoboosting an immo gives a percentaged greater reduction of production time than chronoboosting 2 "queued" stalkers
Only "major" disadvantages I recognized were:
5. Immos have 1 less range than stalker and
6. Immos can not shoot air
7. Immos can not blink
5th point seems actually more like an advantage to me because there will be just a few Range5 Units which will result in quick establishment of efficient concaves
6th point is also not really a disadvantage because one reason of the 1/1/1 build is to enable building phoenixes on demand easily
7th point seems also irrelevant because I guess if you intend to get blinkstalkers you wount neither build a stargate nor a robo early on
According to all these points I consider the Robo as 2 Warpgates building Stalker or, refering to the Terran 1/1/1, a Warpgate with an even better Reactor which also relativize the higher robo costs compared to a single gateway.
Next consideration is to afford the gas costs.
Afaik the gas provided by two 3probe-Extractors equals around 240/min and the normalized costs of constant immo + phoenix production equals 242/min. From this it follows that the only ugly part is to squeeze 2-3 sentries for guardian shield in.
Furthermore Phoenixes offer a solution to the EMP problem by simply lifting the ghost up while your groundforces engaging the enemy, even a single phoenix can bolster your army by lifting one of the few siege tanks involved in early pushes and they are viable scouts which allow you to skip observers until detection is needed.
All in all it seems to me, that the idea of 1/1/1 Protoss can not be blank abandoned. Unfortunately EU-Servers are still not online, so i cant test it myself :[
Oh and btw: I wonder why the Robotics Bay is even mentioned in this thread. Collossus from one base is a whole build itself and it is at least to me obvious that this allready thin build cant incorperate a stargate.
|
Yeah people have observed the DPS/cost ratio of Stalkers/Immortals before Xanatos. Here's some things to add to your list:
Immortal Pros:
-Instant damage (i.e. no projectile) = no overkill
Stalker Pros:
-Speed (big difference)
-Made from a cheap, core building rather than an expensive building that only makes support units
-Can be warped-in
IMO at the end of the day the Stalker's pros outweight their cons on everything but armored ground units, which is what people already uses Immortals for.
|
i did 4/1/1 late game vs zerg, 4 gateways to stalker sentry/1robo for collosi/ 1 star for phx to dominate air. but i feel just 4/2 is better because blinking stalkers>corruptor and do reasonably well vs mutas.
|
1/1/1 as Terran has the strength of being able to build off of one base. All of their tech options are a tech lab away.
1/1/1 as Protoss is clunky, takes forever and is not supportable on 1 base. Advancing the tech tree involves building at least one additional building, which is expensive and slow.
A mix of gateways, stargates and robos might lead to some new strategies, but they won't play out at least until you expand.
tl;dr mixing production buildings as protoss is not a feasible early game strategy in the context of 1/1/1 terran.
|
Back to the discussion concerning 1/1/1: the only circumstance in which I see this as being viable is when playing on an island map e.g. Troy, Arkanoid, Chariots (
rofl does anyone still remember those maps? :-p
|
1/1/1 is very effective in PvP, because Phoenix > non-Stalker and Immortal > Stalker.
I don't know about the other matchups. I always preferred to expand earlier than that. (Against Zerg, I doubt you'd want both Phoenix and Immortals, because Hydras and Queens are the natural response to Phoenix and they also work against Immortals. Against Terran, I still doubt you'd want both air and Immortals, because the simplest counters to them (marine, possibly with ghost) are the same.)
|
oh wow...
well, think about it this way: the money it costs you to get all the tech would be more than 1000 minerals/gas. That's a tonne of money, and even with sacrificing a huge amount of probe production, your opponant will have a way larger army, and even if one of the tech trees you got countered it, it wouldn't be anywhere near effective enough to work.
Maybe a noob shouldn't be posting his "very vivid mushroom dreams about SC2."
|
On July 09 2010 09:22 Severedevil wrote:
1/1/1 is very effective in PvP, because Phoenix > non-Stalker and Immortal > Stalker.
I don't know about the other matchups. I always preferred to expand earlier than that. (Against Zerg, I doubt you'd want both Phoenix and Immortals, because Hydras and Queens are the natural response to Phoenix and they also work against Immortals. Against Terran, I still doubt you'd want both air and Immortals, because the simplest counters to them (marine, possibly with ghost) are the same.)
I honestly doubt this. If you 1/1/1 in PvP the other guy can just go 3gate zeal or 4warpgate and just completely overrun you in seconds.
If you 1/1/1 and utilize Phoenix, you'll need at least 5+ to really have them be any use. Your opponent can jsut grab stalkers to counter your phoenixes easily and out-mass you. Sure, you can build immortals out of you robo, but your opponent can then just get some zealots. In other words, your opponent can easily counter your composition using purely gateway units. Furthermore, the resources you spent on teching will be used by your opponent to achieve a larger army size and larger army size is almost always the winning factor in PvP.
|
If by 1/1/1 you mean Gateway + Stargate + Robo (no Fleet Beacon, Citadel, or Support Bay), that's a fairly small investment in tech. It's 150 for the Gateway +150/150 for the Stargate + 200/100 for the Robo = 500/250 total for your unit producing structures. (650/250 if you get two gateways, which you might be able to run alongside a Stargate and Robo off one base. I never found a second gateway necessary except to counter zealot rushes, but w/e.)
For comparison, a blinkstalker build will require at least 3 warpgates (500/50) + citadel (150/100) + blink (150/150) for a total of 800/300. A 3 gate Robo build takes 700/150. A four warpgate rush still takes 650/50.
On July 09 2010 09:39 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2010 09:22 Severedevil wrote:
1/1/1 is very effective in PvP, because Phoenix > non-Stalker and Immortal > Stalker.
I don't know about the other matchups. I always preferred to expand earlier than that. (Against Zerg, I doubt you'd want both Phoenix and Immortals, because Hydras and Queens are the natural response to Phoenix and they also work against Immortals. Against Terran, I still doubt you'd want both air and Immortals, because the simplest counters to them (marine, possibly with ghost) are the same.) I honestly doubt this. If you 1/1/1 in PvP the other guy can just go 3gate zeal or 4warpgate and just completely overrun you in seconds.
Probe scout --> identify build --> adjust to build. 3 gate zeal obviously can't deny scouting. Can a 4 warpgate rush deny pre-Phoenix scouting and still brank the front before the first Immortal completes? I've lost to it before, but I'm fairly confident it's defensible.
If you 1/1/1 and utilize Phoenix, you'll need at least 5+ to really have them be any use. Your opponent can jsut grab stalkers to counter your phoenixes easily and out-mass you. Sure, you can build immortals out of you robo, but your opponent can then just get some zealots. In other words, your opponent can easily counter your composition using purely gateway units. Furthermore, the resources you spent on teching will be used by your opponent to achieve a larger army size and larger army size is almost always the winning factor in PvP.
Phoenix murder light units, Immortals murder armored units, Zealots are solid and beefy against anything except Phoenix and Colossi. The plan isn't to lift your Stalkers and run under them or something. Pheonix kill your light shit. (They have to take Stalker fire to kill Sentries, but that's OK because they're beefy and lightly-armored and Sentries die fast. They can kill Zealots from the cover of the Zealot/Immortal line, due to flying and having four range.)
Immortal DPS vs. light is the same as two stalkers, so it's hardly a catastrophe if my Immortals are shooting his Zealots and his Stalkers are shooting my Zealots.
I'm still doubtful of Protoss 1/1/1 versus Zerg or Terran since the counters to Immortals and Phoenix/Voids seem to be the same. Maybe a joint Immortal Drop + Void Ray harass could have potential, but I'm none too keen.
|
also because protoss has to wait for the cyber core before going into the robo/stargate which takes extra time.
|
protoss tech is too gas heavy and even still if you get out one void one immortal or whatever
you wont have enough gateway units to even touch your opponents army
with terran they can wall off and bunker and play defensively (with hardly any cost, just making buildings at their ramp and they can salvage bunkers) where toss would have to invest in some cannons and would cost even more
|
Start with Stargate units to contain Terran -> Observer ASAP for Banshee -> Blink Stalkers or Chargelots to fend off first attack -> Colossus ASAP for big push -> HT later for additional support
I lost quiet alot to this build... Trick is to expand early during the initial contain with Stargate units so Protoss can outmacro with gateway units until Colossus pops up.
|
On July 09 2010 12:40 Leeoku wrote:
also because protoss has to wait for the cyber core before going into the robo/stargate which takes extra time.
Same as the other 2 races.
Cyber core = Orbital command = Queen = 150 minerals
Protos allredy have their macro mechanics built in Nexsus.
On topic, i think it could be valid against protoss but u have to remember not to build stalkers at all and save that gas for immos.
It could be possible tho for 1/1/1 build against zerg and terran also, just to simply switch stargate with a twilight council. (zelot charge to counter marines and marauders OR to simply build dark shrine for harassment, also zelot charge is a counter to hydras and u can check in game help that zelot IS the counter for both marauder and hydralisk and i suppose they meant if and only IF u get charge).
|
i think this build would work as long as you don't produce out of all of your buildings at the same time like swapping between stargate and robo to counter whatever your opponent sends
|
Immo + Phoenix +1 gate doesn't seem very viable against any sort of massable t1. It might work fine vs protoss if he techs, but zealots, or vs terran (marines) or zerg (lings) you are going to get frigging rocked.
Also EMP will wreck your shit.
The advantage of terran 1/1/1 is that it deals well with pretty much everything.
|
On July 10 2010 01:12 ToxNub wrote:
Immo + Phoenix +1 gate doesn't seem very viable against any sort of massable t1. It might work fine vs protoss if he techs, but zealots, or vs terran (marines) or zerg (lings) you are going to get frigging rocked.
Also EMP will wreck your shit.
The advantage of terran 1/1/1 is that it deals well with pretty much everything.
Yes, but only because Terran units are individually very cost effective. Two Sentries isn't anywhere close to as crippling to a Terran Marine+Tank+Raven force than a single PDD does to what the Protoss would have at that point.
I got rocked by this build yesterday. I typically go for a quick Observer in PvT find out what he has, and then react, using Force Field to stall for time if necessary, but in this case as my Observer was trundling across the middle of Steppes of War, he already had 2 Tanks (Siege tech on the way), 11 Marines and a Raven (nearing 100 energy), and killed the Observer on the way over. Blew my mind how quickly the guy built up that force and I honestly don't know what I would switch up to stop it. Guardian Shield apparently wasn't enough to counteract that many marines, tanks and a PDD.
All I COULD have had at that point is a Gateway force and maybe one unit from a T2 structure (in place of the Observer), such as a Void Ray, Phoenix or Immortal. The only indicator I had was two gas fairly early and a wall-off with a Reactor. Who only knows what he was doing behind that wall. It could have been Banshees for all I know.
Has there been a general concensus on how to scout and stop that particular variation of the 1/1/1 build?
|
I'm Really feeling the zealot nerf. This makes protoss 1/1/1 even more impossible than before. I really could use that stargate gas for a sentry or an immortal.
|
The Terran 1/1/1 isn't really good on P because they usually go 3-4 gate, which will stop the unit composition Bibdy faced. Similarly, the P 1/1/1 has a high chance of failure to a rax/factory Terran build.
Regarding sentries: If you invest too heavily in sentries, you will fall behind though. In my experience, go sentries if you are trying to play a macro game, but if not, don't build any because 1 ff doesn't do a hell of a lot of good, and 500 gas on 5 sentries means little or no stalkers.
On another note, I've had some success with a Protoss 1/1/1 build, but when I get into a fight it is usually an all in situation (I do really well with micro so it suits me) so if you lose the fight, it's over. Only 3-6 gates and additional unit structures can recover from a loss like that, not a 1/1/1, and that's its biggest weakness. The Protoss 1/1/1 is mostly suited against Zerg, since zeals kill lings and hydras, and immortals kill roaches, and phoenixes add some really good support to whatever unit is giving you the most trouble.
|
On July 08 2010 22:40 Juvator wrote:
nice mushroom trip but naah wouldn't work
User was warned for this post
wtf ? i'm sorry but why do I get warned for this ? it was a friendly remark
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
