|
On October 20 2011 06:23 Entteri wrote:
IMO fast repair+maybe having some marines in your base is better than this and the only time you want to spam that many turrets is when you are maxed and just want every unit to be with your army(maybe with mech if you have a crapton of minerals).
i have to disagree with the fast repair because we all know that even fast repair vs 10-15 mutas you still lose SCVs, and the point of turreting up carefully is to avoid these kinds of losses
On October 20 2011 05:13 gfever wrote:
the best players are players who don't rely on turrets when the first couple of mutas come out but just position your marines where the mutas would come from and have the rest of ur army near your natural. That way you don't spend turrets too early. Spending turrets this early in the game can mean your 3rd expo is much much later. You will sooner or later need to start making turrets after 3rd base is up but having your marines positioned is better than wasting minerals on turrets. End of story. If you build turrets just to defend the first batch of mutas around 10 mins. That is bad.
This is coming from a GM.
this is partially true but alas i have to disagree.. from watching GSL and MLG you can already see how the lack of turrets but with increased marine production while lots of mutas are out tends to lead to a lot of stuff getting sniped
even the koreans arent infallible to this kinds of things which can be seen a lot especially in the GSL, ive seen countless times the players running their marines back and forth or getting them sniped repeatedly by 15-16 mutas because they just didnt have the proper defense
as for that last line that i bolded, i dont recall putting anything like that in the guide, as i mentioned proper scouting is involved before making such an investment
On October 20 2011 06:41 Xodushai wrote:
Concerning not sending 4 scvs at a time to build turrets, I don't see how this is worse than having 1 scv build 4 in a row. The lost mining time will be the same, save the minimal time it takes for them to go behind the mineral line to build. Queing up 1 or more turrets on 1 scv is a lot worse for your economy as you are binding up the minerals requierd to build them in advance, when you instead could've used them to something else and built the turret when the last one is done.
Edit: Just a minor thing, this is theorycrafting and given you need 4 turrets, and has nothing to do with building up your defences gradually. Also if anybody disagrees or have agrumetns for other methods they are of course welcome.
i dont believe you understand quite fully how much worse it is to send 4 SCVs to make 4 turrets immediately compared to having 1 SCV build 1 turret with 1 Qed
essentially with the latter, you have 200 minerals (used) and more income at X point in time
with the former, its like dropping a CC down instead but with 4SCVs not mining.. basically you have binded 400 minerals down to what might have been an overcommitment to turrets ( as i mentioned you want to gradually build up your turrets based on what you think you opponent is going for). not to mention that at X point in time your income would be much lower and you would have less unit production than you would if you had built 1 turret at a time
On October 20 2011 06:28 MrCon wrote:
In the recent GSL TvZ, a lot of the terrans have been turtling with a lot of turrets, I feel it's a good idea.
But the problem is upgrading them, those players are not doing it, unless you're willing to lay down a 3rd engbay, marines upgrades will always have priority, whatever the scenario is, over range and +2 building armor.
this is a mentality issue, because most of the times pro players even the koreans in the GSL believe that they have the necessary set of skills to deal with muta harass but at the same time the players doing the muta harass believe they have the necessary skills to be able to harass well
its an opportunity cost thing too, which often times leads to some of the following chains:
- do I wait 80 seconds and some minerals more on 1 of my upgrades to get safer defense or do i want to just beef up my marines ASAP
if yes:
- you will be definitely lose marines here and there trying to prevent muta harass
- you will lose some structures (depots / addons) and even SCVs some times before your marines get to the mutas
- in most cases you end up with a lot of forced stims and low medvac energy
if no:
- yes you will have a higher marine count
- you can hit off a nice timing if planned well and possibly take the game
remember that the time taken for + 2 armor is a lot more than the time taken for + 1 range, and i also point out that there is hardly ever the need for + 2 armor, its just there for numbers and for those who want to go the extra smile to be safe
On October 20 2011 04:33 Validity wrote:
Also @op
What are the benefits of putting 4 turrets (x2 for nat/main) and never being able to move out because you have 8 less marines compared to 1-2 per base and using a small group of marines to help defend with the turret, which can be used in your push. 4 immediate turrets per base is like sacrificing a fast 3rd OC because you can't split your marines up to defend.
assuming you had only built 1 turret in the middle of your mineral line to defend against muta harass
and assuming they had gotten about 14-16 mutas, you're going to have less SCVs because you know for a fact that they can just fly in and rape that 1 turret (who are we kidding here we've seen top level zergs do this countless times), and after that just go to town on SCVs
not only do u lose the 100 minerals for that 1 turret, but even if you had mass repaired it you would have lost SCVs
losing SCVs leads to lower income and ultimately less marines
and even if you did have marines to defend as mentioned by some already, a lot of zergs know that small grps of 8 marines can easily be taken out by mutas and they have qualms about doing it either
not to mention the fact that by the time your marines get stimmed to go defend your mineral line the dmg has been done (unless they are standing on the mineral line which i doubt so) as well as the dmg on your stimmed marines which will take up more medivac energy
|
Turrets are fine when you rely on mecha, because thors are slow as sh**, but they're not here to repulse 20+ mutalisks, as a planetary fortress is not here to defend against 20+ roaches. Both a just preventing little runbies (like 12 zerglings or 4 mutalisks) from happening, forcing the opponent not to do harassment but commited attacks, leaving his base unguarded.
My premium reaction when seeing 20 mutalisks in my mineral line is to make the SCVs go far far away with mutas on their tail, box my whole army and go f***ing kill the zerg.
|
Love you guide. I don't understand why people are putting up so much of a fight. 1 turret is 2 marines in minerals, and 0 supply.
Yeah when your going for a timing push, like you said, not really efficient. But when you going for the long macro game, having heavy turret use will pay off greatly. It forces Zerg to build more units rather then relying on the Mutas to delay the push in order to get their units.
I also noted that in the most recent TvZ with Korean pros i have been noting heavier Turret use.
|
On October 20 2011 03:33 buckKeefe wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 01:51 Hider wrote:
1) The real cost of building 4 turrets instead of 2, is not 200. Its much higher, because of the oppurtunity cost of the turrets + opp cost of scv not mining.
2) Also that turret range upgrade is pretty terrible unless you go into late game as you need them for infantry, unless you want to build 3 ebays which just delays everything a lot. If you go mech and you know that the zerg will go muta heavy, sure getting that upgrade might be benefical.
The first point doesn't make sense to me even though I see this errant reasoning a lot (esp re: mules vs scans) - the opportunity cost of something that costs 100 minerals is...100 minerals. I get the mining time thing, but the mining time lost to a turret is roughly 40 minerals. So, you're right I guess, it's 280 instead of 200, but I don't see how that changes the calculation in the OP since all the other things you have to rebuild after harassment also cost mining time (edit: or production time for add-ons). Opportunity costs don't exist in a vacuum - the big question is 'what else would you get with that money'? Assuming you're rolling with smooth production out of the buildings you've already got (something I wouldn't sacrifice to get turrets unless it was a serious emergency), it seems that the alternative is to save for expansions/more production, and building those new buildings actually costs more mining time than the turrets. For a mech army in particular, you're bottlenecked on gas and limited in your mobility to defend a lot of bases - adding on more orbitals can only go so far. In those cases, I find turrets to be a fantastic mineral sink, since the opportunity 'cost' basically amounts to 'I won't be banking that money' (=good thing). I agree on 2, though: +range should be reserved for heavy mech. I tend to go pure mech in TvZ and the extra range can have a huge effect. Most players are used to microing their mutas around un-upgraded turrets, so I see a lot of accidental overcommitments or attempts to fly to a corner that turns out to be unsafe. (edit) Finally, you get just a liiittle bit of extra time to help your mass-repair to be totally imba :D
Your def. correct in that opp cost dont exist in a vacuum.
The reason I talk about oppurtuniy cost here is that, you could use the minerals to 1) get a quicker expansion, which increases your economy exponontially (this could possilbe make the real value of 1 turret worth much much more than 100 minerals), 2) build more marines, which allows you to put more pressure on the zerg or just have a mobile defense. Assuming you use too much on immobile defense and the zerg realizes this, he is free to get a quick hive tech and mass droning without protecting his expansions.
|
I agree with the logic here with all of the turrets, but if you arent going for a timing push, isn't it more effective to split your marines into thirds to defend your bases as you get your turrets up, and delay your turrets a lot longer, as the marines can help you turtle incredibly well. MVP and Bomber do this a lot, keeping 20 or so marines with 2 medivacs by each base so they can stim, which is much scarier to zergs than turrets imo. This use of the majority of your marines in muta defense allows for those 400 resources to then go into another expo, and turrets later.
|
On October 20 2011 07:58 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 03:33 buckKeefe wrote:On October 20 2011 01:51 Hider wrote:
1) The real cost of building 4 turrets instead of 2, is not 200. Its much higher, because of the oppurtunity cost of the turrets + opp cost of scv not mining.
2) Also that turret range upgrade is pretty terrible unless you go into late game as you need them for infantry, unless you want to build 3 ebays which just delays everything a lot. If you go mech and you know that the zerg will go muta heavy, sure getting that upgrade might be benefical.
The first point doesn't make sense to me even though I see this errant reasoning a lot (esp re: mules vs scans) - the opportunity cost of something that costs 100 minerals is...100 minerals. I get the mining time thing, but the mining time lost to a turret is roughly 40 minerals. So, you're right I guess, it's 280 instead of 200, but I don't see how that changes the calculation in the OP since all the other things you have to rebuild after harassment also cost mining time (edit: or production time for add-ons). Opportunity costs don't exist in a vacuum - the big question is 'what else would you get with that money'? Assuming you're rolling with smooth production out of the buildings you've already got (something I wouldn't sacrifice to get turrets unless it was a serious emergency), it seems that the alternative is to save for expansions/more production, and building those new buildings actually costs more mining time than the turrets. For a mech army in particular, you're bottlenecked on gas and limited in your mobility to defend a lot of bases - adding on more orbitals can only go so far. In those cases, I find turrets to be a fantastic mineral sink, since the opportunity 'cost' basically amounts to 'I won't be banking that money' (=good thing). I agree on 2, though: +range should be reserved for heavy mech. I tend to go pure mech in TvZ and the extra range can have a huge effect. Most players are used to microing their mutas around un-upgraded turrets, so I see a lot of accidental overcommitments or attempts to fly to a corner that turns out to be unsafe. (edit) Finally, you get just a liiittle bit of extra time to help your mass-repair to be totally imba :D Your def. correct in that opp cost dont exist in a vacuum. The reason I talk about oppurtuniy cost here is that, you could use the minerals to 1) get a quicker expansion, which increases your economy exponontially (this could possilbe make the real value of 1 turret worth much much more than 100 minerals), 2) build more marines, which allows you to put more pressure on the zerg or just have a mobile defense. Assuming you use too much on immobile defense and the zerg realizes this, he is free to get a quick hive tech and mass droning without protecting his expansions.
the problem is youre building an extra expansion against a zerg.. so even if you get up that CC and you fly it over and transfer SCVs as well.. can you defend it well against ling runbys or muta harass efficiently? can you protect all your SCVs from mutas? imagine a map like Tal'Darim Altar where take the third after u destroy the rocks
Mutas can fly back and forth between your third and main
can you honestly keep enough marines on both sides to prevent the muta harass?
will you be able to move out of your base? these are the problems
sure you can get an early third which is the opportunity cost when making turrets.. the other thing is whether you can defend it
On October 20 2011 08:01 ComBro1 wrote:
isn't it more effective to split your marines into thirds to defend your bases as you get your turrets up, and delay your turrets a lot longer, as the marines can help you turtle incredibly well. MVP and Bomber do this a lot, keeping 20 or so marines with 2 medivacs by each base so they can stim, which is much scarier to zergs than turrets imo.
this is true but the problem is more players dont do this often enough
and also there is the thing about forced stims
|
I don't know about you, but my marine upgrades are waaaay too important to be delayed by building armor and the like, I would only upgrade them after I'm 3-3 with my marines or I have a third ebay.
When you're in turtle mode, leaving rines spread out in vulnerable areas is much better then building the turrets earlier, with tanks and bunkers there's almost no way for them to break the front.
Grab as many TvZ replays from Bomber as you can, he has some of the best turret timing/placement that I've seen (with a fast third).
|
On October 20 2011 02:03 Logick wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 01:25 KawaiiRice wrote:
so... I've read through everything twice and am I correct in saying that the only thing this guide says is to build more than 1 turret and get range upgrade? Lol o_O; uhmmm... o_O;; its more than just that, it discusses why you should safely do so and talks about the pros and cons I guess you could say that the overall gist is as what you mentioned but then again if i had just posted "get more turrets = win" that wouldnt really get my point across @hlder as for you good sir, Im pretty sure you did not read everything through but rather just skimmed through and looked for stuff to disagree upon 1. the opportunity cost for an ONE SCV mining is really such a big deal to you? if that is the case i assume that you dont scout at all during the early game because your worker wouldnt be mining? 3. this is why i assume you didnt read at all, because if u did read carefully you and some of the previous posts, you would know that 4 turrets vs 15 mutas, even if all the turrets fall, the amount of dead mutas as opposed to destroyed turrets that cost no guess is not even a good trade at all for the zerg player not to mention that you should have some reinforcements to come assist the and deal with the mutas, so essentially the zerg player has lost mutas, taken heavy dmg and only killed 4 turrets ( assuming hes stupid enough to send 15 mutas into 4 turrets 4. i guess you disagree with my guide which is fine, but do not try to make the point that i do not understand the use of turrets, but rather you lack the understanding of the my guide what i can say is this, try reading a few posts next time and actually read through the whole guide thoroughly before you go into criticize mode ( which i predicted too that someone would)
1) Read my prev. post.
3) The numbers are not the point. They were just used as examples. The point is that you cant predict how many mutas he will have in 1 minut. Soem tiems he will have 7-8, some times he will go up to 15-20. Some times he will stop at 15-20, or other times he will get 40. Trying to overproduce turrets can be really costly (like if you expect that he will have between 7 and 16 mutas attacking your base in 1 minut, how many turrets do you build?).
4) I explained why you lacked the understanding. Do you understand my arguments?
There is one exception to "my" rule of how turrets should be used. And that is when your just planning on never attacking and playing some kind of split map strategy. This is when having a mobile army compared to a immobile army isn't very benefical in the midgame. THis is probably why Avilo agrees with overproducing turrets as he plays an extremely defensive style. I do that style occiasionally as well, but my problem with your OP is that you dont think of building turrets in relation the strategy you uses. Most terrans will go for some kind of 2base/3base timing, and you simply cant do an efficient timing attack if you have to skip infantry upgrade and overproduce turrets.
|
On October 20 2011 08:12 Logick wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 07:58 Hider wrote:On October 20 2011 03:33 buckKeefe wrote:On October 20 2011 01:51 Hider wrote:
1) The real cost of building 4 turrets instead of 2, is not 200. Its much higher, because of the oppurtunity cost of the turrets + opp cost of scv not mining.
2) Also that turret range upgrade is pretty terrible unless you go into late game as you need them for infantry, unless you want to build 3 ebays which just delays everything a lot. If you go mech and you know that the zerg will go muta heavy, sure getting that upgrade might be benefical.
The first point doesn't make sense to me even though I see this errant reasoning a lot (esp re: mules vs scans) - the opportunity cost of something that costs 100 minerals is...100 minerals. I get the mining time thing, but the mining time lost to a turret is roughly 40 minerals. So, you're right I guess, it's 280 instead of 200, but I don't see how that changes the calculation in the OP since all the other things you have to rebuild after harassment also cost mining time (edit: or production time for add-ons). Opportunity costs don't exist in a vacuum - the big question is 'what else would you get with that money'? Assuming you're rolling with smooth production out of the buildings you've already got (something I wouldn't sacrifice to get turrets unless it was a serious emergency), it seems that the alternative is to save for expansions/more production, and building those new buildings actually costs more mining time than the turrets. For a mech army in particular, you're bottlenecked on gas and limited in your mobility to defend a lot of bases - adding on more orbitals can only go so far. In those cases, I find turrets to be a fantastic mineral sink, since the opportunity 'cost' basically amounts to 'I won't be banking that money' (=good thing). I agree on 2, though: +range should be reserved for heavy mech. I tend to go pure mech in TvZ and the extra range can have a huge effect. Most players are used to microing their mutas around un-upgraded turrets, so I see a lot of accidental overcommitments or attempts to fly to a corner that turns out to be unsafe. (edit) Finally, you get just a liiittle bit of extra time to help your mass-repair to be totally imba :D Your def. correct in that opp cost dont exist in a vacuum. The reason I talk about oppurtuniy cost here is that, you could use the minerals to 1) get a quicker expansion, which increases your economy exponontially (this could possilbe make the real value of 1 turret worth much much more than 100 minerals), 2) build more marines, which allows you to put more pressure on the zerg or just have a mobile defense. Assuming you use too much on immobile defense and the zerg realizes this, he is free to get a quick hive tech and mass droning without protecting his expansions. the problem is youre building an extra expansion against a zerg.. so even if you get up that CC and you fly it over and transfer SCVs as well.. can you defend it well against ling runbys or muta harass efficiently? can you protect all your SCVs from mutas? imagine a map like Tal'Darim Altar where take the third after u destroy the rocks Mutas can fly back and forth between your third and main can you honestly keep enough marines on both sides to prevent the muta harass? will you be able to move out of your base? these are the problems sure you can get an early third which is the opportunity cost when making turrets.. the other thing is whether you can defend it
I kinda tried to explain this is in my first post. Yes you spread out your marines in a defensive position. The zerg cant really fly between your 3rd and main, thats why too risky.
ANd as I said you move out by dropping forcing the zergs mutas to defend the drop, or you can leave some mariens back to defend and move out. He will soon be forced to go back and defend with mutas. Then you can reinfornce with your "defensive" marines.
I agree that this isn't an easy thing. For some plat-diamond players overproducing turrets might be the easiest thing to do. But if you have good mechanics /multitasking, this isn't optimal.
|
@ hlder dear god thats why its clearly stated in the the guide not to bother on heavy defense if youre going for a timing
its stated there like 3 times at LEAST
so its apparent that you dont read through at all
|
with ops layout on most maps he showed, the zerg can just ball his mutas up and run them along the end of the line deeper into the base. he is assuming the deterrent is enough for the mutas to just completely back away/unable to engage the turrets. but he isnt dealing with mutas just running straight through the line behind the base.
this is why most people build a lot more turrets than the OP is claiming you can get away with, everywhere needs to be protected because the mutas can just go past the edge of the turrets, get shot twice, then have a free reign over the back of the base.
if you are advocating building these turret rings all around you're base (a massive investment) then the zerg just has a new way to deal with them, engage them side on. only getting shot by 2 turrets at a time while plowing through them in 2 shots a peice.
this is why turrets are (in the late game ) built in doubles or triplets. this is a 2 fold bonus. 1 they cant avoid half youre turrets while taking out 1/2 anywhere from 2- 6 turrets might need to be engaged at a time. and with the turrets closer together they are more likely to attack the same targets, giving you easymode focusfire on the mutas.
|
On October 20 2011 08:17 Logick wrote:
@ hlder dear god thats why its clearly stated in the the guide not to bother on heavy defense if youre going for a timing
its stated there like 3 times at LEAST
so its apparent that you dont read through at all
Its a pretty bad structued OP as the head lines makes little sense.
Anyway all I have seen is this:
"this is by no means a form of deterrence off 1 base".
I actually said 2base/3base, and since you relate this turret defense to GSL, where 9/10 tvz games involes the terran player doing a 3 base timing, it actually seems very weird that you dont think your strategy is viable in GSL..
|
On October 20 2011 08:17 turdburgler wrote:
with ops layout on most maps he showed, the zerg can just ball his mutas up and run them along the end of the line deeper into the base. he is assuming the deterrent is enough for the mutas to just completely back away/unable to engage the turrets. but he isnt dealing with mutas just running straight through the line behind the base.
this is why most people build a lot more turrets than the OP is claiming you can get away with, everywhere needs to be protected because the mutas can just go past the edge of the turrets, get shot twice, then have a free reign over the back of the base.
if you are advocating building these turret rings all around you're base (a massive investment) then the zerg just has a new way to deal with them, engage them side on. only getting shot by 2 turrets at a time while plowing through them in 2 shots a peice.
this is why turrets are (in the late game ) built in doubles or triplets. this is a 2 fold bonus. 1 they cant avoid half youre turrets while taking out 1/2 anywhere from 2- 6 turrets might need to be engaged at a time. and with the turrets closer together they are more likely to attack the same targets, giving you easymode focusfire on the mutas.
This is also true, however I assumed that OP will overproduce turrets through all the game. Like if he gets 4 turrets when the possible highest amount of mutas the zerg can have at that time is 10, and then he will get like 10 turrets in the main if the zerg can have 20-25 mutas.
As I said prev. this can only work if your trying a split map strategy.
|
What league are you in Mr.Gold?
|
On October 20 2011 08:17 Logick wrote:
@ hlder dear god thats why its clearly stated in the the guide not to bother on heavy defense if youre going for a timing
its stated there like 3 times at LEAST
so its apparent that you dont read through at all
just accept your failure 
|
On October 20 2011 08:24 abSTRAkt wrote:
What league are you in Mr.Gold?
this is a really big question, but even if you were masters it doesn't matter @ OP
you can't get away with spending so much money on useless turrets like this vs good zergs. Money that you spend on turrets + the range upgrade slows down everything youre doing. It's apparent that you're winning games enough to feel comfortable enough to make a guide on TL. Maybe this will help players increase their winrate vs zergs as well, I don't know. But doing unrefined things like this will screw you over against a good player.
edit: my posting seems to always be terribly incoherent and goes around everywhere.. why did i even quote abstrakt lol
|
On October 20 2011 09:09 KawaiiRice wrote:this is a really big question, but even if you were masters it doesn't matter @ OP you can't get away with spending so much money on useless turrets like this vs good zergs. Money that you spend on turrets + the range upgrade slows down everything youre doing. It's apparent that you're winning games enough to feel comfortable enough to make a guide on TL. Maybe this will help players increase their winrate vs zergs as well, I don't know. But doing unrefined things like this will screw you over against a good player. edit: my posting seems to always be terribly incoherent and goes around everywhere.. why did i even quote abstrakt lol
How would you counter mass muta strategies like Idra's?
|
On October 20 2011 09:54 Antisocialmunky wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 09:09 KawaiiRice wrote:On October 20 2011 08:24 abSTRAkt wrote:
What league are you in Mr.Gold? this is a really big question, but even if you were masters it doesn't matter @ OP you can't get away with spending so much money on useless turrets like this vs good zergs. Money that you spend on turrets + the range upgrade slows down everything youre doing. It's apparent that you're winning games enough to feel comfortable enough to make a guide on TL. Maybe this will help players increase their winrate vs zergs as well, I don't know. But doing unrefined things like this will screw you over against a good player. edit: my posting seems to always be terribly incoherent and goes around everywhere.. why did i even quote abstrakt lol How would you counter mass muta strategies like Idra's?
Maybe the Dong-whatever guy is a better example...it's really about timing. Some people claim to play a management game, but the truth is that every Terran has to rely on timings to beat the Zerg. You can be aggressive and exploit the need to grab a first third with marines/hellions, or you could take the opportunity to grab a fast third yourself (this is in itself a timing strategy) and hold with tons of marines.
Just like you can't blindly overmake turrets, bear in mind the zerg cannot blindly overmake mutas. Having upgraded marines around + medivacs (of course) is not only going to repel mutas, it's going to force him to make LESS mutas because 1. mutas suck against marines and 2. you need gas for banes = less mutas.
You CAN get away with a mech + mass turret style in BW because there's no airspace behind the main in some maps and the zerg cannot mass drones as quickly. Also it deters drops which is painful for mech to deal with. Turtle, move forward, clear zerg out, take bases, repeat...it only works in BW.
I guess the main point is that why overmake turrets (say 2 per base on 2 bases) when you can have 8 marines for that cost that can be used as offensive or defensive units?
|
Turrets cost no food.
The best is a combination of both to mitigate food not being with your push and turret immobility..
|
If you go a lot more turrets in the early game just to be safe off 2 bases then in turn you're losing the ability to go out. If your plan is to be defensive and turtle then a few more turrets should help, but if you plan on moving out with 8 less marines than you could have had you're gonna get cleaned up easily. Also, after a while, bar building upgrades and turret upgrades, 3 turrets at each position won't cut it, you'll need a lot more against upgraded mutas. However, this delays bio upgrades which are also super important.
There's also no telling on how many mutas they decide to go. If you invest heavily in turrets and they see this then they'll probably just end up droning really hard and expanding realizing they're safe. It's just better to slowly add on more turrets and get upgrades for bio/mech.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
