MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/8/2006 1:41:34 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here are the Hawaiian Islands, without the coastlines done, and with relatively few names on it.
Difficult to tell if it is done OK or not.

Attachment (1)

Post #: 1

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/8/2006 1:44:15 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here are the same Hawaiian Islands with the coastlines added, by me, not the graphic artist, so this might not be the same in the final game. I just add them to see the map clearer and see the flaws better. And for fun too, I like doing this

.
I also added the most names I could gather, to be able to recognise the place on actual maps.

Edit : This is a reduced picture, I work on a larger one. I made screenshots of all the map, and created a complete map of the full MWiF map. It was great fun to do this !

Edit : I know I made the islands to small, and thus the terrain is difficult to dinstinguish.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Froonp -- 7/8/2006 1:45:59 PM >

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 2

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/8/2006 9:09:16 PM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

I think some of those 'shoals' and 'rocks' might be a bit small to have any military significance, i.e. long enough to build an airstrip on? It seems there are more land hexes now between Pearl and Midway?

I think in WiF it is important to draw the sea boundaries into the port symbols to clearly show which sea zones are connected to which ports.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 3

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/9/2006 10:19:06 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I think some of those 'shoals' and 'rocks' might be a bit small to have any military significance, i.e. long enough to build an airstrip on? It seems there are more land hexes now between Pearl and Midway?

Distances are magnified by a 2,6 factor, so new land hexes are normal.

quote:

I think in WiF it is important to draw the sea boundaries into the port symbols to clearly show which sea zones are connected to which ports.

The rule in WiF FE is that the position of the port in the hex doesn't matter. If the Sea Zone boundary intercects the hex, then the port has access to both sea zones.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 4

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 3:44:47 AM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

I looked at my paper maps and there were originally five other hexes between Pearl and Midway, one of which was the now three hex group aroud Kauai now. I understand that as the scale goes up more land will appear. But I think there were geographical reasons and limits why there was a base on Midway and not on the other islands. Are you really sure all those bits of land have potential military use? Most any island big enough to build an airstrip was considered in planning by both sides. And of course only some islands had enough space say for a B-29 runway. But in WiF any hex will do. It will really make no difference to strategy or play if there are ten hexes between Pearl and Midway or only five of them. Now what I'm getting at is if all the beautiful hi-res coastline bitmapping is eating up computing power and loading time, perhaps some savings could be generated by eliminating places with names like "shoal"?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 5

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 4:18:43 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I looked at my paper maps and there were originally five other hexes between Pearl and Midway, one of which was the now three hex group aroud Kauai now. I understand that as the scale goes up more land will appear. But I think there were geographical reasons and limits why there was a base on Midway and not on the other islands. Are you really sure all those bits of land have potential military use? Most any island big enough to build an airstrip was considered in planning by both sides. And of course only some islands had enough space say for a B-29 runway. But in WiF any hex will do. It will really make no difference to strategy or play if there are ten hexes between Pearl and Midway or only five of them. Now what I'm getting at is if all the beautiful hi-res coastline bitmapping is eating up computing power and loading time, perhaps some savings could be generated by eliminating places with names like "shoal"?

When counting coastal hex bitmaps I am already assuming that there will be a myriad of hexes that use a generic 'island' hex bitmap. There might be several of different sizes (tiny, itsy bitsy, teeny weeny, smallish, shoal enough). Don't worry about that stuff, I have that worrying well covered already.

Your points about their effect on gameplay are more interesting, and valid concerns.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 6

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 5:44:50 AM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

maybe you can head out on the ocean and do some up-close 'research' of your home area of the map.

there are so many hexes to choose from even at Pacific scale that adding more islands won't make too much difference. perhaps the ones within bombing range of Japan, where land is a bit more scarce, should be added with care. what US player wouldn't want to see more hexes in the North Temperate zone in the Bonins?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 7

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 4:57:34 PM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

When counting coastal hex bitmaps I am already assuming that there will be a myriad of hexes that use a generic 'island' hex bitmap. There might be several of different sizes (tiny, itsy bitsy, teeny weeny, smallish, shoal enough).

You could have an itsy-bitsy, teeny-weeny, yellow polka-dot Bikini Atoll.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 8

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 6:31:12 PM

SurrenderMonkey

Posts: 124
Joined: 10/5/2005
Status: offline

Definitely to many usable islands between Hawaii and Midway, IMHO. Take a look at the WitP map - I think the only usable piece of ground is French Frigate Shoals, and it is extremely marginal at best. Johnston Island is due west, and much more viable. What's that west of Midway, between Midway and Wake?

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 9

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 7:58:10 PM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

The problem in island hopping and selection during wwii seems to be a bit oversimplified. For example an airstrip may be built but how is it supplied, by air or sea? Is there a port and if not is the island capable of handling small seacraft landing supplies?

Since we should not change the WiF rules and we do not want to unbalance game play (think China problems) adding more land could very quickly unbalance game play.

If islands are added for asthetics then great. So I propose the road which allows for traditional game play with asthetic only land masses for islands. Perhaps a grey island could be an unusable land mass but will be there for good looking maps. This way we leave the same amount of islands and their original use as defined in WiF.

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to SurrenderMonkey)

Post #: 10

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 8:20:42 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I looked at my paper maps and there were originally five other hexes between Pearl and Midway, one of which was the now three hex group aroud Kauai now. I understand that as the scale goes up more land will appear. But I think there were geographical reasons and limits why there was a base on Midway and not on the other islands.

Midway has a minor port;so can stack more planes. Moreover, Midway is placed at the intersection of 3 Sea Areas, and is in supply from Pearl through the Hawaiian Island Sea Area. One CP is sufficient to keep it in supply, and the Hawaiian Sea Area is easy to escort from Pearl, ensuring a fair chance of staying is supply. Kure for example has nothing of those. It is hard to supply, hard to escort the supply ships, low stacking, with no port.
In WWII, we know that the US had bases at Midway. But what do we know of which bases they could have built on any other Hawaiian island chain, if the need had arrised, if the Japanese had taken Midway for example, and were threatening Pearl Harbor ???
The WiF FE game has to leave this open to the player.

I would add that this map is the map how Harry would have liked it, if space constrains were not existing for the paper game.

Also, having taken measurements on this map, it is a lot more accurate than the WiF FE one, that has to abstract some details because of the scale.

Bottom line is that I'm in favor of reviewing the map to remove blattant flaws, but I'm against making the Pacific part of the map a simple magnified out version of the WiF FE map, with exactly the same number of land hexes in the seas. Having played CWiF a lot, and in the Pacific too, believe me there is no problem with the "extra bases". Thoses "extra" land hexes are here for both belligerents, and they are faithfull to Geography.

This said, I begun reviewing the Caroline Islands, but I've got troubles finding maps showing enough details.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 11

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 9:57:40 PM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I also find the present map and the Islands it contains in the Pacific very good and I do not think it should be changed.

Having played a lot of CWiF with the same map, it works very well for both Japan and the USA and much Island hopping usually takes place in order to get bases for land based air which then enables placing pressure on the other side.

As far as Islands go in the Pacific, the navigation maps even in the mid 50's were not all that complete and a many small Islands were either not on the maps or noted as 'reported by USS xxx in 1952 to be 15 miles NW of the printed location etc.

This is real, I was there on merchant ships at the time.

Lars

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 12

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 10:33:17 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

I made improvements on the map (didn't change anything from the MWiF map).
I made the Sea Zone boundaries a little longer, to experiment what it could look like. They are not as long as what Steve has told, but a little longer.
I also made the islands a little larger, because the terrain didn't show very well.
I believe that with those sizes, the terrain shows quite well.
Also, I marked as unknown an island that that lies 10 hexes (about 800 miles) north from Oahu. I can't find it in any map. The MWiF map has it being part of the Hawaiian Islands Territory.

I believe that any island like this one that are unfound on real maps should be deleted. It seems they do not exist.
So, if someone knows this island, please tell me what it is.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Froonp -- 7/10/2006 10:36:32 PM >

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 13

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/10/2006 10:37:42 PM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

The problem in island hopping and selection during wwii seems to be a bit oversimplified. For example an airstrip may be built but how is it supplied, by air or sea? Is there a port and if not� is the island capable of handling small seacraft landing supplies?

This is more what I was trying to think about, you are right. Thus Tarawa got an airstrip and other nearby places didn't, because it had a pier you could unload a regular merchant ship on (been awhile since reading up on this), thus it's port symbol in WiF. And of course never underestimate what the CBs could do. But I don't think either side ran into any limits as far as finding usable airbases until the Americans wanted to launch heavy bombers against Japan. Adding hexes shouldn't matter too much in the South Pacific; I'd be more careful where they are already scarce, like Hawaii and the Bonins.

(in reply to Anendrue)

Post #: 14

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 12:02:38 AM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I never questioned that island by itself north of Oahu in CWiF but after Patrice pointed out that it is something unknown and questionable I believe it does indeed not exist. There is an undersea 'Musicians Seamount' chain in that area but I also have not found any evidence that an Island actually exists there.

Lars

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 15

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 12:44:16 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin
I never questioned that island by itself north of Oahu in CWiF but after Patrice pointed out that it is something unknown and questionable I believe it does indeed not exist. There is an undersea 'Musicians Seamount' chain in that area but I also have not found any evidence that an Island actually exists there.

Lars

Obviously it was reported by the same guy who reported there were mermaids luring sailors into the sea by playing lyres.

Most likely this island exists on the map because of a typo on the row and/or column number for the hex.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 16

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 1:42:19 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

This is how the Carolines look.
Some notes about it :

- Ujalang is part of the Marshalls, not the Carolines Islands.

- I would move Gaferut 1 hex West.
- I would delete the 3 Islands West of Faraulep / Italik / Woleai / Eauripik. Did not find it on the maps, or I placed the whole western Carolines wrongly.
- I would delete the Island south of Mokil / Pingelap. Did not find it on the maps.

Note : The most western Carolines Islands (Yap Islands) are covered in the Palau Islands part (next). MWiF had them (wrongly ???) belonging to the Palau Islands Territory.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 17

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 1:43:22 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here is how they look in WiF FE

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 18

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 1:44:54 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here are what the Palau Islands look.
No changes are proposed here.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 19

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 1:46:43 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here is what the Palau look like in WiF FE

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 20

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 1:48:24 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here are what the Marianas look like.
No Changes made.

Note :
Guam-Tokyo : 27 hexes (20 MP on the WiF FE maps -- 10 hexes)
Saipan-Tokyo : 24 hexes (18 MP on the WiF FE maps -- 9 hexes)
Farallon de Pajaros-Tokyo : 18 hexes (12 MP on the WiF FE maps -- 6 hexes)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 21

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 1:49:34 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here are what the Marianas look like in WiF FE.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 22

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 2:54:21 AM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I think Eauripik Island should be moved 2hexes - 1 hex east and then 1 hex southeast.

I agree that the three islands to the west shown as full hex lands should not be there.

Lars

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 23

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 3:15:07 AM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

I could be wrong and I may be thinking of a different game but I think the island north of Hawaii was originally a game mechanic of the original WiF for aircraft movement to/from the USA box and as correctly stated did not actually exist.

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 24

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 5:38:30 AM

Zorachus99

Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

I have marched a MAR deep down into the Pacific with land moves, Borneo, Sumatra, and New Guinea all being connected. This is just from memory. There is an incredible chain of land hexes marine units can move along on the regular Wif Pacific map. Yes all of these are less effective than naval transport, however no invasions are done during movement, the notional units can become a non factor.

I'm also aware most of these moves between hexsides would require the MAR to flip, and in the new MWIF this is less likely to be the case.

The maps above disconnect some KEY island chains that were connected before. This will have HUGE in-game consequenses.

Is this what we want?

The few ways I can see to fix this.

1) Move islands to connect them (unsavory for distance purposes)
2) Create all sea hexsides for MAR units to move on (unsavory as a game change)

Or has the decision to make these changes already been made? The great sea chain to New Guinea gone forever? We are talking about a potentially HUGE number of hexes that were crossable by MAR that will not be possible on the new map.

I know the LCU's MAR used had very good range in calm water. Likely more than one hex. Can someone validate this?

(in reply to Anendrue)

Post #: 25

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 9:08:32 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

I could be wrong and I may be thinking of a different game but I think the island north of Hawaii was originally a game mechanic of the original WiF for aircraft movement to/from the USA box and as correctly stated did not actually exist.

I measured, and this mysterious island is 44 hexes from San Diego or Los Angeles.
San Diego or Los Angeles to Honolulu is 47 hexes.
Removing this island makes flying to Honolulu a rebase mission restricted to 16-ranged planes. The mysterious island allowed 15-ranged planes to fly here.

Anyway, both are A LOT more than what it was with the WiF FE maps and the America Map : 34 MP (32 for Los Angeles) (18 from San Diego to the edge of America Map (16 for Los Angeles) + 10 to change maps (14.1.2) + 6 from the edge of the Pacific Map to Honolulu).

With the America Minimap it was 42 MP (30 from Los Angeles to the edge of America Map + 6 to change maps (14.1.2) + 6 from the edge of the Pacific Map to Honolulu) to Fly from Los Angeles to Honolulu.

Real flying distance is 4,210 km (Google Earth). This makes for a MWiF scale of 90 km (4210 / 47) per hex.

The average scale of km per hex on the MWiF maps is 85 km, if I use this scale Honolulu should be 50 hexes from San Diego, so I think that the MWiF map is once again the most correct of the 3 possibilities. Moreover, this 47 hexes distance can be seen as generous (compared to the 50 hexes given by the average scale), so I think that this mysterious island should be deleted.

(in reply to Anendrue)

Post #: 26

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 9:13:35 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I have marched a MAR deep down into the Pacific with land moves, Borneo, Sumatra, and New Guinea all being connected. This is just from memory. There is an incredible chain of land hexes marine units can move along on the regular Wif Pacific map. Yes all of these are less effective than naval transport, however no invasions are done during movement, the notional units can become a non factor.

I'm also aware most of these moves between hexsides would require the MAR to flip, and in the new MWIF this is less likely to be the case.

The maps above disconnect some KEY island chains that were connected before. This will have HUGE in-game consequenses.

I am against "fixing" that, because I think it was abusive on the Pacific Map. This rule was designed on the European Map and on the European Map it is OK. If you draw the European Map at the Pacific Scale, then the MAR unit will be able to accomplish incredible feats too.

I think scaling down to the European map (nearly) for the Pacific portion of the map get this "island hoping" capacity back to its normal capabilities.

(in reply to Zorachus99)

Post #: 27

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 11:56:16 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I have marched a MAR deep down into the Pacific with land moves, Borneo, Sumatra, and New Guinea all being connected. This is just from memory. There is an incredible chain of land hexes marine units can move along on the regular Wif Pacific map. Yes all of these are less effective than naval transport, however no invasions are done during movement, the notional units can become a non factor.

I'm also aware most of these moves between hexsides would require the MAR to flip, and in the new MWIF this is less likely to be the case.

The maps above disconnect some KEY island chains that were connected before. This will have HUGE in-game consequenses.

I am against "fixing" that, because I think it was abusive on the Pacific Map. This rule was designed on the European Map and on the European Map it is OK. If you draw the European Map at the Pacific Scale, then the MAR unit will be able to accomplish incredible feats too.

I think scaling down to the European map (nearly) for the Pacific portion of the map get this "island hoping" capacity back to its normal capabilities.

I agree.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 28

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 10:49:33 PM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

I could be wrong and I may be thinking of a different game but I think the island north of Hawaii was originally a game mechanic of the original WiF for aircraft movement to/from the USA box and as correctly stated did not actually exist.

I measured, and this mysterious island is 44 hexes from San Diego or Los Angeles.
San Diego or Los Angeles to Honolulu is 47 hexes.
Removing this island makes flying to Honolulu a rebase mission restricted to 16-ranged planes. The mysterious island allowed 15-ranged planes to fly here.

Anyway, both are A LOT more than what it was with the WiF FE maps and the America Map : 34 MP (32 for Los Angeles) (18 from San Diego to the edge of America Map (16 for Los Angeles) + 10 to change maps (14.1.2) + 6 from the edge of the Pacific Map to Honolulu).

With the America Minimap it was 42 MP (30 from Los Angeles to the edge of America Map + 6 to change maps (14.1.2) + 6 from the edge of the Pacific Map to Honolulu) to Fly from Los Angeles to Honolulu.

Real flying distance is 4,210 km (Google Earth). This makes for a MWiF scale of 90 km (4210 / 47) per hex.

The average scale of km per hex on the MWiF maps is 85 km, if I use this scale Honolulu should be 50 hexes from San Diego, so I think that the MWiF map is once again the most correct of the 3 possibilities. Moreover, this 47 hexes distance can be seen as generous (compared to the 50 hexes given by the average scale), so I think that this mysterious island should be deleted.

Oh I definitely agree the island does not exist. My only concern is play balance. So long as the original intent to get a certain amount of aircraft in/out of the Hawaian islands during turn X is maintained would be my only concern.

Play balance is the critical aspect of this game. So long as we do not sacrafice balance for eye candy then I am happy.

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 29

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands - 7/11/2006 11:15:11 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562
Oh I definitely agree the island does not exist. My only concern is play balance. So long as the original intent to get a certain amount of aircraft in/out of the Hawaian islands during turn X is maintained would be my only concern.

Play balance is the critical aspect of this game. So long as we do not sacrafice balance for eye candy then I am happy.

I believe everyone has the same goal here: recreating WIF on the computer to the highest degree we can.

The visual appearance is rather important too though. Players should be able to understand what they see on the screen effortlessly, if at all possible. Some experienced WIF players might find this to be overkill, but I worry about newcomers to the world of WIF who lack background experience with the board game. I want their learning curve to be a gentle climb, and not require pitons, ropes, and Sherpa guides.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Anendrue)

Post #: 30