I've been trying to get a few hours before the weekend to re-look at the 2.05 version. At this point, I'm heading out of town, and probably won't be able to do much until Monday (and with the way my Monday's go...

Anwyways, here's my comments... Overall, read really really well, great game and it's wonderful to see so many people working on this this.

First off - numbering notes. All of these are minor - fixing them reduces later potential confusion.

(a)
The two sections "14.6 Late arrivals" and "14.6 Early depatures" have the same number (14.6)

(b)
The section 33.1 comes before 33.02 - while it is incredibly anal, I am thinking that changing (33.1) to (33.01) is best

(c)
The sections "32.0282 Treasury ..." and "32.0282 Mining agg.." have the same number.

(d)
The sections "33.0621 Ships .." and "33.0621 Provides..." have the same number.

(e)
The sections under 33.132 Monarchy look like they are missing a digit. I.e. 33.131 should be 33.1321, etc. Otherwise, they each duplicate other entries' numbers.

(f)
The sections "33.1372 All cities..." and "33.1372 Provides 10 ..." have the same number.

That's all of those that I caught. Next post, the commentary (which I have tried my best to remove suggestions for modifying the game from, and leave just proof-reading notes!)

This was done from the 2.04 word doc file.

(a)
> 1.3 ... should play to a fixed time limit (see 34.1 B, below) ...

Correct that from (34.1 B) to (35.1 B)

> 2.1 ... greatest number of victory points (35) ...

Correct that from (35) to (36.) It looks like a section was inserted?

(b)
> 3.1 A ... to the near east ...

Minor quibble Is India near, middle or far east? Admittedly, I could be off base.

(c)
> 3.2 .... does not use dices.

Alter from "dices" to "dice".

(d)
> 4.72 ... There are nine stacks, one for each level of trade card. ...

How about "There are two sets of Trade Card States, used when the trade cards are split between East and West. Each set consists of nine stacks, one for each level of trade cards."

(e)
> 15.11 ... Many times simply removing panels ...

The difficulty is that the map no longer really has panels. Or does it? Maybe a slight mod to the map to show where the four panels would be, or maybe just drop the idea of panels?

(f)
17.1 - The sequence of play chart has some section references which need updating.

> Speccial Abilities Phase (30)
s/b (31.)
> Acquire civilization cards & return excess (31)
s/b (32.)
> Movement of succession markes on AST (32)
s/b (34.)

[[[ Argh! I missed this when I did the player mats. :: beats head on table :: ]]

(g)
> 23.1 ... unless the city owner holds Public Works (26.11) ...
s/b (25.11)

(h)
> 23.36 Players may not attack (move tokens into an area containing) a player
> who holds Cultural Ascendacy ...

I am thinking that this is supposed to be "city" instead of "area", but I could be wrong?

(i)
Under (24.) City Construction, Architecture is described; I am thinking that Urbanism needs to be at least mentioned.

Insert 24.5 "Players who hold Urbansim are able to draw some tokens from adjacent areas to construct wilderness cities. See Urbanism (33.131)"

(j)
> 25.1 ... This is the only time excess tokens are removed ...

What about Famine? How about this:

"... This is the only time excess tokens are removed, with the exception of the combination of Famine and Agriculture (see Famine.) ..."

(k)
> 26.12 ... may select that cities ...

"... may select THE cities ..."

(l)
The section (27.) does not describe the East/West stacks. I just thought of the possibilty of purchasing cards - what about purchasing from the opposite stack? Shouldn't be possible.

How about this:

Insert 27.12 "When seperate East and West stacks are in play, the eastern nations draw from the eastern stack and so on. The eastern countries are listed by name near the eastern stack, and the same for the western countries. An eastern country only obtains cards from the eastern stack, never the western. A western country only obtains cards from the western stack, never the eastern. Of course, they may still receive them in trades."

(m)
The section 27.52 isn't reflected in the Politics writeup. *Assuming* that this is still an intended rule (might not be?), need to insert a copy of that into 33.107(x) and 27.52 needs to reference (33.107)

(n)
> 29.3 Neither is ...

"29.3 Neither are ..."

(o)
> 29.6 ... Any player with a higher numeric value calamity may resolve a non-minor calamity simultaneously with another lower numeric value calamity provided his actions will have no effect on the other player's resolution. ...

This is strange wording - and implies that I might be able to resolve Piracy at the same time as Volcanic Eruption/Earthquake as long as the Piracy could not possibility interfere with the Earthquake. But that ignores the Famine being held by a *third* player.

How about this instead?

"29.6 ... Any player with a calamity may resolve it earlier than otherwise as long as the action of resolving it early will have no effect on any other calamity resolution."

(p)
In section 29.7, after the first sentence, it pretty much duplicates section (32. Restacking Returned Trade Cards. How about remove everything after the first sentence?

Change to: "29.7 AFter all calamities are resolved they are put to one side to be later restacked with the rest of the trade cards (32.."

(q) Sections (29. and (29.9) are pretty much a duplication of (31-Special Abilities Phase) I would suggest removing (29. and (29.9).

(r)
> 33.1311 .. These tokes are ...

"... These tokeNs are ..."

(s)
> 33.0312 Engingeering reduces the effects of Earthquake (30.214) and Flood (30.515).

This misses 30.213.

"33.0312 Engingeering reduces the effects of Earthquake (30.213 and 30.214) and Flood (30.515)"

(t)
> 33.213 ... These unit points may force a reduction of a city ...

City reduction is only check during two phases (and Slave Revolt.) This text could mistakingly imply that Earthquake should check for city support. I suggest removing the entire sentence.

(u)
> 30.214 ... Engingeering has noeffect on Volcanos.

However, 30.213 makes it clear that it does have an effect on the Urbanism augmentation of Volcanos, so how about

"30.214 ... Engingeering has no effect on Volcanos, with the exception listed under (30.213)."

(v)
> 18.1 ... This is the only way tokens are moved into treasury, except by
> pillaging (23.52).

And this text to the end: "... or by use of Trade Routes (33.0262)."

(w)
[MINOR] The example in Tyranny (30.813) is strange (but not impossible) as it is a non-tradable 8 calamity, and the example uses 4 cities.

(x)
> 30.822 ... sacrifice two commodity cards from his hand ... Calamity trade
> cards held by the player should be put to the side during this selection. ..

Commodity cards cannot be Calamity cards. Trade cards refer to both. The sentence "Calamity trade cards held by the player should be put to the side during this selection." is pretty much redudant and MIGHT be construed that the discard is random (which it isn't, right?)

(y)
Add this text to the end of 30.924: "Pirate cities may not be selected as secondary vistims of calamities."

It's stated with Barbarbian Hordes, might as well state it here

(z)
> 32.31 The value of commodity card sets when acquiring civlization cards is
> calculated as set out in 28.51

Change 28.51 to (28.5) - as there is text regarding the calculating in 28.52 and 28.53.

(aa)
> 33.106 ... Opponents may,however, still pillage the city for 3 treasury
> tokens.

Change to: "... Opponents may, however, still pillage the city for up to 3 treasury."

(bb)
Add this text to the end of 33.0261: "(32.71)"
Add this text to the end of 33.1583: "(32.71)"
Alter this text on 32.71 "... (nine if they hold Trade Routes) ..." to:
"... (nine if they hold Trade Routes, seven if they hold Diaspora, and eight if they hold both) ..."

(cc)
> 33.42 When a player resolves teh calamity "Regression" he immediately pushes himself down one space on the AST

Needs to change to something like: "33.42 When a player resolves the calamity "Regression", he immediately effects the AST at that point in time."

I have fixed these issues in the revised 2.05 (2.05-fix) as by today.
It is downloadable from my site (jon.severinsson.net/civproject).
The next three weeks I will be on holidays and not have regular access to computers, so don't expect much input from me until 9th of August.

Comments to your corrections:

(b)
Saudi Arabia is near east, India is midle east, and China is far east.
Changed to midle.

(c)
Correct brittish english in this case is actually dices, as it's not specified that is is only one dice. (Compare: "does not use one dice, it uses two dices" and "does not use any dices").
Perhaps one could put in a "any" before "dices", but as both is gramatically correct, I'll keep it as is, unless american english differs from brittish in this case (but as Word set on US english doesn't complan I don't think so).

(e) Panels are dropped, but as they very likely might be re-introduced the sentence might not have to be changed. In adition there will most likely be panels when printed, as papers large enough for the entire board is not for sale.
Perhaps mentioning the uppcomming senario handbook would be apropriate though?
No change for now.

(j) Reworded:
This is the only time excess tokens are removed, with the exception being players holding Agriculture who is the primary target of Famine (30.32).

(l) Reworded:
27.12 When separate stacks for the East and the West are in play, the western nations draw cards from the stacks detonated “The West” and the eastern nations draw from the Stacks detonated “The East”. An western nation will only obtain cards from the stacks detonated “The West”, never the stacks detonated “The East”, and the other way around. Of course, they may still receive them in trades.

(m) The civcards has been edited lately, so it's more likely that 27.52 should be removed. Done so.

(n) My english teacher has told us on countless times that english is an odd language, and this with singular and plural is not concistent with any rules. An example she has mentioned often is "neither", which is ALWAYS singular. That is brittish english however, so it may be different in the states, but untill someone (such as an american english teacher) confirms this I won't change it.

(p) 29.8 and 29.9 is probably left since the time when there was no Special Abilities Phase, but the special abilities was more or less concidered level 10 calamities (such as Fundamentalism in the original game) The paragraphs are now removed.

(t) You are right when you say that it has to be changed, but I think it still has to be mentioned somehow. What about
30.213 If the primary OR secondary victims holds Urbanism and does not hold Engineering, an earthquake or volcano forces that player to remove four unit points from any area adjacent (by land or water) to any areas affected by 30.211 or 30.212. If there is less than four tokens total in the adjacent areas, a city has to be reduced. If less than four tokens and no city is present, remove all your tokens in adjacent areas.

(u) A shorter way to say the same thing is:
30.214 If the primary victim holds Engineering, an earthquake, but not a volcano, reduces, rather than destroys, his city.

(w) I agree, though it is posible, as Egypt in the example might have lost cities in previous calamities.

(cc) What about
34.42 When a player resolves the calamity “Regression” he immediately pushes himself down zero to two spaces on the AST.

Well, US English is definitely different than UK English in this respect.

Singular
Die

Plural
Dice

Any yankee is going to claim dices is wrong. Merriam Webster has dices as plural only in the case of food, but again, americans would avoid that plural and go with "diced food". Since I don't have a subscription or copy of the OED, I really can't check there.

As the source rule book (Advanced Civilization) has it as "dice", I'd probably prefer the original text.

As a side note, in my copy of the rule book, the paragraph with the sentence in question is 3.3 instead of 3.2, perhaps there were a couple printings?

Now a quote from Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary"

DIE, n.
The singular of "dice." We seldom hear the word, because there is a prohibitory proverb, "Never say die." At long intervals, however, some one says: "The die is cast," which is not true, for it is cut. The word is found in an immortal couplet by that eminent poet and domestic economist, Senator Depew:

A cube of cheese no larger than a die
May bait the trap to catch a nibbling mie.

The wording is 4 unit points. We already have rules in place on how cities can factor in. Unit points refers to both tokens and cities. I'd change the last sentence to:

"If there are less than four unit points of the primary victim present in the adjacent areas, remove all unit points belonging to the primary victim in the adjacent areas."

That'll cover all possibilities

American english does use die (singular) vs dice (plural). I never knew that British was different. It is extremely jarring to the American reader.

If it was "dice", would it be jarring to the British reader?

Hm. Is there a way to word it that it isn't jarring to either? (Then we've got Austrlian readers, though they are probably closer to the British in usage - just me wildly guessing, though.)

2.05 proofread notes

(I keep thinking I posted this already from my notes, but I can't find it. Here goes... it is less this time

(a)
"3.1 A ... midle ..."

Change to: "3.1 A ... middle ..."

(b)
To make it clear - as it has with the other quick chart - that the quick chart doesn't have any new info:

Add: "12.2 The information on the quick chart is the same as in the rulebook."

(c)
The are two sections labled "13.1"

(e)
The wording of Public Works sometimes is confusing if it the city's owner, or someone else.

Alter: "25.11 Aras with cities may also contain 1 extra token if the owner of the city holds Public Works."

(f)
27.12 has the word "detonated" multiple times. This needs to be replaced with either "labled" or "denoted".

(g)
The last sentance of 27.3 has a phrase seperated by a comma. Change to a semi-colon (;) as both phrases can stand alone as seperate sentances.

(h)
> 2.93 Neither is tradable calamity cards...

Change to "2.93 Neither are tradable calamity cards..."

(i)
Add to the end of (30.4111): "An exception is the case of a late arrival (14.62)".

(j)
Add to the end of (30.74): "If no two such areas exist, then this calamity has no effect."

I'll admit that we'll probably never see such a situation, but who knows

(k)
Under 30.813, in the last sentence of the example, the reference to the 1-token-province (should be area anyways as that it the term that the rules use), should be corrected to the 3-token-province.

(l)
Minor point - as 30.826 is actually something that is modifed by 30.823,30.824,30.825, it probably ought to be renumbered and placed before them. To be more precise, it needs an additional sentence too: "The secondary victim(s) choose these cities."

(m) 30.825 - why shouldn't Monotheism affect the secondary victim? Makes life interesting Admittedly this is *not* a proofreading comment. Sigh.

(n)
PROBLEM - 23.34 specifies that white tokens are used and 30.924 specifies that any tokens which are not use. The effect can be different if the Barbarians have been exceptional frequent lately. One of these needs to be modified to match the other.

(o)
Need to add this: "32.84 In the case of seperate East and West stacks, trade cards that were drawn from one set of stacks, need to be returned only to the stack that they were drawn from."

That completes the restrictions - only the east draws from the east, and only east cards get shuffled back into the eastern stacks.

(p)
> 33.0252 Agriculture does not work during a Famine (30.324)

Change to "33.0252 Agriculture does not work during a Famine for the primary victim (30.324)"

I found my my missing notes finally - and removed the duplications

(a)
Insert to "6.2 ... The summary on the civilization cards is the same as in the rulebook and is presented for ease of reference."

==> Net effect - when in doubt, the rulebook "rules".

(b) English and plurals - I know it is a mess

> 25.1 ... players holding Agricuture who is the ...

... players holding Agriculture who are the ...

(c) The calamity resolution has some rules buried elsewhere. I am suggesting adding a *brief* reference noting where those can be found. The alternative would be to repeat them (which I do not think is a good idea.)

Insert "29.67 During calamity resolution, keep in mind the rules for city reduction (26.2) and Unit points (5.6)."

(d) The last two sentances in 30.213 are redudant considering the unit point discussion in 5.6 - I'd suggest removing them.

(e) I guess I'm responsible for 30.214; the wording is pretty exotic

> 30.214 If the primary victim holds Engingeering, an earthquake, but not a volcano, reduces, rather than destroys, his city.

How about this?

"30.214 If a Volcano eliminates a city, Engineering will have no effect on the elimination of the city. If an Earthquake would eliminate a city, if the player has Engingeering the city is reduced instead."

That gets around the Engineering being of some use regarding Volcano and Urbanism, while still getting the idea across. Whew.

I'm back from my holidays now and are working on fixing all these issues. If I havn't commented on any of the issues in this thread here, I have fixed it as by your sugestions.



You are correct, however, as your solution is not much simpler (shorter), and can be ambigious for an unexperienced player, I vote for keeping my text:

"If there is less than four tokens total in the adjacent areas, a city has to be reduced. If less than four tokens and no city is present, remove all your tokens in adjacent areas."



It's about as jarring as "There is 15 man over there". Clearly wrong, but understandable. The rulebook is, however, suposed to be in american english, so let's go for dice.



Changed 12.1 to include the information (similary to the advances quickcharts):

12.1 The Calamity Quick Chart sets out the effects of each calamity. It contains no new information and is printed separately for ease of reference.



Together with the word "Neither" you ALWAYS use third person singular (i.e. "is"), at least in brittish english, and MS Word set on US English complains at "are", but not "is".



I think you're right, but as this isn't a proofreading, I'm waiting on Velusions opinion before doing anything.


The text in 30.924 has not been changed since the specific white tonkens was introduced, and should state white tokens. The question is if barbarians/pirates should have a limited amount of tokens, and if so if they should only have tha same amount as everyone else. With two sets of tradecards they appeare twice as often, but has only the same amount of tokens to use...
Velusion: Your input please!



Your sugestion makes 32.83 unnesesary, but is somewhat complicated. What about this to replace the excisting 32.83 and your 32.84?

32.83 When separate eastern and western stacks are in use, trade cards that were drawn from one set of stacks are to be returned to the same stack as they were drawn from, as indicated on the card.



Changed to "It contains no new information and is presented for ease of reference." to conform with 12.1, 13.1 and 13.2



Changed to singular instead (otherwise it would have to be victims as well, and there is never two primary victims at the same time.

"... with the exception being a player holding Agriculture who is the primary victim of Famine ..."



Duplicate of my first quotation of you. See above.

Thanks! I'll take the non-proofreading/rule issues and repeat them outside of the thread for comment by Velusion and others.

I never expected to learn more about grammer by working on this thing



It is understandable either way, just slightly jarred my ear with "is".

:: searches ::

It looks like that, at least in American English, "neither" is sometimes singular and othertimes can be treated as plural. I also found one reference to Canadian English with this.

On the other hand, I have found other references that for formal written American English, treat it as singular (and use "is".)

Summing up - "is" is fine

Hi Gang,

I have some proposed changes to the rulebook that affect the Holy Grail of this project, namely the original rulebook where no Civ Project changes are needed. These are mostly to clarify meaning, simplify the language used, and whenever appropriate, shorten the text.

Please direct your comments either to the specific changes suggested or to the idea of actually fiddling with he Holy Grail.

Original:
3.2 ADVANCED CIVILIZATION: The Expansion Project does not use dice.
Proposed:
(delete this section; not needed)

Original:
4.21 Land areas consist of any area bounded by white lines that contains various green or brown-colored territories. Several islands within one area are considered to constitute one island for rule purposes.
4.22 Water areas consist of any area containing blue. Areas that contain both green or brown territory and blue are considered to be both land and water areas.
4.23 Open sea areas are water areas that contain only blue territory.
4.24 Coastal areas are areas that contain both land and water and can trace back a path, strictly over water, to an open sea zone. The exceptions to this would be regions that border the Caspian or Arial Seas (Caucasus, Dihistan, Lesser Armenia, Media, Hecatompylos, Nisa, and Chorasmia)

Proposed:
4.21 Land areas consist of any area bounded by white lines that contains various green or brown-colored territories. Several islands within one area constitute one island for rule purposes.
4.22 Water areas consist of any area containing blue.
4.23 Open sea areas are water areas that contain only darker blue territory.
4.24 Coastal areas are areas that contain both land and water and are considered to be both land areas and water areas. Land areas that border labeled seas (such as the Caspian Sea) are coastal areas. Unlabeled inland lakes are not considered 'coastal'.

Original:
4.31 A white line dividing two land areas indicates Land boundaries.
4.32 A white line dividing two water areas, not including lakes, indicates Water boundaries.
4.33 A boundary that crosses both land and water is considered to be both a land and a water boundary.

Proposed:
4.31 White lines divide the map into areas. These boundaries may be land boundaries, water boundaries or both.
(sections 4.32 and 4.33 deleted)

Original:
4.42 Flood Plains are represented by dark green coloring. Any area that contains such dark green coloring is considered to be is on a flood plain.

Proposed:
4.42 Flood Plains are represented by dark green coloring. An area that contains any dark green is on a flood plain.

(This change only affected Moesia on the Adv Civ map, but affects many more areas on the Civ Project map.)
Original:
4.43 City Sites are represented by small squares. Most city sites are black. White city sites are on flood plains and are vulnerable to floods.
Proposed:
4.43 City Sites are represented by small squares. Most city sites are black. White city sites are on flood plains and are vulnerable to floods. Black city cites on flood plains are not vulnerable to floods.

Original:
4.71 The Census Track is used to hold each nation's census marker. After population expansion has occurred, players determine how many of their tokens are on the board and their census markers are moved to the appropriate number on the Census Track.
Proposed:
4.71 The Census Track is used to show each nation's population. After population expansion has occurred, players count their tokens on the board and move their census markers to the appropriate number on the Census Track.

Original:
5.1 ...The white set of playing pieces does not include ships, a census marker or an accession marker, and is used only to represent barbarians and pirates.
Proposed:
5.1 ...The white set of playing pieces only has tokens and cities, and is used to represent barbarians and pirates.

Original:
5.2 Tokens are square, and are used to represent rural populations. When the term token is used, this does not include ships or cities.
5.3 Cities are round, and are used to represent urban populations.
5.4 Ships are rectangular, and are used to move tokens across water areas along with fight naval battles (with the Naval Warfare advance).
5.5 "Units" are a term used to refer to tokens and cities, but not ships.
5.6 "Unit points" are a term used to refer to the value of tokens and cities, ...

Proposed: (note section 5.1 already says tokens are square...)
5.2 Tokens are used to represent rural populations. When the term token is used, this does not include ships or cities.
5.3 Cities are used to represent urban populations.
5.4 Ships are used to move tokens across water areas and to fight naval battles (with the Naval Warfare advance).
5.5 "Units" refers to tokens and cities, but not ships.
5.6 "Unit points" refers to the value of tokens and cities, ...

Original:
8.1 ...The term trade card is used in the rules to refer to both commodity and calamity cards. ...

Proposed:
8.1 ...The term "trade card" refers to both commodity and calamity cards. ...

Original:
9.1 ...The following table sets out the value and number of each commodity:
Proposed:
9.1 ...The following table shows the value and number of each commodity:

Original:
10.1 ...The following table sets out the trade card stack in that each calamity is placed and its trade status:
Proposed:
10.1 ...The following table shows the trade card stack containing each calamity and its trade status:

I have personaly nothing against changing on the Original rules, but ONLY if it does improve the rules noticabely.


Actually, it is quite clarifying, as most boardgames out there does use dice.


These rules has already been changed. They now state:

4.2 Map areas:
4.21 Land areas consist of any area bounded by white lines that contains various green or brown-colored territories. Several islands within one area are considered to constitute one island for rule purposes.
4.22 Water areas consist of any area containing blue. Areas that contain both green or brown territory and blue are considered to be both land and water areas.
4.23 Open sea areas are water areas that contain only blue territory.
4.24 Coastal areas are areas that contain both land and water and can trace back a path, strictly over water, to an area which has a water-only boundary (such as the Caspian Sea).
4.25 The map areas containing the AST and the Trade Card Stack are not in play. Areas bordering to these areas are considered to be bordering the map

With this in mind, only 4.21 is relevant. In my opinion that one is quite good though.


Quite a lot of peaople read the rules quite literaly, and water borders and land borders are used as clarifier in mor than one place.
With that in mynd it's my opinion to keep these paragraphs as is.


Well, the areas isn't actually flood plain, it's actually a piece of paper. We are saying "considered" in the rest of the rules, so I sugest keeping that word. The rest makes sence though. That is, I propose:
4.42 Flood Plains are represented by dark green coloring. An area that contains any dark green is considered to be on a flood plain.


That is already implied by the rules. However, some clarifications does not hurt.

Except the above, I do agree to all your changes. What is the opinion of the rest of you?