Latest draft is uploaded. You can get it here:
AdvancesQuickChart(2.10-draft5).odt
AdvancesQuickChart(2.10-draft5).pdf

Hey I noticed Trade Empire and Provincial Empire have lowered 10 points.

Did not notice that before.

Why is that?


I've noticed, the quickchart contains 'you may' @ trade empire, where the quickchart should contain 'holder'


Engineering says:

any player attacking CITIES- and - Holder's CITY is replaced.

Shouldn't that be either both cities or city?

besides, we talking ONE additonal token once and AN addtional token twice.

i'd say:

Any player attacking holder's cities requires one
additional token per city, and holder's cities are replaced by
one additional token.

This in one line, because it's the same action.


Can you attack a friendly or your own city? No, so, I'd leave out "when attacking an enemy cities"

And put 'cities' instead of 'city' in that line when choosing for general 'cities' in this case.



For the card I came up with this:

- Any player attacking your cities requires one additional token per city, and your cities are replaced by one additional token.
- You require one less token when attacking cities, and the defending cities are replaced by one less token.
- EARTHQUAKE: Your cities are reduced rather than destroyed
- VOLCANIC ERUPTION OR EARTHQUAKE: Voids the effects of Urbanism
- FLOOD: A maximum of seven unit points from a flood plain are destroyed, or a coastal city is reduced rather than destroyed.




This card contains the most lines of all, BUT
in fact, to use a general ruling and comparing it to Metalworking it should state:

- Any player not holding Engineering attacking your cities requires one additional token per city, and your cities are replaced by one additional token.
- You require one less token when attacking cities of players not holding Engineering, and the defending cities are replaced by one less token.
- EARTHQUAKE: Your cities are reduced rather than destroyed
- VOLCANIC ERUPTION OR EARTHQUAKE: Voids the effects of Urbanism
- FLOOD: A maximum of seven unit points from a flood plain are destroyed, or a coastal city is reduced rather than destroyed.



And if you don't want to put this sentence in one line:
- Any player not holding Engineering attacking your cities requires one additional token per city, and your cities are replaced by one additional token.
but in two, it becomes something like this:

- Any player not holding Engineering attacking your cities requires one additional token per city.
When your cities are attacked by a player not holding Engineering your cities are replaced by one additional token.

making it even longer, so at least i'd put the first four lines in two lines anyway for the card.

Trade Empire and Provincial Empire was lowered 10 each, while Politics and Monotheism was increased by 10 each, as I originally suggested in Combination Politics, Monotheism, Fundamentalism too strong and later announced in New draft of CivProject 2.10.


Missed that when copy-pasting from this thread. Will be fixed for next draft.


That was a deep analysis of a card that no one before has ever complained about before. But you are right, for consistency it should be changed.

I agree it should be "cities" all the way, and it should be "one {additional,less} token". However, nowhere else do we use "any player", it should be simply "players" instead. Also, I don't think you need to include the "not holding Engineering" stuff, as the two effects simply cancel each other in those cases.

Additionally I tried to make the two effects consistent with each other, and came up with the following text:
Players require one additional token when attacking holder's cities, and the defending cities are replaced by one additional token.
Holder requires one less token when attacking cities, and the defending cities are replaced by one less token.
This also have the benefit of being relatively short...

If you really want to play with "not holding Engineering" it becomes:
Players not holding Engineering require one additional token when attacking holder's cities, and the defending cities are replaced by one additional token.
Holder requires one less token when attacking cities belonging to players not holding Engineering, and the defending cities are replaced by one less token.
Not quite as short, but manageable.


Additionally I found some other inconsistencies when looking for stuff that Engineering should look like:

Metalworking should read:
In a conflict, holder removes his first token from the area after all players not holding Metalworking have removed their first token.

Military should read:
Holder constructs and maintains ships and moves after all players not holding Military.

Cultural Ascendancy should read:
Players may not attack holder's units without holding either Cultural Ascendancy or Advanced Military.

Diplomacy should read:
Players may not attack holder's cities without holding either Diplomacy or Military.

Gerart: Please don't start with the card texts until I've got back home and published another draft...

Yes, that's right.

In fact, when you use 'not holding' in military and metalworking, you should use it here too, or "nullifies other players' engineering in attack".
or something like that.

I think, we should choose for the shortest form when doign the card, the quickchart and rules can contain more text ofcourse.

Well, the difference between Metalworking and Engineering is that Metalworking is one effect that don't work if the other player has Metalworking, while Engineering is two "equals but opposite" effects that thus cancel each other if both have Engineering.
Thus Metalworking needs "not holding", while Engineering can optionally use "not holding". As we are short of space, I think we should skip "not holding" on the cards. And for consistency, I think we should skip it on the quick chart as well.

ok, I think it should stay on the quick chart though.

This is an example when search-and-replace don't work:


This sounds plain stupid. The first "holder" is easy to get rid of, by changing it to "If the player asked holds", but the remaining two consecutive "holder" sounds even worse, and is not as easily gotten rid of (can't just change any of them to "he", as that would refer to "the player" rather than "holder").
My best idea so far is rewriting the second part of the sentence completely, replacing it with "holder collects it and may not ask anyone else for it this turn".

The fill text on the quick chart would then be:


And on the card it would be:


What do you think?

Additionally, if we are to use different texts on the quick chart and the cards anyway, we should probably use "a holder" rather than just "holder" where appropriately (which is most of the places)...

New draft is uploaded (again). You can get it here:
AdvancesQuickChart(2.10-draft6).odt
AdvancesQuickChart(2.10-draft6).pdf

Perhaps we are a little bit exaggerating, but I think we will converge to a good result in the end...

After reading today's comments, I changed the list of texts from QuickCart-version to Card-version. While doing this, I found another couple of items to discuss.

AGRICULTURE

Increases by one the population limit in areas containing only tokens belonging to a single holder.

I moved the word 'only' to the end, because it sounds more natural in English:

Increases by one the population limit in areas containing tokens belonging to a single holder only.


MILITARY

A holder constructs and maintains ships and moves after all players not holding Military.

I added a comma between 'ships' and 'and', because I want to emphasize that 'construct and maintain ships' belongs to the same phase, and 'movement' to another phase:

A holder constructs and maintains ships, and moves after all players not holding Military.


NAVAL WARFARE

Ships may carry one additional token.

To be more in line with most of the other texts, I changed it to:

A holder's ships may carry one additional token.


PUBLIC WORKS

Areas containing a holder's city may also contain one token.

'Areas' is plural and 'city' isn't. Since one area can hold one city only, and a holder will usually have more than one city, I changed 'city' into 'cities'.

Areas containing a holder's cities may also contain one token.


UNIVERSAL DOCTRINE

During the Special Abilities Phase, a holder may replace from stock up to five pirate or barbarian units in one adjacent area, provided that an unblocked path can be traced to target area.

I noticed that this sentence contained both 'adjacent' and 'unblocked path', which combination doesn't make any sense. After consulting the rulebook about the real meaning, I removed 'adjacent', which seems to be incorrect.

During the Special Abilities Phase, a holder may replace from stock up to five pirate or barbarian units in one area, provided that an unblocked path can be traced to target area.

My new versions of both QuickChart- and Card texts can be found in the following file:

http://www.kjbwaarland.com/Civilization ... -03-11.xls

Although I already adjusted these comments in my texts, I mean to put them into discussion, so please shoot if someone doesn't agree..

I don't know the best way to present the texts. Jonno, can you make a file similar to the QuickChart, based on the card texts? I hope my texts from Excel can be copied into it easily. If not, I can tell you the good news that I downloaded OpenOffice, but the bad news is I didn't use it yet :-)

I knew it


Good change.


I had recently removed that very same comma, because it's grammatically incorrect English... (At least school book English, don't know about real-life English as I'm not a native speaker.)
If you really want a comma there, you have to add another one after "moves", making "and moves" an subordinate clause rather than the second half of an enumeration. But that makes it sound as if "and moves" is an afterthought...


Good change.


Well, this is also a recent change for grammatical correctness... With cities in plural, each area should contain multiple cities for it to also be able to contain a token... (Though yet again there is that difference between schoolbook English and real life English...)


Adjacent should be removed (it's still in the xls file).


I'll take a look at the card texts tomorrow, when I'm hopefully not quite as tired...


Well, the real test is if Flo can copy-paste them to the trade card template, for me the xls is OK (eg OpenOffice.org Calc opens it just fine).

ok. all changes seem fine to me. for military, I would go for the two extra comma, as they don;t hurt and make it more clear. PLaying cards arent book-english anyway. (as goes for commercial pay-offs and so)



when im starting with the cards, first I want to be sure and really sure on both all the cards-texts, and the layout. (uncluding points, commas and capitals.)

Last time I did this, I copy-pasted it from word, WITHOUT LINE BREAKS. This is because I have to redo the linebreaks and all anyway.
In copy paste, italian texts dont copy so thats not needed.

copy-paste can be done from excell, as long as it is all in one line, per card.(guess thats so)

offcourse later re-editing a single card is possible, but not intended. doing spelling-check and so ON the cards is very unhandy.

After thinking some more I realized that the only "correct" way is to use two commas for Military, as anything else means that a player without Military should move before a player with Military constructs and maintains ships, which isn't true.

So it should be:
A holder constructs and maintains ships, and moves, after all players not holding Military.

As for Public works, you are right that cities sounds smoother than city, and the possibility for confusion is minimal, so let's use cities. However, if we do, we are speaking of the areas collectively, so then we must add an "each" (so you can have more than one token total in all areas containing a holder's cities):
Areas containing a holder's cities may also contain one token each.

I also just noticed that Fundamentalism isn't described correctly:
During the Special Abilities Phase, a holder may destroy all units in one area adjacent by land belonging to a player not holding Fundamentalism or Philosophy. Pirate cities and barbarian tokens may not be destroyed.

This should be something like this instead:
During the Special Abilities Phase, a holder may destroy all units in one area adjacent by land not containing units belonging to a player holding Fundamentalism or Philosophy. Pirate cities and barbarian tokens may not be destroyed.

Other than these three, and the superfluous "adjacent" in Universal Doctrine, I'm satisfied with both the Quick Chart texts and the Card texts in your xls file.

Ha,

In Military you should've removed the A:

Areas containing a holder's cities may also contain one token each.
Areas containing holder's cities may also contain one token each.


For Fundamentalism:
Is it so, that you cannot pick an area containing tokens form different players, where only one doesn't hold the specific cards and only destroy HIS tokens?


p.s. will this word-fucking ever stop?

I assume you mean Public Works, as that is what you quote.
I don't like that, just "holder" looks weird. It should be either "a holder", "the holder", "holders" or "the holders". I think the first one (a holder) is the most appropriate, and additionally is consistent with most other advancements.


No, but you can select an area with tokens belonging to multiple players and destroy all of them, provided none of the players hold Fundamentalism or Philosophy.


Probably not
I've been doing it for four years now (well, three years, ten months and twenty seven days to be exact).

Yes, public works

It either 'Holder's cities' or 'a holder's city' in my opinion.


Fundamentalism:
But you CAN select a multi-area, in which one player hold a specific card and another doesn't. If that's true, then your line doesn't cover all.

Maybe a strange line, but it should be somthing like this:

During the Special Abilities Phase, a holder may destroy all units, belonging to players not holding Fundamentalism or Philosophy in one area adjacent by land. Pirate cities and barbarian tokens may not be destroyed.

If you can select only one player of this multi-area, it should be:

During the Special Abilities Phase, a holder may destroy all units, belonging to a single player not holding Fundamentalism or Philosophy in one area adjacent by land. Pirate cities and barbarian tokens may not be destroyed.