Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong???

Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

Tanaka -> Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 3:21:48 AM)
quote from Xargun: First of all I believe the manual is wrong.. HI needs 1 Resource and 1 Oil per day to run, not 2 oil. Toyohara has 10 Manpower and 5 HI. It also produces 12 Resources per day. So in order for the HI to run it needs 5 Resources and 5 Oil per day. For the Manpower to run, it needs 100 Resources per day. Thus it needs 105 Resources and 5 Oil per day to run at 100%. Manpower is as important as HI in my opinion, as without it all the nice guns and stuff you make has no one to use them. All combat units (land units) suck up Manpower points for replacements and to come on the map. Now if you expand your HI you will of course need more - I have it at 10 HI in my game, but that is not that much of an increase - +5 oil/resource per day.. Xargun

Mr.Frag -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 3:27:58 AM)
Whats your question? All you did was quote X [:D]

Xargun -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 3:39:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag Whats your question? All you did was quote X [:D] He's asking if I'm right about the manual. Xargun

Mr.Frag -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 3:42:33 AM)
Well, considering I told you that the manual was wrong and you are repeating what I told you, I guess I have to back up your claim [:D]

Bodhi -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 4:11:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag Well, considering I told you that the manual was wrong and you are repeating what I told you, I guess I have to back up your claim [:D] As you're always telling people to read the manual, and you say the manual is wrong in places, which places of the manual should we ignore. [;)] Put another way, is there an errata thread for the manual somewhere?[:)]

Mr.Frag -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 4:39:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bodhi quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag Well, considering I told you that the manual was wrong and you are repeating what I told you, I guess I have to back up your claim [:D] As you're always telling people to read the manual, and you say the manual is wrong in places, which places of the manual should we ignore. [;)] Put another way, is there an errata thread for the manual somewhere?[:)] Nope, because no one would read that either [:D] There are about 5 errors in the manual. None of which is life altering or affects understanding of how things work. A formula mistake of 1.25 vs 1.5 is not going to bother your learning abilities.

Tanaka -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 8:08:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag quote: ORIGINAL: Bodhi quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag Well, considering I told you that the manual was wrong and you are repeating what I told you, I guess I have to back up your claim [:D] As you're always telling people to read the manual, and you say the manual is wrong in places, which places of the manual should we ignore. [;)] Put another way, is there an errata thread for the manual somewhere?[:)] Nope, because no one would read that either [:D] There are about 5 errors in the manual. None of which is life altering or affects understanding of how things work. A formula mistake of 1.25 vs 1.5 is not going to bother your learning abilities. No but a 2 to 1 will! So I take it that HI needs 1 oil per day and not 2 as you both have said. I guess I have to take your word for it [;)]

irrgang -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 11:14:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag There are about 5 errors in the manual. None of which is life altering or affects understanding of how things work. A formula mistake of 1.25 vs 1.5 is not going to bother your learning abilities. Thought the manual was still in beta. It hasn't passed the grammar check yet [;)] Content is fine, but the overall quality is rather bad. I'd like to see an updated version.

Bodhi -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 11:17:16 AM)
Agreed. A proof-read or two wouldn't have gone astray, preferably by someone who hadn't played the beta version.

Culiacan Mexico -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 11:19:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag Nope, because no one would read that either [:D] Really?! I have it printed out and refer to it all the time. Why not start a thread with correction/clarifications? 13.2.2 Industry Heavy Industry – “For heavy industry factories at a location to function each day, there must be more resources stored at that location than heavy industry, and there must be more oil at that location than two times the heavy industry. If these requirements are satisfied, then each heavy industry point produces a supply point and 1.33 fuel points that are added to the bases, at a cost of 1 resource and 1 oil point.” “In addition, heavy industry points equal to the number of heavy industry factories are added to the heavy industry pool. Resources equal to the heavy industry points are expended and oil equal to two times the heavy industry points are expended.” Caveat: “Fuel is not produced by both Heavy Industry and Oil Centers at locations that do not have at least a port size 1.” Questions and comments: First - The manual seems to indicate that there is an addition cost to produce Heavy Industry points after producing supply and fuel points. Yet, I have run the game a couple of times through turn one and found (where I could) that oil consummation per turn equals the number of heavy industry factories. Would it be correct to say… Each point of heavy industry factory produces: 1 – Supply Point 1.33 – Fuel Points 1 - Heavy Industry point At a cost of 1 – Resource 1 - Oil Second - Cities such as Harbin (inland) will use its heavy industry factory to produce both Supply and Heavy Industry points, but not fuel? Thank You

Marc von Martial -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 11:41:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bodhi Agreed. A proof-read or two wouldn't have gone astray, preferably by someone who hadn't played the beta version. It has been proof read a couple of times. By the designers themselves too. In such a monster manual some errors simply slip through the comb. Sorry.

Marc von Martial -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 11:41:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: irrgang Content is fine, but the overall quality is rather bad. I'd like to see an updated version. What are your concerns about "quality" ?

Culiacan Mexico -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 11:44:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck It has been proof read a couple of times. By the designers themselves too. In such a monster manual some errors simply slip through the comb. Sorry. ... now you have a few hundred proof readers/critics... [:'(] You guys did a very good job in my opinion. [:)]

Pascal_slith -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 12:32:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck quote: ORIGINAL: Bodhi Agreed. A proof-read or two wouldn't have gone astray, preferably by someone who hadn't played the beta version. It has been proof read a couple of times. By the designers themselves too. In such a monster manual some errors simply slip through the comb. Sorry. I find you've done an excellent job on such a large manual. So there are a few errata. Has anyone everseen a wargame rules book without errata? [:D] May I suggest collecting the errata and putting them in a text file in the 'Download' section of the WitP website?

Culiacan Mexico -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 12:37:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pascal May I suggest collecting the errata and putting them in a text file in the 'Download' section of the WitP website? Agreed.

Tanaka -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 12:43:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck quote: ORIGINAL: Bodhi Agreed. A proof-read or two wouldn't have gone astray, preferably by someone who hadn't played the beta version. It has been proof read a couple of times. By the designers themselves too. In such a monster manual some errors simply slip through the comb. Sorry. hey marc any answers on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? thanks!!! quote: quote from Xargun: First of all I believe the manual is wrong.. HI needs 1 Resource and 1 Oil per day to run, not 2 oil. Toyohara has 10 Manpower and 5 HI. It also produces 12 Resources per day. So in order for the HI to run it needs 5 Resources and 5 Oil per day. For the Manpower to run, it needs 100 Resources per day. Thus it needs 105 Resources and 5 Oil per day to run at 100%. Manpower is as important as HI in my opinion, as without it all the nice guns and stuff you make has no one to use them. All combat units (land units) suck up Manpower points for replacements and to come on the map. Now if you expand your HI you will of course need more - I have it at 10 HI in my game, but that is not that much of an increase - +5 oil/resource per day.. Xargun

Bodhi -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 1:01:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck quote: ORIGINAL: Bodhi Agreed. A proof-read or two wouldn't have gone astray, preferably by someone who hadn't played the beta version. It has been proof read a couple of times. By the designers themselves too. In such a monster manual some errors simply slip through the comb. Sorry. Sometimes it helps to get a proof-read by someone not so closely involved. I knew it would have been proof-read, I should have said: an extra proof-read or two by people who are new to the game. Sure some things will get through, but I was a little surprised at some of the things I found. I'm sure the excellent service you guys are giving will continue and we'll get an "official errata" before too long. [8D]

irrgang -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 3:59:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck quote: ORIGINAL: irrgang Content is fine, but the overall quality is rather bad. I'd like to see an updated version. What are your concerns about "quality" ? Marc, Sorry about that very general quality remark. What I meant is that there are a some spelling errors that a grammar check or a proof reader should've caught. (At least if they have english as their native language.) They are very obvious and easy to catch. My point is if they are obvious then authors are probably aware of them. Then the question arise: Why aren't these faults corrected? From a technical point of view proof reading is ok, but it's clearly lacking in regards to the langauge used. Anyway, from the top of my head here's what I stumbled on... - Grammar: ", and" as in Ch. 1.0 of Tutorial: "Beginners, Intermediate, and Advanced" - Misspellings. As an example: 'Their' spelled as 'Thier' in some places and 'There' in some places. Spell checkers find the first one for sure and grammar checks the second one. Aren't those used and if so, why aren't they acted upon? Although these are minor faults it gives an indication on what attitude Matrix/2by3 has towards quality. (A bit harsh, but reading the manual/tutorial gave me my first impression of the game and 2by3 products.) - Errata: Ch. 19.4.1 IJN CV loadout: 3/8 + 3/8 + 3/8 = 9/8 - Errata: Tutorial. (Disclaimer, I might have done something wrong here!) In beginners section the allies are told to form a fast transport on turn 1 that follows another transport TF. HD is set to Woleai. My fast transport headed to Saipan (follow TF) while the tutorial seemed to expect that it should head to Woleai or Satawal (where it was supposed to be attacked on turn 2). - Errata: Tutorial page 16. Altitude says 1500, should be 15000. As I said, the content is fine, I really can't wish for anything more. And of course, this must be put in perspective. What counts is the gameplay and so far it seems to have a high quality and good focus on squashing bugs and tweak the performance.

freeboy -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 4:07:55 PM)
note the 3/8s has been mentioned.. it actually is correct representing larger than 100% loadouts

ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 4:22:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck quote: ORIGINAL: irrgang Content is fine, but the overall quality is rather bad. I'd like to see an updated version. What are your concerns about "quality" ? The quality is fine. There are still some spelling errors that a spell checker should have caught and an occassional gramatical error, but overall, it is a very good manual. A few more actual examples of the calculations in play would be helpful.....

Grotius -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 5:22:22 PM)
I like the manuals, but there are indeed a fair number of typos and grammatical errors in both the manual and the tutorial. Perhaps Matrix should start a stickie'd thread for everyone to post errors? Also, the manuals really could use an index. I've written the index for two 400-page books, and I'm half tempted to write one for the WITP manual.

Damien Thorn -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 5:32:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: irrgang Marc, ... there are a some spelling errors that a grammar check or a proof reader should've caught. (At least if they have english as their native language.) Yeah. For example, the word "English" is always capitalized. [;)]

irrgang -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 6:36:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn quote: ORIGINAL: irrgang Marc, ... there are a some spelling errors that a grammar check or a proof reader should've caught. (At least if they have english as their native language.) Yeah. For example, the word "English" is always capitalized. [;)] Ok, got me there [&o] But I guess it proves my point if I, who have English as a second language, have complaints on a document in English released by an American company (they do speak English, don't they [;)].

Marc von Martial -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 7:35:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: irrgang Sorry about that very general quality remark. What I meant is that there are a some spelling errors that a grammar check or a proof reader should've caught. (At least if they have english as their native language.) They are very obvious and easy to catch. My point is if they are obvious then authors are probably aware of them. Then the question arise: Why aren't these faults corrected? From a technical point of view proof reading is ok, but it's clearly lacking in regards to the langauge used Oh, believe me, we used spell checkers, seems no system is perfect then [;)]. We corrected every little typo we we aware of. I have encyclopedias here that have typos too [;)]

The Gnome -> RE: Can anyone from Matrix comment on this??? Is the manual right or wrong??? (7/7/2004 7:41:22 PM)
quote: Really?! I have it printed out and refer to it all the time. Why not start a thread with correction/clarifications? 13.2.2 Industry Heavy Industry – “For heavy industry factories at a location to function each day, there must be more resources stored at that location than heavy industry, and there must be more oil at that location than two times the heavy industry. If these requirements are satisfied, then each heavy industry point produces a supply point and 1.33 fuel points that are added to the bases, at a cost of 1 resource and 1 oil point.” “In addition, heavy industry points equal to the number of heavy industry factories are added to the heavy industry pool. Resources equal to the heavy industry points are expended and oil equal to two times the heavy industry points are expended.” LOL offering a level headed sollution on a message board? How dare you!? We'd rather lash out with crazy talk that gets the blood boiling and solves nothing. :P Sorry for the sarcasm, but this is a fine idea. Maybe people with a better understanding of what needs to be in an errata can post it in a seperate thread and hope it gets stickied.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.640625