Clerify Bonus Unit Chart

[dude]

Ok, is it me or is this chart's wording confusing? This is the chart for listing political areas and who will recieve bonus units... however, instead of staying who WILL get the units the column says "No Benefit"... then to make matter worse for North Africa it says "only Turkey"... does that mean they are the only ones with "No Benefit" or did they mean to say they are the only ones with the benefit?

The column uses a double negative in most cases... "No Benefit" and "Not Turkey"... so does that mean the no's cancel each other out and only Turkey gets a benefit? or should the column have been label just "Benefit"? It makes more senese that way.

[Ironclad]

The not really means not. So Duchy of Warsaw bonus isn't available to the 4 countries shown, Turkey is the only one which gets the North African bonus but doesn't get any of the others listed

[Mike Parker]

If IronClad is right, then I agree with the OP this chart is awkwardly worded.  For example if Turkey is the only one that can get the bonus from North Africa (which makes sense) when we look at the Chart we see.
 
No Benefit  --  Only Turkey
 
Which means (unless my English Grammar has truly deteriorated) that Only Turkey has no benefit, ie. they will NOT get the bonus and everyone else will.
 
Likewise when looking at say Kingdom of italy.
 
No Benefit  --  Not Turkey
 
Which means Only Turkey gets the benefit! (a little more difficult to see, its the more classic double negation error.  For a digression assume a set C = {France, Great Britian, Russia, Prussia,...,Turkey,...} which represents all the possible national entities.  When you say Not Turkey you really mean C/Turkey or the partition of the set that includes everything except Turkey, so what is left in the No Benefit column is everything but Turkey)
 
I do say when I see the chart above, I understand what its trying to say because I know enough about the time-period and regions to be able to say "Oh well it cannot mean that.. it must mean this instead"; however, if someone came to the game completly unlearned on the subject I think they would be very confused (and rightly so)  The OP hit the nail on the head, remove the No from 'No Benefit' or rename 'No Benefit' to 'Bonus' or something and it will be correct.
 

[ericbabe]

The column heading should just say "Benefit", so that Duchy of Warsaw cannot be formed by Prussia, Russia, Austria, or Turkey, and North Africa can only be formed by Turkey.  (I remember exchanging e-mails with the manual writer about this table, but I reckon my response to him wasn't sufficiently clear.)

[dude]

I kinda figured that ... thanks for clarifying it.  [:)]

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

The column heading should just say "Benefit", so that Duchy of Warsaw cannot be formed by Prussia, Russia, Austria, or Turkey, and North Africa can only be formed by Turkey.  (I remember exchanging e-mails with the manual writer about this table, but I reckon my response to him wasn't sufficiently clear.)

Just typing benefit as the column header is still not as clear as it should be, it would make some readers think Turkey was the only one that benefits in many cases where it doesn’t. The ‘not’ and ‘only’ statements should simply be removed and just the country names should remain in the different column cells.

And for North Africa, the no benefit column cell should state ‘all countries except Turkey’.

Jim