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

[Grotius]

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]

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]

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

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]

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]

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.

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.