DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Wing Leader General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 931--------------------------------------------------
Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 17, 2019, 9:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Last year, Rick and Vincent and I did some work on developing a
house style for rules and suchlike. With some new guys coming
aboard I thought l'd better post the house style notes as they
currently stand.
(1) Queen's English. The rules are written in the Queen's
English. However, beyond the obvious spelling differences we
avoid anglicisms that may trip up North Americans.
(2) Capitalisation. We capitalise only proper names. The class
of things we capitalise include components (Battle Display, Wing
Display); the names of tables (Cohesion Table); and markers
(Veteran marker, Dive marker).
This can potentially lead to sentences like: "if the squadron
has a veteran aircrew mark it with a Veteran marker".
Initialisms should be capitalised. So ADC -> Aircraft Data Card;
MP -> Movement Points; VP -> Victory Points.
Phases of the game turn, such as Tally Phase and Movement Phase
are capitalised.
Terms like Balbo and Lufbery are based on the names of
historical figures and are therefore capitalised.
There are some generic or common things without a proper name we
might not want to capitalise, for example 'player aid card',
'dice' and 'map'.
(3) Hyphenation. There are two cases: verbs, and compound
adjectives.
With verbs, you use a hyphen when a compound formed from two
nouns is used as a verb: so "a dive bomber", "a dive bombing",
but "to dive-bomb". Along the same lines, "a skip bombing" but
to "skip-bomb", "to glide-bomb", etc.
When you have a phrasal verb (a verb made up of a verb and an
adverb or preposition), you don’t hyphenate: "to set up the game
pieces", for instance. But if a phrasal verb is made into a
noun, you should use a hyphen: "Scenario set-up"
Now, regarding adjectives, when you're using a compound as an
adjective, you also hyphenate the terms when the adjective is
before the noun: a dive-bombing attack, an off-map entry hex. If
it is after the noun, you do NOT hyphen it: the entry hex is off
map.
(4) Capitalisation of Hyphenated terms. When used as a title or
at the start of a sentence we generally capitalise only the
first letter, so we have Air-to-air Rockets, not Air-to-Air
Rockets.
(5) Pluralising Initialisms. Again, this is something Vincent
has introduced, so that we now talk about MPs and VPs rather
than MP and VP. Except when they are singular.
(6) Cloud. Far reasons that are unclear we don’t pluralise the
word “cloud”. So we say “scenarios that feature cloud”, not
“scenarios that feature clouds”. This means ensuring the Cloud
entry in scenarios says “Cloud” and not “Clouds”. Our previous
use on this has been inconsistent.
(7) “As per”. We have removed the informal “as per” from the
text in favour of the formal “per”.
(8 ) Oxford Comma. Ethan has asked me to use the Oxford comma.
#Post#: 933--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 17, 2019, 10:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Vincent wrote this last year regarding the presentation of the
orders of battle:
Over the various Wing Leader games and supplements, the names of
the various units in the OOBs (the bold, italic text right under
the Raiders or Defenders line) vary a lot. Nothing surprising,
given the number of different authors involved, but would you
care about bringing some uniformity across the scenarios?
I have a number of proposals based on the observation of the
various scenario OOBs:
British and Commonwealth
*IDs with cardinal numbers: 110 Squadron, 11 Group, etc. (which
was normal practice for the British air forces during WW2 if I'm
not mistaken?)
* Add at the end the airforce to which the units belong: RAF,
RN, RCAF, RNZAF, etc.
Ex: "Elements of 11 Group, RAF"
"112 (P) and 436 Squadrons, RAF"
Americans
*IDs with ordinal numbers: 46th Fighter Group, 445th Fighter
Squadron, 48th Bomb Division, etc.
* Add at the end the various services: USAAF, USN, USMC
Soviets
* The current usage is very muddled and often varies from
scenario to scenario: you sometimes use cardinal numbers, and
sometimes ordinals:
For example: 334 BAD, 3 GIAD, or 1 Fighter Aviation Army; but
other scenarios list 2nd Aviation Army, 5th Air Army... We
should settle on one consistent use.
* Also, you seem to use the Soviet abbreviations for Squadrons,
Groups, and Wings (IAP, BAD, IAD...) but the English translation
for Air Armies... (mostly, since there is an occurrence of 2
GIAK, which means 2nd Guards Air Army) Are you ok to confirm
this?
* Add at the end the various services: VVS or PVO
Germans
* IDs with German WW2 terminology: JG 1, III./ZG 26, 14./KG 51,
etc.
* No mention of "Luftwaffe", because it was the only service to
operate aircraft in the German Armed Forces
Italians
* IDs with Italian ordinals: 23° Gruppo, 50° Stormo, etc.
* No mention of "Regia Aeronautica" at the end, because it was
the only service to operate aircraft in Italy; for Fascist
Republic scenarios, though, we mention "ANR" at the end
Japanese
* Almost all IDs use English ordinals: 23rd Kokutai, 46th
Sentai, etc.
* Regarding the units themselves, you sometimes use Japanese
terminology (Sentai, Kokutai, Daitai) with at times invariable
plurals (e.g., 23rd and 46th Sentai) and at time Englicised
plurals (e.g., 23rd and 46th Sentais), and sometimes English
translations (Air Attack Force, carrier Air Group, Carrier
Division, Air Fleet, Air Flotilla)...
* Add at the end either IJN or IJAAF
Do you want to settle on consistent usages for the OOBs? Do you
want me to draft a more detailed proposal for the various air
forces for you to review?
I responded:
I'm a bit torn on this. I'm aware of the discrepancies, but
there are a some issues with the naming conventions:
First is that the sources themselves are inconsistent. This is
particularly true of sources on the Russians and Japanese. And
so I have been nervous about regularising these in case I create
a new error.
Second, space on the page is a major consideration for many
scenarios. Some have the space for full names but many do not
and I have to try and use abbreviations where possible. If you
don't see me add 'Luftwaffe' or 'Regia Aeronautica' to naming,
is simply that I frequently don't have the space for it.
Third, there are instances where I have no unit information at
all and must put down some general title such as 'Elements of
Imperial Japanese Navy'.
I'm open to suggestions but be aware that perfection of naming
conventions might create problems in some cases.
As you can see, this is not really a resolved issue. At this
stage I'm not inclined to change the current system much, unless
someone has any strong ideas on particular air forces.
#Post#: 1067--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: January 21, 2019, 8:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Guys,
I'm currently reviewing the Victories scenario book (and will do
the Eagles ones after that) and I have a question regarding the
WL House Style:
Lee seems to have changed all the instances of "Turn 4", "Turn
2" etc. (upper case) to "turn 4", "turn 2", etc. (lower case).
It probably was done upon a recommendation from one his other
proofers, but as the style sheet instructs us to capitalise the
name of the various phases of the game turn, I'd be in favor of
also capitalising a specific turn, whereas a non-specific turn
would remain in lower case.
For instance, "it enters play on Turn 4" but "it enters play on
a later turn".
Any opinion about it?
#Post#: 1068--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 21, 2019, 8:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have no firm opinion, but I sure appreciate your attention to
detail!
#Post#: 1099--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: January 22, 2019, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Elias. I cannot contribute to playtest sadly, but I have
a lot of daily commute time to devote to proofreading and,
believe it or not, find it quite relaxing in fact.
So, guys, no additional opinions? Lee?
I seem to remember Rick's away at the present time, maybe he's
the one who recommended the change? I'd like to hear the
reasoning behind it (and who knows, maybe even agree with it :D
)...
#Post#: 1101--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 22, 2019, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I believe Rick is back in February, but others might have an
opinion on this.
#Post#: 1209--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 26, 2019, 2:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Vincent, I'm going through your ADC proofing pass. It's all good
stuff. However, one thing: I think I will continue to use the
plural for Bombs in the variant information, were it's listed
next to a value, instead of your suggestion of 'Bomb'. Yes, I
can see you're matching the front column on the ADC, but as part
of a sentence the plural works better in English vernacular.
However, where you have said 'Bomb rating' I shall leave it
singular.
#Post#: 1212--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: January 26, 2019, 5:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Lee Brimmicombe-Wood link=topic=64.msg1209#msg1209
date=1548492917]
Vincent, I'm going through your ADC proofing pass. It's all good
stuff. However, one thing: I think I will continue to use the
plural for Bombs in the variant information, were it's listed
next to a value, instead of your suggestion of 'Bomb'. Yes, I
can see you're matching the front column on the ADC, but as part
of a sentence the plural works better in English vernacular.
However, where you have said 'Bomb rating' I shall leave it
singular.
[/quote]
Roger that.
While we're at it, did you check my 10.1.2 Mutual Attack rewrite
proposal in the "Tally order in combat" thread? Since you didn't
chime in I'm not sure you saw it; and as Elias seems to think it
does the job, I just wanted to point you toward it so that you
might not have to work on a rewrite if you feel it is ok.
#Post#: 1214--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 26, 2019, 8:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the reminder. I'll take a look at that later this
weekend. I'm currently buried in ADC proofing and, in some
cases, edits of back-of-card blurb.
#Post#: 1810--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: February 19, 2019, 3:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Lee,
I'm currently proofing the Eagles book. Did you make your mind
about the "Turn 6" or "turn 6" spelling?
I'd be in favor of the former (i.e., capital 'T' when dealing
with a specific turn, lower 't' anywhere else), while Rick (I
think?) was championing the latter.
I don't feel that strongly about it, really, just wanted to know
what form you want to use so that I don't note and type in to
hundred occurrences for nothing...
Thanks!
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page