Thanks for the compliments. The 4 butt shift or 5 butt shift pattern was documented on some shifts for 19th century vessels, but aside from Vasa, we really don't know the patterns used on 17th century ships, or if they even used a pattern at all. I usually adopt a pattern anyway, and have to plan in pencil where the plank seams will be about 4 strips ahead on the surface of the false deck. Those open deck spaces near the centerline are where you have to keep track of the pattern as the planks locations are planned around the hatches. In early ships, the planking pattern was not strictly followed. If you look at the Vasa, you will see that planks of random wood were used in planking in many places. So, if your planking pattern wanders off, it's not a real problem. On La Couronne, the hatch coamings were place over the deck planks. That was a model simplification directed by the kit instructions. On my current model, the planks were cut and fitted around the coamings as on a real ship, which takes more work and planning.
My first build log had arrows drawn to help the viewer trace lines as they were rigged later on in the log, but not for the earler lines. This will really help others see how lines are routed. I wish all the pictures had such arrows, but it only occured to me to use them later on. I will use them from now on. They serve to fill the gap that kit instructions don't have. This way, I can pass on line routing and belaying point information for the specific ship, even if the belaying plan is largely guesswork, to new builders. That saves them a huge amount of planning work and gathering and analyzing information from a great many sources. I wish instructions were written like that, but that would drive the kit price up in printing costs. When you don't know if a particular running rigging line passes through the lubbers hole in a top, you have to look at other models or Lennarth Pedersson's books and make an educated guess. Questions like that abound in rigging and model making in general.
