[Idea] Issue Effect Warnings

[Luna Amore]

After playing NS for several years, I was shocked to find that my economy had imploded overnight. I was curious what the cause was, but I'm guessing it had something to do with my taxes (Very high, due to the simple nature of the Issues System).

I could suggest numerous changes to the issues system, and I might suggest more changes in the future, but for now, I'd like to merely suggest that for instances such as these, in which a large change that the user does not expect occurs, there be warnings that further action would result in these changes occurring.

[Katganistan]

Whoa, why did my nation get so weird?

Nationstates Issues: (Spoilers)

Refactoring

[Frisbeeteria]

... or ... you could carefully read the issues and try to anticipate the effects before making poor choices.

Every change in your stats is foreshadowed in the options. Game issues don't arbitrarily do random things. You're a 'National Leader' now, and you should take responsibility for your actions.

[Katganistan]

... or ... you could carefully read the issues and try to anticipate the effects before making poor choices.

Every change in your stats is foreshadowed in the options. Game issues don't arbitrarily do random things. You're a 'National Leader' now, and you should take responsibility for your actions.

That too.

[Aardenland]

Whoa, why did my nation get so weird?

Nationstates Issues: (Spoilers)

Refactoring

I'm glad that this has been considered before. We can learn lessons from those failed attempts to see what would be most acceptable to the community.

... or ... you could carefully read the issues and try to anticipate the effects before making poor choices.

Every change in your stats is foreshadowed in the options. Game issues don't arbitrarily do random things. You're a 'National Leader' now, and you should take responsibility for your actions.

I never said that the game does random things. The problem is, I continued raising taxes for months, maybe years on end, and my economy stayed strong. How am I supposed to know when the programming kicks in, or if it's going to kick in? A warning for a change as big as an economy imploding will improve the experience for the majority of players, and it will stop several players from leaving out of frustration. Think of it as an automated advisor, but much less pressing and frequent. For those who want a different experience, they can choose to keep the advisor off.

[The Agnostic Collective]

The game isn't obligated to warn players of ill effects caused by issues, nor should it (unless it's one of those broken issues, in which case, they strongly advise that you dismiss the issue.) You're supposed to think these things through before you settle on an option. My aspiring Anarchy nation suffered an equal blow to Political Freedoms, but instead of running to the forum, I worked on getting things back on track and it didn't take long. Learn from your mistakes and move on.

[Aardenland]

The game isn't obligated to warn players of ill effects caused by issues, nor should it (unless it's one of those broken issues, in which case, they strongly advise that you dismiss the issue.) You're supposed to think these things through before you settle on an option. My aspiring Anarchy nation suffered an equal blow to Political Freedoms, but instead of running to the forum, I worked on getting things back on track and it didn't take long. Learn from your mistakes and move on.

Perhaps it is not obliged, but to what degree? I find the issues aspect of the game to be intuitive in some ways, but very unintuitive in others. How long can I have a tax rate of 90% before the economy falls in? By implementing the change I suggested, people can have a choice to do it one way or the other, and it will prevent people giving up NS due to frustration.

As an aside I'm curious, and a little concerned, as to why everyone here is so demanding in their language. I have an issue, and wish to discuss it intelligently, with users responding to my idea with the same consideration I would give to theirs.

[Trelatche]

Perhaps it is not obliged, but to what degree? I find the issues aspect of the game to be intuitive in some ways, but very unintuitive in others. How long can I have a tax rate of 90% before the economy falls in? By implementing the change I suggested, people can have a choice to do it one way or the other, and it will prevent people giving up NS due to frustration.

As an aside I'm curious, and a little concerned, as to why everyone here is so demanding in their language. I have an issue, and wish to discuss it intelligently, with users responding to my idea with the same consideration I would give to theirs.

I don't think your tax rate has anything to do with your economy imploding, I have a slightly older puppet that has a tax rate of nearly 97%, and it still sits at 100/100 in terms of economy. Keep in mind that this nation simulator was meant to be tongue-in-cheek anyway, most of the issues have pretty overstated effects compared to what would actually occur in real life. When in doubt, just dismiss the issue.

[Phydios]

Perhaps it is not obliged, but to what degree? I find the issues aspect of the game to be intuitive in some ways, but very unintuitive in others. How long can I have a tax rate of 90% before the economy falls in? By implementing the change I suggested, people can have a choice to do it one way or the other, and it will prevent people giving up NS due to frustration.

Why do you think a high tax rate will eventually result in a collapsed economy? On one of my puppets, I had a tax rate of over 90% and a "High" economy (as taken from the Trends page) for weeks. Then I deliberately imploded it by choosing an issue option that's widely known to do so.

As an aside I'm curious, and a little concerned, as to why everyone here is so demanding in their language. I have an issue, and wish to discuss it intelligently, with users responding to my idea with the same consideration I would give to theirs.

We are discussing it. But you are far from the first person to complain about unintentional effects from issues. The answer to any proposal to make issue effects more predictable will (as far as I know) always be the same: no. A lack of people taking your side does not mean everyone here is being rude.
In the future, do what every nation should do- read the issue options carefully, remember that NS exaggerates things, and realize that the option you choose might still have unexpected effects. Also, you can try searching for "nationstates issue #XXX" using your favorite search engine. Some people have recorded the stat changes and/or effect lines for certain options of certain issues. The stat change records won't be 100% accurate for you, and there isn't information on many issues, but searching the Web can help sometimes.

[Aardenland]

Why do you think a high tax rate will eventually result in a collapsed economy? On one of my puppets, I had a tax rate of over 90% and a "High" economy (as taken from the Trends page) for weeks. Then I deliberately imploded it by choosing an issue option that's widely known to do so.

I don't think your tax rate has anything to do with your economy imploding, I have a slightly older puppet that has a tax rate of nearly 97%, and it still sits at 100/100 in terms of economy. Keep in mind that this nation simulator was meant to be tongue-in-cheek anyway, most of the issues have pretty overstated effects compared to what would actually occur in real life. When in doubt, just dismiss the issue.

Thanks for the info. I really have no idea what went wrong I was just making a guess, as my tax rate was probably the most unreasonable part of my nation. Yet the idea that a single issue, rather than systemic neglect, should change my nation in such a big way makes no sense to me. Should there really be a single issue that can destroy an economy without warning?

I'll look through my history to see if any of the effects sound apparent enough to be the cause, but I can't be sure it'll come up positive. I do dismiss issues where I have no clue what to do. I take on issues because the accolades for the issues system require constant addition of values, but I do dismiss issues frequently.

We are discussing it. But you are far from the first person to complain about unintentional effects from issues. The answer to any proposal to make issue effects more predictable will (as far as I know) always be the same: no. A lack of people taking your side does not mean everyone here is being rude.
In the future, do what every nation should do- read the issue options carefully, remember that NS exaggerates things, and realize that the option you choose might still have unexpected effects. Also, you can try searching for "nationstates issue #XXX" using your favorite search engine. Some people have recorded the stat changes and/or effect lines for certain options of certain issues. The stat change records won't be 100% accurate for you, and there isn't information on many issues, but searching the Web can help sometimes.

I think that a system that is more upfront will appeal to more people and attract more users. Having it be optional will almost definitely be pleasing to more users. It doesn't need to be absolutely upfront. A guide is not necessarily a walkthrough.

I understand everything you said. I'm not upset, but I am principled, consider myself well reasoned, and tend to pursue issues to their best conclusion. I know I can't ramble on indefinitely, but if I convince people to agree with me, I can affect change. If not, I retreat or switch to a different topic. If someone with the power to end this conversation demands it (or locks it, either way), I will comply.

I do not think everyone here was being rude. Kat wasn't completely and personally upfront (most of his points were made by linking to other pages). Though he supported Frisbee's position, that doesn't make him rude, and I apologize to him if I implied so. Sorry, Kat! AC was a little demanding (The last sentence sounds very commanding to me, given the context), but I'm willing to overlook that, though it does give credence to my point.

Frisbee, on the other hand, is a Moderator, and unlike Kat, I found personal offense in his statements. Whether or not he followed the rules set by the sight, I expect better conduct from people in authority, and object to Frisbee's snark, in particular concerning my "poor choices." I'm not going to make any reports, since such a minor infraction of my own beliefs (as opposed to the site's rules) is not worth pursuing. I can comment on it freely though, unless that is an infraction of the site's rules, which I don't believe it is. Even if he's frustrated that this is being brought up for at least the fourth time, that's no reason to dismiss the issue out of hand when it's being argued from a new perspective.

TLDR:

Thanks for the info about taxes, I will continue looking for the reason my economy imploded, but I have serious doubts, and those doubts are connected to my bringing this issue up.

Not upset, but principled and concerned.

I am grateful for both of your explanations and concerns. I believe that my idea still holds water, though, and will pursue it until this page is locked. If someone else brings it up in the future, I will support it.

I pointed out and am now explaining my objections to the comments previous to my concern over the use of language.

Since I have a new perspective on the issue, I think people should respect and consider my opinion, even if they don't accept it. Since Frisbee is a moderator, I especially object to his initial response to my concern.

[The Agnostic Collective]

If you somehow interpreted my suggestion as "commanding" that was not my intention. I simply stated the obvious. NS is all about the extremes and their are some issues known to decimate economies in one foul swoop (I think Issues 240 and 242) so keep that in mind. I can't check right now because I'm on a mobile device, but you should look through previous threads. If I remember correctly, there was a thread recently entitled "What in the name of Max" that may be of use to you.

EDIT: Apparently, Issues #221 and #242 will tank your economy if you pick the wrong one.

[Phydios]

Aardenland, what incentive does the staff have to implement this proposal? You say it would appeal to and attract more people; I say NS has no trouble with attracting users, or even with keeping them around once they've registered. Sure, many nations are only logged into once or twice before ceasing to exist, but there's more than enough regularly active players for a large, varied, and thriving community. Change in general is good, even necessary. But radical change to solve a problem we don't have? Not so much. I seriously doubt the issue system as it stands now is changing (significantly) anytime soon; it works, and the overwhelming majority of players are fine with it. Just now, in a "Got Issues?" thread on this same topic ("I don't like how issues have unexpected effects"), Fris said this much better than I could:

To paraphrase the other 9,999 times this has been requested, "not gonna happen". This satirical game is, by design, all about unexpected consequences. If you want predictability, this is not the game for you.

[Luna Amore]

Just to clarify, only issues and WA resolutions (if you are a WA member at the time of passage) can affect your nation stats. If you stop answering issues, your nation will not change except the steady increase in population.

Looking over your past issues, it looks like you received Issue #221 somewhat recently. Judging by the fact that you have funding for every other govt department except business and religion, I'm guessing you chose opt 3 of that issue and chose to ax your business budget.

"If anything is bloated about the taxes and how our money is spent, it's those business subsidies!" rages @@RANDOMNAME@@, a concerned and rather irate citizen. "If you ask me, the government needs to cut the corporate welfare for these rich bigwigs! Cut the average guy a tax break, and keep the programs that benefit the people, not big business!"

Seeing as how your economy crashed, I'd figure your economy was extremely dependent on those business subsidies. That issue can have drastic effects depending on how the nation is set up before hand.

[Sanctaria]

The game isn't obligated to warn players of ill effects caused by issues, nor should it (unless it's one of those broken issues, in which case, they strongly advise that you dismiss the issue.)

The game doesn't recommend in any instance that you dismiss an issue if it's "broken" - if there's a fix needed with an issue, we fix it.

Only one issue in the game has a built-in-by-the-admins warning, and that's the WA Woes issue - selection of option 1 will resign you from the WA. The warning is there so people don't accidentally resign from the WA and lose delegacy or hard earned endorsements.

[The Agnostic Collective]

The game isn't obligated to warn players of ill effects caused by issues, nor should it (unless it's one of those broken issues, in which case, they strongly advise that you dismiss the issue.)

The game doesn't recommend in any instance that you dismiss an issue if it's "broken" - if there's a fix needed with an issue, we fix it.

Only one issue in the game has a built-in-by-the-admins warning, and that's the WA Woes issue - selection of option 1 will resign you from the WA. The warning is there so people don't accidentally resign from the WA and lose delegacy or hard earned endorsements.

Maybe not anymore, but there use to be a poorly written issue that would not have the desired effect of what the option you chose. It had a big warning message plastered at the top recommending that players dismissed it. That is what I was referring to. Dismissing such issues are a way to avoid the unforeseen results of it until it's fixed.

[Luna Amore]

The game doesn't recommend in any instance that you dismiss an issue if it's "broken" - if there's a fix needed with an issue, we fix it.

Only one issue in the game has a built-in-by-the-admins warning, and that's the WA Woes issue - selection of option 1 will resign you from the WA. The warning is there so people don't accidentally resign from the WA and lose delegacy or hard earned endorsements.

Maybe not anymore, but there use to be a poorly written issue that would not have the desired effect of what the option you chose. It had a big warning message plastered at the top recommending that players dismissed it. That is what I was referring to. Dismissing such issues are a way to avoid the unforeseen results of it until it's fixed.

That was an NS++ feature and was not sanctioned by game staff.

Here's the relevant thread: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257816