[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects Since New Update

[Drasnia]

For the game, higher Civil Rights tend toward anarchy while lower Civil Rights tend toward totalitarianism. Regardless of your personal views, the criminalization of infant circumcision does involve the exercise of governmental power against people for their conduct. In an anarchy, the government would not ban infant circumcision, so allowing the practice increases Civil Rights.

So, some more observation on this subject, and previous complaints about Civil Rights not working like it should.

In #112, allowing telemarketing and door-to-door sales decreases civil rights, presumably on the basis that people have a harder time tuning out stuff they don't want to hear, even though it's not the government directly that's annoying them.

In #338, enacting no laws against noise pollution increases civil rights, even though the most pertinent effect is that... people have a harder time tuning out stuff they don't want to hear.

So one is more about corporations being allowed to make a racket (which is more Economic Freedom), and the other is more about private citizens being allowed to make a racket, but it still looks to me like #112's effect is illogical (the government isn't banning anything or repressing anyone) and inconsistent with #338.

What's the logic behind this?

I fixed a bug.

The stat changes under "Recent Trends" really do report recent trends, and in some situations it can report recent trends that weren't caused by the issue. In this case, the nation was refounded, and suffered an Influence penalty for its time in the netherworld. It then answered an issue, which reported this Influence drop as a recent trend.

This should no longer happen, nor should a similar situation where nations that spent Influence could see that change reported as a recent trend the next time they answered an issue.

So, whatever the case with Influence (I'm not in the WA), Residency is still showing.

I don't get what the difficulty is. Why not just take the snapshot-of-previous-stats-that-the-new-ones-are-compared-with immediately before processing the issue, rather than using a cached version of some kind (that apparently even survives refounding)? That would solve all current and future bugs of this nature, and save disk space since you don't have to remember both current and cached stats for every nation all the time.

Except in 112, the government subsidizes the telemarketers, not just allow it (For that would be status quo.).

[[violet]]

Hi,
I just had the issue #104 Public Loudspeakers Shrill With Controversy and chose option 1, where the Minister of Safety suggests that public loudspeakers should be used to warn people from emergencies and potentially save their lives (alongside some political brainwashing...)
As a result my Safety rating went down from 101.01 to 58.93, a whopping -41.7%. That was very unexpected, I thought the whole point of option 1 was to increase safety? Can someone explain that result to me?

The stats on that issue option are probably not quite right & I'm reviewing them with the Editors, but the Safety decrease in your nation was caused by increasing corruption, i.e. less trustworthy officials & authorities.

[Greater Hunnia]

...

Violet you said that Cheese Export's oversensitiveness to Enviromental Beauty will be fixed soon. Can we expect the same for Agriculture?

[Legalize Everything]

Selecting option 2 on issue #16, allowing employers to fire workers for any reason decreased economic freedom and income of the rich.

[[violet]]

Violet you said that Cheese Export's oversensitiveness to Enviromental Beauty will be fixed soon. Can we expect the same for Agriculture?

Yep.

[Infidel State]

Hey,

I just encountered Issue #009 and chose option 2 on this nation... which made my safety rating drop by a whopping 100 points (75%)... World avarage is about 54 points.

It also seems kind of weird because it does adress issues underlying problem. (An out of control population of animals). And I can't really see how not putting said dangerous animal on the menu even affects safety, if I still shoot them instead.

I was wondering if such an extreme and unexpected outcome is intended here?

[[violet]]

I just encountered Issue #009 and chose option 2 on this nation... which made my safety rating drop by a whopping 100 points (75%)... World avarage is about 54 points.

This occurred because your nation had previously outlawed guns, which is a very effective way to increase Safety. This ban was repealed with the decision to shoot wild animals.

[Trotterdam]

I just encountered Issue #009 and chose option 2 on this nation... which made my safety rating drop by a whopping 100 points (75%)... World avarage is about 54 points.

This occurred because your nation had previously outlawed guns, which is a very effective way to increase Safety. This ban was repealed with the decision to shoot wild animals.

Who is doing the shooting? The wording and effect line of the option give the impression that it's a government-organized cull, not letting civilians do their own shooting (compare #133 option 4 and #169 option 2/3, which do make it clear that they're about allowing private citizens to do their own shooting - the latter reads mainly as being about sports hunting, but also mentions pest control). That means #009 option 2 shouldn't undo a ban on guns unless they were previously banned even for the police and military, and I don't think banning guns from from the police would be a good way to increase safety unless your government is very corrupt.

[Christian Democrats]

How does a ban on terminator seeds increase Economic Freedom?

Option 553.1 on Culture of Life

[Frenequesta]

How does a ban on terminator seeds increase Economic Freedom?

Option 553.1 on Culture of Life

I've seen that invariably happen every time I've chosen that option. I'm guessing that by banning terminator seeds, you are removing a barrier to market entry because a farmer can now just grow their own seeds to put on the market instead of constantly buying them from McSanto after the second generation. (Of course, the issue assumes that McSanto is as monopolistic as its RL counterpart, otherwise the farmers could have always just reasonably refused to buy from it...)

[A Humanist Science]

How does a ban on terminator seeds increase Economic Freedom?

Option 553.1 on Culture of Life

I've seen that invariably happen every time I've chosen that option. I'm guessing that by banning terminator seeds, you are removing a barrier to market entry because a farmer can now just grow their own seeds to put on the market instead of constantly buying them from McSanto...

I had actually recommended a decrease in business subsidization as a stat effect for #553.1, in order to capture precisely this sort of effect. To the extent that McSanto can leverage terminator technology to corner the market in fertile SuperCorn seed, not banning terminator technology might constitute protectionist intervention by the government against market competition. Thus, strictly speaking, banning terminators should increase market access and competition in fertile seed - thereby increasing economic freedom (if not necessarily output - I also recommended a decrease in the agricultural sector to capture investor flight due to the absence of said IP protectionism).

This logic does require rejection of the assumption that property (including intellectual) exists a priori, in favor of the point of view that property is brought into existance by a legal/social act, making property an intervention which may or may not promote economic freedom. This probably reflects the contents of my own Evil Conspiratorial Ideological Bias (TM & Pat. Pend.)

( At any rate, I'm not privy to how #553.1 as published actually affects stats, so it is pure speculation that economic freedom increases for the above reasons. An Editor may have added another effect for another reason. But for the above reasons, #553.1 consistantly raising economic freedom makes complete sense to me.)

[[violet]]

This occurred because your nation had previously outlawed guns, which is a very effective way to increase Safety. This ban was repealed with the decision to shoot wild animals.

Who is doing the shooting? The wording and effect line of the option give the impression that it's a government-organized cull, not letting civilians do their own shooting

The issue stats repeal any ban on public access to guns. So it's citizens doing the shooting. Need input from Editors as to whether this should be the case.

[Concordant Opposition]

Dilemma 37. Option 1 selected.

Talking point: The government snoops on private internet connections.
Reclassification: -----------'s Civil Rights rose from Few to Some.
Trends: Civil Rights +10.8%

That doesn't look "residual".

I know this is only a game, but, do you think you could make the simulator behave like a simulator with pretend data?

[Almonaster Nuevo]

#127.2 Aging concerns...

"I can't believe I'm hearing this!" yells Elsa Harishchandra, a wizened octogenerian. "We have our rights! You can't do that to us! What utter rubbish about our pensions! I can hardly survive on the paltry number of Fracts I get each week! If anything, we should get more money! If you're so worried about low death rates, then just cut the healthcare budget to make up for the loss!"


As expected: Welfare 3,320.63 → 3,379.81 +1.8%, Public Healthcare 2,459.72 → 2,365.87 -3.8%

But WTF?!: Average Income of Poor 213,968.07 → 157,667.49 -26.3%, Wealth Gaps 1.40 → 2.47 +76.4%, Crime 8.28 → 11.88 +43.5%, Taxation 17.11 → 15.18 -11.3%

I would have expected poor income to rise - the whole premise is that the poor pensioners need cash. I was prepared to take a small hit on taxes to cover it. The result line gives a clue to that: "Elderly citizens regularly buy posh multimillion-Fract mansions.", but that should improve the rich income, rather than slash the poor end. It is also directly contrafactual to the issue text.

The crime thing is totally out of left field, possibly driven by gambling and/or black market which also had sizeable hikes, but why should any of them be affected by better pensions?

This is part of a general pattern I'm seeing where the apparent area of effect of an issue gets a minor tweak, while "side effects" are huge and not at all clued from the text of the issue.

[Greater Hunnia]

161:3 makes wealth gap bigger, decreases income equality, that can't be right.

[Infidel State]

Who is doing the shooting? The wording and effect line of the option give the impression that it's a government-organized cull, not letting civilians do their own shooting

The issue stats repeal any ban on public access to guns. So it's citizens doing the shooting. Need input from Editors as to whether this should be the case.

:$ If citizens are shooting the animals, then you can't really call it a "cull" (which means a killing a population of a selected species...) A slaughter would be more in place... And it'd be nice if the effect line mentioned citizens are doing said slaughter.

[[violet]]

Dilemma 37. Option 1 selected.

Talking point: The government snoops on private internet connections.
Reclassification: -----------'s Civil Rights rose from Few to Some.
Trends: Civil Rights +10.8%

That doesn't look "residual".

I know this is only a game, but, do you think you could make the simulator behave like a simulator with pretend data?

This issue choice affects two types of personal freedom, censorship and privacy, in opposite ways. Which one moves the most, and therefore whether Civil Rights go up or down, depends on how much you had of each beforehand.

[[violet]]

#127.2 Aging concerns...
[...]
As expected: Welfare 3,320.63 → 3,379.81 +1.8%, Public Healthcare 2,459.72 → 2,365.87 -3.8%

But WTF?!: Average Income of Poor 213,968.07 → 157,667.49 -26.3%, Wealth Gaps 1.40 → 2.47 +76.4%, Crime 8.28 → 11.88 +43.5%, Taxation 17.11 → 15.18 -11.3%

Wealth Gaps is strongly influenced by economic wage freedom. Before answering this issue, there was no wage freedom at all in your nation, meaning your government effectively set everyone's income. The issue choice returned you strongly to a regular market economy for wages... which does seem excessive at first glance, based on the text, and I'll raise it with the Editors.

[Wine-loving Chimps]

I just did the issue "Get teens out of MyFace" and picked option 2 (the Luke Zuckermann option) and yet got no effects at all on m Information Technology Industry. I was trying to raise this industry yet here see that an option about computers, favoring computers... doesn't add anything to that industry?

[Almonaster Nuevo]

#127.2 Aging concerns...
[...]
As expected: Welfare 3,320.63 → 3,379.81 +1.8%, Public Healthcare 2,459.72 → 2,365.87 -3.8%

But WTF?!: Average Income of Poor 213,968.07 → 157,667.49 -26.3%, Wealth Gaps 1.40 → 2.47 +76.4%, Crime 8.28 → 11.88 +43.5%, Taxation 17.11 → 15.18 -11.3%

Wealth Gaps is strongly influenced by economic wage freedom. Before answering this issue, there was no wage freedom at all in your nation, meaning your government effectively set everyone's income. The issue choice returned you strongly to a regular market economy for wages... which does seem excessive at first glance, based on the text, and I'll raise it with the Editors.

OK, thanks [v]

[[violet]]

I just did the issue "Get teens out of MyFace" and picked option 2 (the Luke Zuckermann option) and yet got no effects at all on m Information Technology Industry. I was trying to raise this industry yet here see that an option about computers, favoring computers... doesn't add anything to that industry?

Mmm, agreed, should be a little IT bump.

Edit: It now has one.

[Concordant Opposition]

Dilemma 37. Option 1 selected.

Talking point: The government snoops on private internet connections.
Reclassification: -----------'s Civil Rights rose from Few to Some.
Trends: Civil Rights +10.8%

That doesn't look "residual".

I know this is only a game, but, do you think you could make the simulator behave like a simulator with pretend data?

This issue choice affects two types of personal freedom, censorship and privacy, in opposite ways. Which one moves the most, and therefore whether Civil Rights go up or down, depends on how much you had of each beforehand.

So in this case civil rights are better because the government can monitor the citizen's internet usage.

I'm sorry, but that will never be correct.

[[violet]]

This issue choice affects two types of personal freedom, censorship and privacy, in opposite ways. Which one moves the most, and therefore whether Civil Rights go up or down, depends on how much you had of each beforehand.

So in this case civil rights are better because the government can monitor the citizen's internet usage.

I'm sorry, but that will never be correct.

It's correct when the change in censorship is greater than the change in privacy. For example, a nation that monitors its citizens and censors what they can view: This choice wouldn't alter privacy rights but would reduce censorship, resulting in a Civil Rights gain.

[Atomic Utopia]

I just answered #542 with option number two, and while it promises !SCIENCE! It did nothing with regards to my scientific advancement.

[Phydios]

I just answered #542 with option number two, and while it promises !SCIENCE! It did nothing with regards to my scientific advancement.

As a statistic increases, it gets harder and harder to increase it further. For Scientific Advancement, you are #113 out of 171,311 nations. And when you get that high, increasing the stat further is very difficult.