Nation States seems to have a bias

[Caracasus]

Another one of these threads?

If you think the issues are biased, contribute your own, become an editor and correct for the discrepancies.

Quite unhelpful.

A player plays the game, and has comments on what they believe is happening. It does not mean that you can only provide feedback by becoming highly involved in the process of creating the game (rather than playing the game).

Of course, the feedback itself is vague (as has been mentioned) , so questions regarding that in order to get better feedback is welcome. But we should not set the expectation that the only way to be allowed criticism on the game is by becoming a creator.

Agreed. Though the origonal OP was a bit vague, I count at least 3 possible issue ideas in this discussion and more of an awareness of underlying bias in issues - though admittedly not a left/right wing one.

[Your country name can be here for 10 mil]

Guys, the way to fixing this would be to write 2 versions of all issues, one which is biased to leftism and one which is biased to the right.

Then, we make nations which have lefitst views get the left versions and nations with right-wing views get the right versions!

Problem solved! Please everyone!

[Your country name can be here for 10 mil]

Also, changing "intelligence" to "knowledge" would stop people from getting triggered, and would be more accurate.

Don't think that any amount of history or chemistry equations being hammered in your brain helps with directly increasing your IQ

[Singapore no2]

Guys, the way to fixing this would be to write 2 versions of all issues, one which is biased to leftism and one which is biased to the right.

Then, we make nations which have lefitst views get the left versions and nations with right-wing views get the right versions!

Problem solved! Please everyone!

The left and the right are very broad categories. A economically right-wing person may still be left-wing in terms of civil rights, and centre in terms of political freedoms.

[Pencil Sharpeners 2]

There certainly is an issue while choosing not to subsidize food production automatically puts your Economy score at 0.

I presume you're referring to option 3 of "Five Year Plans And New Deals", which I'm pretty sure was a bug that was fixed a long time ago (though that option still can decrease your economy).

[Phoenicaea]

there are biases, nevertheless it seems to me them to be, say, "equilibrated". without biases, you couldn t do original things, so you have to value the overall and accept it as a challenge.
Simply, when I find a bias "against" me it s fine, since the author has also bias in favour of me in some of following issues.

Most important, shown biases are a basis for thinking, which is an aim.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

There certainly is an issue while choosing not to subsidize food production automatically puts your Economy score at 0.

Seems pretty unlikely to me, as the game engine just isn't set up that way.

Can you give me an issue number to look into?

Also seems a bit off topic. Is business subsidisation a right or left wing thing?

[Merconitonitopia]

Seems pretty unlikely to me, as the game engine just isn't set up that way.

Can you give me an issue number to look into?

Also seems a bit off topic. Is business subsidisation a right or left wing thing?

#443: Five Year Plans And New Deals
Although I believe they solved that issue being horribly broken. Not too sure, though.

[Zawikhiztan]

Yes, many issues have left wing bias, in my opinion

That is very true ( my flag is communist but my country is a Right-wing Democratic Republic

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Seems pretty unlikely to me, as the game engine just isn't set up that way.

Can you give me an issue number to look into?

Also seems a bit off topic. Is business subsidisation a right or left wing thing?

#443: Five Year Plans And New Deals
Although I believe they solved that issue being horribly broken. Not too sure, though.

Option 3, then?

Yes, it's still quite heavy-handed, but it certainly doesn't set Economy scores to 0. In fact, it's very strongly pro-market freedom, even while being anti-subsidisation, and that combination of factors means that it's effect varies HUGELY according to the nation that selects it.

Definitely one for review, and will be looking the stats of that one when I get to it on Project: Modernise.

(which is basically me and the team going through every issue from #1 onwards, and trying to modernise the stats to bring them into line with the more rigorous, game system aware and evidence-based approach we demand of newer issues. So far we're still in single figures, so may be some time before we get to 443...)

[Merconitonitopia]

Option 3, then?

Yes, it's still quite heavy-handed, but it certainly doesn't set Economy scores to 0. In fact, it's very strongly pro-market freedom, even while being anti-subsidisation, and that combination of factors means that it's effect varies HUGELY according to the nation that selects it.

Definitely one for review, and will be looking the stats of that one when I get to it on Project: Modernise.

(which is basically me and the team going through every issue from #1 onwards, and trying to modernise the stats to bring them into line with the more rigorous, game system aware and evidence-based approach we demand of newer issues. So far we're still in single figures, so may be some time before we get to 443...)

There was a case of someone's who's 100+ economy was set to 0 from that issue because they decided to cut subsidies to businesses which can't stay afloat on their own. They fixed it but it still cuts you down quite a lot, which is dumb as realistically this would increase economy as no subsidies to failing businesses = less drain on public funds (= more $$$ to go to profitable ventures) + competition allows for more competitive businesses to take hold. The game just assumes more subsidies = better and less = worse no matter what, not necessarily true at all in many cases.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

That last sentence is very true: there's a gap in the simulation showing the bad sides of taxation, and as a result there's no downside to government subsidising business. The benefits get simulated, and the only downside is that the stated tax rate increases.

Even as a socialist and left-wing economist, I can see that this is a nonsense. High income tax is not conducive to effective markets, and raising taxes inherently suppresses economic activity. The trick in business subsidisation is to ensure that you stimulate enough economic growth to make the government spend worthwhile: both left and right believe you can stimulate economic activity through helping business (the left through direct subsidisation, and the right through lower corporation tax, but the net result is the same - allocating societal wealth to business), but both recognise that that stimulus has a cost.

In NS, simply, spending has no cost. That's why we have so many nations with near 100% taxation whose stats make them out to be Utopian paradises.

But as you say, that's the nature of the simulation. I've spoken with admin about this flaw before, and discussed proposals to fix this, but they generally haven't been things that could practically be implemented.

Not everyone will agree, but I'd say that the underlying simulation itself has very strong biases in some of the game engine choices it makes. I don't think it's terrible (as I wouldn't dedicate hours each day of my life to a terrible game), but I think it definitely could use some improvement.

[Astaliah]

Has anyone else noticed a bias in a lot of the issues you encounter?

Any right-wing solution I pick to an issue lowers the intelligence. Any left-wing solution however makes the people of your nation significantly smarter.

Maybe so, but when one is creating a nation, those who choose left-wing opions always end up with a terrible economy, low civil rights etc. There is a bias, but just the other way around.

[Merconitonitopia]

aye, it seems as those there is no downside in sight to increasing taxes and government spending, meaning unless you're minmaxing hard or going for a certain stat layout there's no reason not to pump the government full of as much money as you can.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I really hope that one day the game is changed to have high taxation suppress the economy.

I'm not a programmer, so the technical barriers are hard for me to follow, but it'd be a wonderful thing to see. It'd completely change the way people answer issues, if government spending actually has consequence rather than just being an endless pot of gold.

Of course, it'd also annihilate the economy ratings of a bunch of nations that run off 100% taxation, but there's plenty of ways around it to allow a nation to be both high tax and Economy 100.

One caveat here though is that I raised the issue of the "tax exploit" about 2 years ago, and discussed it extensively around that time. The general conclusion was that this particular change to the simulation wasn't possible, even if lots of my other suggestions at the time were, and have been promised eventual implementation.

[Merconitonitopia]

Another thing is that, not only do they not weight you down, but public services seem to materialise out of nothing independent of how much you're making in the first place.
Example: Kindjal has extremely good welfare, education, healthcare, public transport, etc... and they have for a very long time. Yet, it wasn't until very recently that their economy grew past 0. Even when they have a 0/100 economy, their services were extremely good.

Where is this money coming from? They should be deep in poverty, yet the government magically creates goods and services out of thin air.
Seems like only the private sector is affected by scarcity. A capitalist country that poor would be severely impoverished and in utter ruins.

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

Yepp it is true it is Very left wing

Not quite.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Another thing is that, not only do they not weight you down, but public services seem to materialise out of nothing independent of how much you're making in the first place.
Example: Kindjal has extremely good welfare, education, healthcare, public transport, etc... and they have for a very long time. Yet, it wasn't until very recently that their economy grew past 0. Even when they have a 0/100 economy, their services were extremely good.

Where is this money coming from? They should be deep in poverty, yet the government magically creates goods and services out of thin air.
Seems like only the private sector is affected by scarcity. A capitalist country that poor would be severely impoverished and in utter ruins.

Totally true. Partially, this ties back to tax being inconsequential. But also, as you say, it assumes that the government retains purchasing power for services even when in reality their credit rating would have crashed, their currency would become valueless, and no-one would do anything for them because they'd have no means to pay the bill.

[Jutsa]

There certainly is an issue while choosing not to subsidize food production automatically puts your Economy score at 0.

Ah. Scary. Note to self: subsidize the food industry.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

As noted, it's not true that this happens. Please read the posts that follow.

[Jutsa]

Uh... to be honest I sort of posted that without realizing there was a second page.... whoops

[Your country name can be here for 10 mil]

lmao you people actually think it's a problem that there isn't any important resource management to keep track of beyond industry subsidition?

the only thing about issues that matter is raising the stats you want to rise, or if you are into it, roleplaying to the point of selecting options as the leader of the country would

this is all just one big idle roleplaying game, everything else is just flavour to add onto that aspect

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I don't know what I find most irritating here: the lack of capital letters, or the use of "you people", or the spelling of subsidisation. I mean, an American "z" in place of the third "s" can just about be tolerated, but this is too much...

You probably made some sort of point behind all that noise, but I really can't tell. It's like watching a soap opera with the sound turned off - all flapping mouth, and no content.

[Jutsa]

Spelling aside, I imagine his idea is that you play more as the leader and not the nation, so the stats are less important.

I find it false - I think the nation itself is just as important, and due to my lack of rp skills, I personally find it more important.
It may be fine if you're just into rp, but if you're into gp as well, it is actually quite problematic at times.

[Zaluzianskya]

I don't think there's really a bias. People just see what they want to see. There are plenty of issues that lean to the right.

• Tearing down a statue of a slave trader results in the effect line "All statues and paintings of dogs are being destroyed to avoid offending cat-lovers."
• Legalizing incest between consensual adults leads to people marrying their dogs.
• And I mean, do I have to point out all the gay rights issues where one of the speakers is flamboyant man wearing a feather boa? I'm not offended by it, it's all in good fun, but as long as we're talking about bias I might as well bring that up.
• Issue #66 used to have an option to recognize non-binary genders. This was actually removed in favor of adding a second right-wing option to the issue.