Pencil Sharpeners 2 wrote:I answered 243.3 with this nation and unlocked my national religion. I've definitely answered that option before, so why has it unlocked my religion now?
It’s a new QOL change. Check out the posts above yours.
Advertisement
by Luna Amore » Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:13 pm
Pencil Sharpeners 2 wrote:I answered 243.3 with this nation and unlocked my national religion. I've definitely answered that option before, so why has it unlocked my religion now?
by Pencil Sharpeners 2 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:28 pm
by Jutsa » Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:30 pm
by Luna Amore » Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:33 pm
by Godular » Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:59 am
by Trotterdam » Sat Jun 16, 2018 4:06 am
by Totec Oulzipochtli » Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:40 am
by Trithereon » Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:26 pm
by The Free Joy State » Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:36 pm
Trithereon wrote:948.3 was a boost to military spending plus increased use of my military, but defense forces went down?
Totec Oulzipochtli wrote:Issue 135, option 2.
Is that supposed to lead to a tax cut? I got the impression that it's what the other option is about. I understand that my tax rate is high (or at least was before this issue). But a decrease of 16 percentage points by refusing to make a tax cut? Shouldn't a yes-or-no question have at least one 'no' answer?
by Land Without Shrimp » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:01 am
by Candlewhisper Archive » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:31 am
Land Without Shrimp wrote:Issue 641 - I picked Option 1 on this, really hoping to improve my abysmal health. Sadly, didn't see any affect on Health at all, which seems odd as the main instigator of this issue is the fact that pollutants are damaging kids' health. I checked Trotterdam's database and I see a 0 change is possible. Ok, but why? Is there a flag in my nation which is hindering health increases? (Having a lot of trouble EVER increasing my nation's health!!) Thanks, just wondering if something is "wrong" with my nation here.
by Land Without Shrimp » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:37 am
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Land Without Shrimp wrote:Issue 641 - I picked Option 1 on this, really hoping to improve my abysmal health. Sadly, didn't see any affect on Health at all, which seems odd as the main instigator of this issue is the fact that pollutants are damaging kids' health. I checked Trotterdam's database and I see a 0 change is possible. Ok, but why? Is there a flag in my nation which is hindering health increases? (Having a lot of trouble EVER increasing my nation's health!!) Thanks, just wondering if something is "wrong" with my nation here.
It's not that there's no increase, it's just more to do with whether the change is large enough to register. If you have particularly bad health or particularly good health, the change may be too small a percentage for the sim to consider it worth reporting.
by Samudera » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:15 am
The Federated Islands of Samudera
Proud member of The Western Isles
Factbook - Economy - Maps - News - Tourism - Isleball - Favourite Quote
by The Free Joy State » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:34 am
Samudera wrote:I just answered issue 1014 with option 2, but it seemed to significantly decreased my secularity and increased my religiousness instead. It also cancelled Atheism policy as well
It seems weird for me, is it an error or it is working as intended?
by Samudera » Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:23 am
The Free Joy State wrote:Samudera wrote:I just answered issue 1014 with option 2, but it seemed to significantly decreased my secularity and increased my religiousness instead. It also cancelled Atheism policy as well
It seems weird for me, is it an error or it is working as intended?
It's working as intended. #1014.2 gives your citizens the option to choose atheism, through rational (presumably irreligious) education rather than force. A nation without compulsory atheism would usually become more atheist, but a nation with compulsory atheism becomes -- conversely -- more accepting of religion.
Although you did receive a rise in religiousness, in raw numbers it was actually pretty small (from 2.04 to 2.53).
The Federated Islands of Samudera
Proud member of The Western Isles
Factbook - Economy - Maps - News - Tourism - Isleball - Favourite Quote
by Apabeossie » Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:16 am
Yahlia wrote:Surely everyone likes penguins? Who doesn't like penguins? I refuse to believe there are people out there who have an opinion of them worse than 'indifferent'
Einswenn wrote:For me it always was and is obscure why would people be so blind and shortsighted to allow themselves unsolicited hate. I’ve already posted this before: take care of your own life, live your own life, and don’t tell the others how they should live theirs
Dizgovzy wrote:Please go read a book or play outside instead of spending your youth behind a computer screen. Don’t waste your time on this site.
New Skandenivia wrote:AFAB ❌
AMAB ❌
Apab ✅
by Trotterdam » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:39 am
Eco-friendliness actually represents the amount of money your government is spending on the environment. So if your economy goes down (due to the banning of certain industries), and your government consequently is able to raise less tax money, it can't spend as much money on the environment anymore, even if it wants to.Apabeossie wrote:WHY DID THE FIRST OPTION IN Hackles raised over fur coats debate RESULT IN LOWER ECO-FRIENDLINESS?(Banning fur coats)
by Candlewhisper Archive » Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:51 am
Trotterdam wrote:Eco-friendliness actually represents the amount of money your government is spending on the environment. So if your economy goes down (due to the banning of certain industries), and your government consequently is able to raise less tax money, it can't spend as much money on the environment anymore, even if it wants to.Apabeossie wrote:WHY DID THE FIRST OPTION IN Hackles raised over fur coats debate RESULT IN LOWER ECO-FRIENDLINESS?(Banning fur coats)
Actual Environmental Beauty is not affected by either option on that issue at all. Probably this is because the first option establishes that most of the fur is coming from farming of domestic animals, which wouldn't hurt wild animals much. However, the second speaker does want to "stock rarer animals" (implicitly, ones that aren't commonly farmed and so have to be hunted in the wild), so that option not reducing Environmental Beauty is worth a review.
by Trotterdam » Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:10 am
Well, even if you're captive-breeding them, you'd still need to capture your initial breeding stock from the wild, which would deplete their population. Rather rapidly, if multiple farmers get the idea to try this at the same time, and keep in mind that you need a reasonably large breeding pool to be properly self-sufficient.Candlewhisper Archive wrote:I don't know if wild hunting is strongly implied enough to justify the stat change. You could just be importing them, or allowing breeding of pandas for their fur, or whatever.Trotterdam wrote:Actual Environmental Beauty is not affected by either option on that issue at all. Probably this is because the first option establishes that most of the fur is coming from farming of domestic animals, which wouldn't hurt wild animals much. However, the second speaker does want to "stock rarer animals" (implicitly, ones that aren't commonly farmed and so have to be hunted in the wild), so that option not reducing Environmental Beauty is worth a review.
by Candlewhisper Archive » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:22 am
by Frieden-und Freudenland » Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:24 am
by The Free Joy State » Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:41 am
Frieden-und Freudenland wrote:How come choosing Option 1 for #1014 did not increase my secularism?
https://prnt.sc/jycj3f
by Frieden-und Freudenland » Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:58 am
The Free Joy State wrote:Frieden-und Freudenland wrote:How come choosing Option 1 for #1014 did not increase my secularism?
https://prnt.sc/jycj3f
It's the old, "where you end depends on where you start" answer. I checked your backstage stats, and the basic answer is that your hidden stats -- which produce the score you can see -- were pretty high for secularism already. Once you get beyond a certain level on any stat, it sometimes takes a lot to move them further.
The lesson being, I suppose, that -- on NS -- once you go so far, you can start killing your citizens and the stats won't really notice the difference.
by The Free Joy State » Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:14 am
Frieden-und Freudenland wrote:The Free Joy State wrote:
It's the old, "where you end depends on where you start" answer. I checked your backstage stats, and the basic answer is that your hidden stats -- which produce the score you can see -- were pretty high for secularism already. Once you get beyond a certain level on any stat, it sometimes takes a lot to move them further.
The lesson being, I suppose, that -- on NS -- once you go so far, you can start killing your citizens and the stats won't really notice the difference.
I see. That's bad. So I instituted a capital punishment policy for basically nothing.
OK, thanks.
by Leutria » Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:46 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bhang Bhang Duc, The Ankhalic Vaspriot
Advertisement