[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

[The Arihver]

I figured it was still talking of other countries i suppose. Still. I'd have preferred something more concrete about removing democracy or something

[Fad]

Just had yet another odd policy result...

I faced issue 121 (A Uniform Plan for @@NAME@@'s Students?), which presents options either for enforce school uniforms, or to let the students dress (or stay undressed) however they like.

I selected the latter option (option 2 or 2, for me), and simultaneously had my Nudity go up by 18.2% and the "Prudism" policy instated.

I feel like perhaps that was supposed to be a Prudism removal flag that go set backwards?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Just had yet another odd policy result...

I faced issue 121 (A Uniform Plan for @@NAME@@'s Students?), which presents options either for enforce school uniforms, or to let the students dress (or stay undressed) however they like.

I selected the latter option (option 2 or 2, for me), and simultaneously had my Nudity go up by 18.2% and the "Prudism" policy instated.

I feel like perhaps that was supposed to be a Prudism removal flag that go set backwards?

Huh. Happened exactly like you said.

The weird thing here is that both before AND after answering that issue you met the criteria to qualify for Prudism, but as you say, it only flagged for you after you made that pro-nudity decision.

My only thought is that as a pretty new nation, maybe the system hadn't check which policy flags you're eligible for, or something. Who knows?

Regardless never seen anything like this. Something weird going on here, will flag it backstage.

[Fad]

Thanks a bunch, CWA!

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Okay, we've wracked our brains, by which I mean a cleverer editor than me worked it out.

Essentially it's a known bug. There's invisible secret stats that don't exist in a nation till they're called upon for the first time, and the stat that Prudism depends upon is one of those. That stat came into existence for you because you chose an option that references that stat, and at point of generation, you qualified for Prudism, even though this was a pro-nudity option

Obviously that's somewhat problematic, but it has been flagged before a long time ago in a different context for a different doesn't-exist-till-it's-called-on stat, and the tech team is aware of the narrative inconsistencies this can create, but it's apparently not easy to fix.

For now, call that a known bug, and I'll update the OP to reflect that.

[James_xenoland]

I know the weather stat is weird and kind of random but.. I had a weather stat increase (in green) that went like this: "130.00 → -129.00 ^0.77%"

Is that normal?

[The Free Joy State]

I know the weather stat is weird and kind of random but.. I had a weather stat increase (in green) that went like this: "130.00 → -129.00 ^0.77%"

Is that normal?

While weather is a secondary stat related to several broad factors (both with the issues and your own nation), I can't tell you if this particular change is within the normal range without knowing the issue and option that gave you this result (the date, if not today, is also helpful).

[James_xenoland]

I know the weather stat is weird and kind of random but.. I had a weather stat increase (in green) that went like this: "130.00 → -129.00 ^0.77%"

Is that normal?

While weather is a secondary stat related to several broad factors (both with the issues and your own nation), I can't tell you if this particular change is within the normal range without knowing the issue and option that gave you this result (the date, if not today, is also helpful).

Oh ok, the only reason i didn't post everything is because i wanted to make sure it wasn't something normal.

Nation: James_xenoland
Time: about 46 minutes ago from this post.
Issue: #853 "Silence Is Golden"
Option: #3 "From the highest mountain to the deepest cave - one can always count on finding a good cell signal in James_xenoland."

[The Free Joy State]

While weather is a secondary stat related to several broad factors (both with the issues and your own nation), I can't tell you if this particular change is within the normal range without knowing the issue and option that gave you this result (the date, if not today, is also helpful).

Oh ok, the only reason i didn't post everything is because i wanted to make sure it wasn't something normal.

Nation: James_xenoland
Time: about 46 minutes ago from this post.
Issue: #853 "Silence Is Golden"
Option: #3 "From the highest mountain to the deepest cave - one can always count on finding a good cell signal in James_xenoland."

Yes, the effect that you've seen is normal and is related to the stats in the issue causing a secondary effect.

As an aside, weather is a pretty unpredictable stat that we can't influence directly (which has been suggested to be a comment about the unpredictability of weather), so I wouldn't worry too much about your weather changes.

[James_xenoland]

Oh ok, the only reason i didn't post everything is because i wanted to make sure it wasn't something normal.

Nation: James_xenoland
Time: about 46 minutes ago from this post.
Issue: #853 "Silence Is Golden"
Option: #3 "From the highest mountain to the deepest cave - one can always count on finding a good cell signal in James_xenoland."

Yes, the effect that you've seen is normal and is related to the stats in the issue causing a secondary effect.

As an aside, weather is a pretty unpredictable stat that we can't influence directly (which has been suggested to be a comment about the unpredictability of weather), so I wouldn't worry too much about your weather changes.

Ok thanks very much.. Was just caught off guard when i saw it listed as going up, but the stat went down. I knew that it was kind of random but didn't know it was random even that way. So i just wanted to make sure. lol

Thanks again.

[The Free Joy State]

Yes, the effect that you've seen is normal and is related to the stats in the issue causing a secondary effect.

As an aside, weather is a pretty unpredictable stat that we can't influence directly (which has been suggested to be a comment about the unpredictability of weather), so I wouldn't worry too much about your weather changes.

Ok thanks very much.. Was just caught off guard when i saw it listed as going up, but the stat went down. I knew that it was kind of random but didn't know it was random even that way. So i just wanted to make sure. lol

Thanks again.

No problem.

Just as an additional explanation, the stat rose from -130 to -129, so it did go up. Your weather is now slightly better than before.

[Frievolk]

Issue #193: "Robots Leaving Workers Jobless"
I chose option 2: ("Hey, I’ve got a job to keep up too, you know,” says Carter Gutierrez, a factory manager. “If I don’t think of new ways of keeping costs down, the investors will go elsewhere. It’s my neck on the line as much as anyone else’s, even if I do have much more money. Besides, it’s business, and no-one ought to be able to say who - or what - I can hire.”)

And in result, my employment stat was increased from 69.23 to 69.44
Bug or feature?

[The Free Joy State]

Issue #193: "Robots Leaving Workers Jobless"
I chose option 2: ("Hey, I’ve got a job to keep up too, you know,” says Carter Gutierrez, a factory manager. “If I don’t think of new ways of keeping costs down, the investors will go elsewhere. It’s my neck on the line as much as anyone else’s, even if I do have much more money. Besides, it’s business, and no-one ought to be able to say who - or what - I can hire.”)

And in result, my employment stat was increased from 69.23 to 69.44
Bug or feature?

Known bug, I'm afraid. There are a lot of stats that can impact employment, which means it sometimes doesn't behave as you'd expect.

Employment is programmed for a fall, but other economic changes (such as the investors alluded to) in the issue can mean employment may rise.

The OP explains the mechanism:

- Why didn't employment rise/fall when it said we were creating / destroying jobs?

Often, the described effect has taken place, but other changes to your economy could have affected employment elsewhere.
For example, if you create a load of artificial jobs to employ the homeless, you might also weaken your private sector economy through the public sector taking its market share in certain industries. Your economy might shrink, and your net employment could fall, even though you created the jobs you said you would.

[Frievolk]

Issue #193: "Robots Leaving Workers Jobless"
I chose option 2: ("Hey, I’ve got a job to keep up too, you know,” says Carter Gutierrez, a factory manager. “If I don’t think of new ways of keeping costs down, the investors will go elsewhere. It’s my neck on the line as much as anyone else’s, even if I do have much more money. Besides, it’s business, and no-one ought to be able to say who - or what - I can hire.”)

And in result, my employment stat was increased from 69.23 to 69.44
Bug or feature?

Known bug, I'm afraid. There are a lot of stats that can impact employment, which means it sometimes doesn't behave as you'd expect.

Employment is programmed for a fall, but other economic changes (such as the investors alluded to) in the issue can mean employment may rise.

The OP explains the mechanism:

- Why didn't employment rise/fall when it said we were creating / destroying jobs?

Often, the described effect has taken place, but other changes to your economy could have affected employment elsewhere.
For example, if you create a load of artificial jobs to employ the homeless, you might also weaken your private sector economy through the public sector taking its market share in certain industries. Your economy might shrink, and your net employment could fall, even though you created the jobs you said you would.

Ah, thanks.

New Question (this time, I just want to know the mentality behind this process:)
Issue #1093 That Smarts: "The clever boffins down in Human Resources have been experimenting with the cloning vats, and have realised that by tweaking DNA they can alter cognitive neurotransmitter levels, and create babies that are significantly more or less intelligent than the average."

I chose fallout no.1: "“Oh brave new nation, that has such wonders, innit?” asks Professor Oswald van Gogh, dancing maniacally around a laboratory filled with bubbling multicoloured liquids in complicated glassware. “Let’s use this technologiwotsit to make Frievolk the most cleverest place in the world. Sure, messing around like this might cause neurological cancers to get more commoner, and has had the side effect of making people less gooder at working together, but people need to get more brainsier, don’t they? Braaaaaaaains!”"

And as a result, My Civil Rights fell (not very much, roughly 0.66%), My Crimes rose (4.7%) but my Social Conservatism rose (3.1%).
I have to ask, why?

[The Free Joy State]

Known bug, I'm afraid. There are a lot of stats that can impact employment, which means it sometimes doesn't behave as you'd expect.

Employment is programmed for a fall, but other economic changes (such as the investors alluded to) in the issue can mean employment may rise.

The OP explains the mechanism:

- Why didn't employment rise/fall when it said we were creating / destroying jobs?

Often, the described effect has taken place, but other changes to your economy could have affected employment elsewhere.
For example, if you create a load of artificial jobs to employ the homeless, you might also weaken your private sector economy through the public sector taking its market share in certain industries. Your economy might shrink, and your net employment could fall, even though you created the jobs you said you would.

Ah, thanks.

New Question (this time, I just want to know the mentality behind this process:)
Issue #1093 That Smarts: "The clever boffins down in Human Resources have been experimenting with the cloning vats, and have realised that by tweaking DNA they can alter cognitive neurotransmitter levels, and create babies that are significantly more or less intelligent than the average."

I chose fallout no.1: "“Oh brave new nation, that has such wonders, innit?” asks Professor Oswald van Gogh, dancing maniacally around a laboratory filled with bubbling multicoloured liquids in complicated glassware. “Let’s use this technologiwotsit to make Frievolk the most cleverest place in the world. Sure, messing around like this might cause neurological cancers to get more commoner, and has had the side effect of making people less gooder at working together, but people need to get more brainsier, don’t they? Braaaaaaaains!”"

And as a result, My Civil Rights fell (not very much, roughly 0.66%), My Crimes rose (4.7%) but my Social Conservatism rose (3.1%).
I have to ask, why?

Civil rights fell due to the process of messing around with people's bodies and brains without their permission (not to mention putting them at undue risk of "neurological cancers") and restricting their freedom of development, if you like. Anytime you control your people, your civil rights will usually take a hit. Social Conservatism is a secondary stat tied to civil rights. The lower your civil rights, the higher your social conservatism and vice versa.

As for the crime, that is due to this line: "has had the side effect of making people less gooder at working together", which can be taken to mean that people may be more aggressive and engage in more low-level criminal acts.

[Austacia]

752.1 lowered economic freedom on this nation- what does this have to do with economic freedom?

-Fauxia

[The Free Joy State]

752.1 lowered economic freedom on this nation- what does this have to do with economic freedom?

-Fauxia

Because, as with the "Immortal Cells of Henrietta Lacks", the cells have been reproduced and sent to scientists across the world (which implies commerce, or -- minimally -- some kind of trade). Now they're not allowed to do that anymore, which puts a limit on the original lab's economic freedom.

Worth pointing out that the change it made was minimal, falling here from 67.43 to 67.00.

[Roman-Britannic Empire]

Issue 218, Roman-Britannic Empire

("Got two mommies?" I don't remember the exact name and it's kind of hard since backtracking results in NS complaining about an obsolete page)

I chose option 1 to enable adoption, but CR didn't go up.

Is the loss of religious freedom offsetting adoption rights resulting in no CR gain?

[Roman-Britannic Empire]

OK, sorry to beat a dead rug,

Issue 1095 (I think?), option 3 lowered Civil Rights even though I didn't even think this was a CR issue.

I don't remember all the details, but I think it was something to do with lawns? The local council wanted to force someone to mow the lawn in front of his house, but the house was his and the lawn was not. Option 1 was the man's opinion. Opion 2 forced the guy to mow anything in front of his house.

Option 3 was to make the land lot owned by the homeowner. Then suddenly, I got "grumpy old house owners demand that pedestrians get off their footpaths" Wait what? Did I cede the sidewalk to the homeowners? I can see that lowering CR, but since the option didn't say I was restricting pedestrians, that's an unfair CR trap.

If this is working as intended, let me know and I'd also like to know what all the options do to CR so I can do it right next time.

[The Free Joy State]

Issue 218, Roman-Britannic Empire

("Got two mommies?" I don't remember the exact name and it's kind of hard since backtracking results in NS complaining about an obsolete page)

I chose option 1 to enable adoption, but CR didn't go up.

Is the loss of religious freedom offsetting adoption rights resulting in no CR gain?

No, what happened here is that certain options, including this, can only boost your civil rights so far. As your civil rights were already better than that, you saw no change.

OK, sorry to beat a dead rug,

Issue 1095 (I think?), option 3 lowered Civil Rights even though I didn't even think this was a CR issue.

I don't remember all the details, but I think it was something to do with lawns? The local council wanted to force someone to mow the lawn in front of his house, but the house was his and the lawn was not. Option 1 was the man's opinion. Opion 2 forced the guy to mow anything in front of his house.

Option 3 was to make the land lot owned by the homeowner. Then suddenly, I got "grumpy old house owners demand that pedestrians get off their footpaths" Wait what? Did I cede the sidewalk to the homeowners? I can see that lowering CR, but since the option didn't say I was restricting pedestrians, that's an unfair CR trap.

If this is working as intended, let me know and I'd also like to know what all the options do to CR so I can do it right next time.

This option grants homeowners more rights, but it restricts the rights of councils and their employees to do necessary work on in front of properties at all, and may restrict walking (the option explicitly states: "Expand land rights out from the front door to the road."). This restricted right is very small (other nations may not see much, if any change), but because your rights were so good, you noticed a change.

I can't predict with certainty what each option will do. We can't give you the backstage code, and -- even if we could -- it wouldn't help. Options react differently with the individual stats of every nation, and may even react differently with the same nation at different times (depending what has happened to their stats in between times).

I can tell you that civil rights in NS work according to a specific metric: if people gain the right to do what they want -- to walk where they want, marry who they want or vote how they want -- generally you will gain civil rights (unless your civil rights are as high as they can already go).

But, the way it works really is unique for every nation.

[Lord Dominator]

85.1 on this nation decreased economic freedom despite being action taken against something described as illegal in the description?

[The Free Joy State]

85.1 on this nation decreased economic freedom despite being action taken against something described as illegal in the description?

The option makes it legal to alter people's private property -- their hard-drives -- to prevent file-sharing ("What we need to do is hack their computers and format their hard drives"). This interference with privately owned property limits people's property rights (which is economic). Also, by reinforcing and actually strengthening the ban on file-sharing, the nation is preventing people from enjoying music the way they want.

As you know, when you prevent people from doing what they want to do in NS, freedoms usually go down somewhere.

[Lord Dominator]

85.1 on this nation decreased economic freedom despite being action taken against something described as illegal in the description?

The option makes it legal to alter people's private property -- their hard-drives -- to prevent file-sharing ("What we need to do is hack their computers and format their hard drives"). This interference with privately owned property limits people's property rights (which is economic). Also, by reinforcing and actually strengthening the ban on file-sharing, the nation is preventing people from enjoying music the way they want.

As you know, when you prevent people from doing what they want to do in NS, freedoms usually go down somewhere.

Got it, that makes sense

[Merconitonitopia]

635.2 did not up my drug use. Seems a bit silly considering I only recently legalised smoking. Unless smoking doesn't count, which is even more silly.

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

635.2 did not up my drug use. Seems a bit silly considering I only recently legalised smoking. Unless smoking doesn't count, which is even more silly.

The backstage stat that the issue raises is already maximized.