[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

[Trotterdam]

Capital cities don't sound like a great place to practice agriculture.

[He Qixin]

Capital cities don't sound like a great place to practice agriculture.

And manufacturing too?

[Caracasus]

Capital cities don't sound like a great place to practice agriculture.

And manufacturing too?

Looks like you might be seeing a shift in your nation's economy from manufacturing and agriculture to retail and other service industries. Will take a look later.

[He Qixin 2]

And manufacturing too?

Looks like you might be seeing a shift in your nation's economy from manufacturing and agriculture to retail and other service industries. Will take a look later.

Probably, but thanks for the reply though!

[Anexora]

This morning I found an issue (pun not intended) regarding the "No Immigration" policy not having being granted on Issue #35 after selecting Option 2.

My source for this comes from the NSIndex Issue page and me having passed Option 2 about one hour ago.


If the issue itself has been reworked since or my source is declared unreliable I sincerely apologize for taking up your time.

Sources :
NSIndex Policies - https://nsindex.net/wiki/Policies
Current Anexora Policies - https://www.nationstates.net/nation=ane ... l=policies
NSIndex Issue 35 - https://nsindex.net/wiki/NationStates_Issue_No._35

[Trotterdam]

This morning I found an issue (pun not intended) regarding the "No Immigration" policy not having being granted on Issue #35 after selecting Option 2.

You're not banning all immigrants, only refugees.

People who have time to file out the proper paperwork before they have to pack up and leave their old homes, and who can demonstrate they meet whatever criteria your nation sets for "productive citizens", are still allowed in.

[Dwarfpolis]

I picked the third option in the Colosseum issue (putting criminals to combat) and crime rates increased and compliance decreased? Though that might be due to the abolition of the jail system.

Changing your penalty policy to a capital one logically shouldn't raise crimes unless the suicidal population goes on a mugging spree

[Trotterdam]

Your justice system is now more interested in putting on a good show than in catching criminals efficiently. Also, some criminals might win their freedom by winning enough gladiatorial matches, in which case, congratulations, you now have a bunch of known criminals who are also really good at violence running loose.

Additionally, the widespread consumption of violent entertainment had made your citizens desensitized to violence and accustomed to taking pleasure in others' suffering, making them more likely to turn to crime.

[Bears Armed]

I picked the third option in the Colosseum issue (putting criminals to combat) and crime rates increased and compliance decreased? Though that might be due to the abolition of the jail system.

Changing your penalty policy to a capital one logically shouldn't raise crimes unless the suicidal population goes on a mugging spree

That's crime' as the issue editors see it, rather than as your nation does... and they probably count deaths in the arena as murder.
This nation's 'crime' rate went up when I legalised dueling, and that was the explanation they gave me then, anyway...

[Dwarfpolis]

Your justice system is now more interested in putting on a good show than in catching criminals efficiently. Also, some criminals might win their freedom by winning enough gladiatorial matches, in which case, congratulations, you now have a bunch of known criminals who are also really good at violence running loose.

Additionally, the widespread consumption of violent entertainment had made your citizens desensitized to violence and accustomed to taking pleasure in others' suffering, making them more likely to turn to crime.

Your explanation would have been far less "DURRRRRRRRR" if you said it was just the policy I got.

[Caracasus]

Please keep this thread civil.

[Conservative-Europe]

I picked option 1 to issue 589, and my public transportation increased, from supporting my space program???

[Jutsa]

Well... I mean, it's more like "private transport", at least until we start living on Mars.
Plus, you probably need more public transport if you wanna transport parts for spaceships around.

(Tbh I'm not actually sure, but there's some narrative you can come up with until someone has a more definite answer)

[Reorganisieren Reichregierung]

Issue 16, option 2

Allowing corporations to fire strikers increases income equality.

[The Free Joy State]

Issue 16, option 2

Allowing corporations to fire strikers increases income equality.

This is a secondary effect. The end result here depends on where your income equality levels began. I tested this on one of my puppets (one with especially high levels of income equality) and got a significant decrease.

[Triangle And Square]

This happened a long time ago, on He Qixin.

Once, I was ranked in the top 5% in the world for the largest gambling industry. However, after I outlawed gambling, the Kelly Criterion or whatever that gambling index plunged immediately to the negatives. How come that much?

[Caracasus]

This happened a long time ago, on He Qixin.

Once, I was ranked in the top 5% in the world for the largest gambling industry. However, after I outlawed gambling, the Kelly Criterion or whatever that gambling index plunged immediately to the negatives. How come that much?

You outlawed gambling. The Kelly Criterion measures your gambling industry. Because you outlawed gambling, your gambling industry was made illegal.

[Triangle And Square]

There is absolutely nothing I can do to lower my Corruption. Everything I take to lower it drops it by less than ten points or so, but everything that raises it inceases it by twice that, at minimum!

-but the last straw came tonight. I finally got the "Government Saturated In Corruption" Issue, and I chose the most extreme solution: hang all politicians who exhibit corruption.

Why are there so many Issues that involve reducing Corruption that INCREASE Corruption when you take them?! In "Mayors Behaving Badly", if you hold mayors to fanatically strict codes of ethics, your corruption rises there, too.

Corruption cannot be reduced by significant amounts per Issue, but some Issues can double it. Why is this so unfair to those of us who DON'T want corrupt states?

That bug has been fixed. And yes, there ARE issues that can reduce corruption significantly. For example, by outlawing corporate lobbying (answering 234.1). I once was like the top 87% for least corrupt governments, but choosing that option boosted me up to the top 74% for least corrupt governments (at least at the time I answered issue 234.1).

It still depends on what rank your nation falls into, however. You are currently in the top 96% for least corrupt governments, so answering 234.1 would show a more significant increase to your integrity, but still a lot less to corruption because you (sort of) have pursued a corrupt government by being at the top 5% of the world for most corrupt governments at the time this post was made. Anyway, good luck! Hopefully you'll get issue 234 soon, and be sure to answer option 1 of that issue!

My Corruption went UP. Worse yet, my Political Freedoms tanked.

Still, why did you choose 229.1? That indeed is a bit extreme. Remember, options that deal with increasing integrity may end up increasing corruption because of it limiting political freedom too much. He Qixin 2 (which is another puppet that I had) just encountered the same issue but choose the second option instead, and guess what? Integrity went UP and my corruption tanked.

Don't worry, though. The bug has been fixed such that political freedom and corruption would be mostly affected in a similar direction, should just one of them be affected by answering an option of an issue. This means that if your political freedom decrease, your corruption would decrease too, and vice versa. Happy? Which also means that you now have to have low political freedom for low corruption.*

As to why corruption increased for both issues your mentioned, however, it was because you are restricting the politicians' right to say immoral speeches, which is a clear restriction of political freedom. Back then (and even until now), the game has interpreted less political freedom with higher corruption. So corruption increases. Not sure if it would now though, as only some issues and options have been reversed for that effect.

*If you see any counterexamples, that is because the nations were affected by the bug before the bug was removed. Also it depends on how your nation was set up before the beta was implemented.

[He Qixin]

Issue 721 option 2 affected Weather (negatively) for some reason.

Weather is a funny census category. If we are being realistic, why just about any issue, except maybe something about cloud seeding, should effect the weather is a mystery to me. Anyway, the answer here, as it always is with weather, is secondary effects. On a side note, the weather algorithm is probably the easiest in the game to figure out and consistently max/min, so if you really care, start paying attention to what other categories consistently move and in which direction.

I have 104 metres (I speak British English, BTW) of sunlight. Uhh.. what does that mean... uh... my nation receives only... uh... 104 metres of sunlight? That's so unrealistic and vague at the same time

[Trotterdam]

Weather is a funny census category. If we are being realistic, why just about any issue, except maybe something about cloud seeding, should effect the weather is a mystery to me. Anyway, the answer here, as it always is with weather, is secondary effects. On a side note, the weather algorithm is probably the easiest in the game to figure out and consistently max/min, so if you really care, start paying attention to what other categories consistently move and in which direction.

I have 104 metres (I speak British English, BTW) of sunlight. Uhh.. what does that mean... uh... my nation receives only... uh... 104 metres of sunlight? That's so unrealistic and vague at the same time

Why are you responding to months-old posts?

[Dwarfpolis]

"the law is more interested in punishing crime than preventing it."

Social conservatism decrases???

The option you picked promises to preserve "the letter of the law, but freedom as well."

Protecting freedom will help to lower social conservatism.

I answered option 1 to issue 457 (the my rushless one) and stats like hdi and lifespan decreased for no reason indicated in the issue text or result. Please review the issue mechanics and give me back my damn hdi and lifespan stat

The issue is working as intended. Lifespan and the Human Development Index are secondary statistics, not directly affected by any one thing. However, in this issue, they are partially related to the destruction of a National Park to build Mr. Rump's manmade tourist trap. Testing this issue on a number of my puppets produced the exact same result.

As for your stats, we can't programme them back to where they were.

(Finally got on a platform to respond suitably)
The logic behind the results is pretty faultless but the result could have been anything more like "natives are being evicted from national reserves to clear way for national monuments" instead of "tourist s come to see this landmark" -50 lifespan.

Charmlessness also increased albeit building a destination, unless that stat is tied to environmental beauty.

[He Qixin 2]

I have 104 metres (I speak British English, BTW) of sunlight. Uhh.. what does that mean... uh... my nation receives only... uh... 104 metres of sunlight? That's so unrealistic and vague at the same time

Why are you responding to months-old posts?

that is against the rules? oh, sorry. Didn't know that.

[Dwarfpolis]

Just a heads up, I'm going to take a break from this thread for a while. Every now and then I have to remind myself that I'm under no obligation to put in work on this game, and that putting yourself up front and centre as someone who is offering to help means people just want to complain at you all the time.

It's not even slightly enjoyable working this thread, so I'm not entirely sure while I'm doing it.

Feel free to keep posting issue effects, but I'll leave it up to the community and the rest of the team to answer them. I'm not retiring for Got Issues or editing in any way, just choosing to leave this thread behind as it seems like a kind of worthless activity from my own point of view.

For sure, about 1 in 20 of the effects reported here leads to a worthwhile change being made, but most of them are covered by existing answers, so the community can field those. I'll leave it to trusted contributors and editors to let me know if something specific needs changing.

I don't think anybody would complain about a FAQ thread about the interactions of statsbetween themselves and issues

[Caracasus]

This thread is designed for people to report effects due to issues that are unusual, so that they can get feedback from the community regarding it.

So yes, replying to posts that are old and/or have already been resolved kind of clogs up the process.

I picked option 1 to issue 589, and my public transportation increased, from supporting my space program???

Increasing government spending often has knock on effects throughout departments. I imagine this is what you're seeing here. I will check this one backstage though.

(Finally got on a platform to respond suitably)
The logic behind the results is pretty faultless but the result could have been anything more like "natives are being evicted from national reserves to clear way for national monuments" instead of "tourist s come to see this landmark" -50 lifespan.

Charmlessness also increased albeit building a destination, unless that stat is tied to environmental beauty.

I don't really understand the point you are making here. Are you arguing that the effect line should be different?

Charmlessness would likely be a reflection of your nation's policies of kicking native tribes off of land they've used for generations to make way for tourist traps.

[Trotterdam]

that is against the rules? oh, sorry. Didn't know that.

My rule of hoof is that responding to old posts is only acceptable if what you have to say is sufficiently meaningful that it would have been worth making a new post for even if it hadn't been discussed previously (in which case quoting the old post is simply pointing out the context of "hey look, this has been discussed before" rather than the actual reason you're posting).