[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

by **Bears Armed** » Fri May 24, 2019 9:26 am

Merni wrote:I selected issue 156 option 3, with the following effect line:

"Heavy industry must go to expensive lengths to dispose of waste."

and, while my Environmental Beauty increased, my Eco-Friendliness actually decreased by about 200 points. This doesn't seem to make sense to me.

(issue answered on this nation, today, 24.5.2019)

The 'Eco-Friendliness' stat is a reflection of how much your government spends on protecting the environment, rather than of environmental quality: That option places a heavier share of the burden on industry, and thus reduces government expenditure.

(If you're careful all along about not taking decisions that would harm the environment then then it's actually possible to have a top 01% Environmental Beauty but a bottom 01% Eco-Friendliness...)

by **Ghost Land** » Sat May 25, 2019 4:02 pm

24.2 on this nation just decreased my arms industry; I'd expect an increase in military spending (which did happen, though very small, at 0.45%) to lead to more arms being produced, but it dropped. What gives?

by **The Free Joy State** » Sat May 25, 2019 7:07 pm

Ghost Land wrote:24.2 on this nation just decreased my arms industry; I'd expect an increase in military spending (which did happen, though very small, at 0.45%) to lead to more arms being produced, but it dropped. What gives?

The two aren't necessarily linked. There is a boost to the military, which is coded for and which you received (although, your defense forces are already in the top 1% of the world, which explains the size of the change -- the further you get to either extreme you get, the harder it is to push further and the smaller the changes get when you affirm the direction of your choices).

However, unless the option says otherwise, that doesn't guarantee that there'll be an investment in the arms manufacuring industry. More investment in the military could just mean more forces in smarter uniforms doing more parades.

by **Flanderlion** » Thu May 30, 2019 12:53 am

Heya,
I just picked option 1 on #1119, legalising smoking in return for a giant bribe. Why did my corruption not increase? I know I have high corruption, but surely selling my nations health (down over 40%) in return for a bribe would at least slightly increase it?

'Oh, who are you kidding: powerful tobacco interests, wheelbarrows full of money in tow, have come to your office begging for the law to change.' and in the option I picked 'He carefully wipes away a single tear with a check for a million denarii, and discretely stuffs it into one of your pockets. “The economic stimulus and additional tax revenue of a complete lifting of tobacco restrictions should overcome any paltry health objections.”'

Effects:

by **Candlewhisper Archive** » Thu May 30, 2019 1:02 am

Your corruption did increase, but your nation is already so corrupt that the change was too small a percentage for the game to consider worth reporting. Something like a 0.04% increase, by my reckoning.

As the world's 30th most corrupt nation, you're not going to see the positive changes reported very often even with "more stats" active - the game has to have a minimum magnitude threshold below which it won't report changes, for practical reasons. If you regularly consult your stat graphs, however, you'll see the raw figure increasing.

by **Flanderlion** » Thu May 30, 2019 1:09 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Your corruption did increase, but your nation is already so corrupt that the change was too small a percentage for the game to consider worth reporting. Something like a 0.04% increase, by my reckoning.

As the world's 30th most corrupt nation, you're not going to see the positive changes reported very often even with "more stats" active - the game has to have a minimum magnitude threshold below which it won't report changes, for practical reasons. If you regularly consult your stat graphs, however, you'll see the raw figure increasing.

Sweet - so I didn't sacrifice my health for nothing. I agonised a bit over that issue, on one hand I'm pretty anti-smoking irl, but eventually my nations interests won out. Thanks for the quick reply.

by **Emazia** » Thu May 30, 2019 4:42 pm

Dilemma 456, Option 2. Basically, ban freeganism. So why did my income equality increase? Is it for the same reason that it did last time?

by **Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners** » Thu May 30, 2019 5:17 pm

Emazia wrote:Dilemma 456, Option 2. Basically, ban freeganism. So why did my income equality increase? Is it for the same reason that it did last time?

Income equality looks like it decreased, from 2.19 to 2.14. Average income of poor also appears to have gone down, and average income of rich went up.

Presumably, you also mean issue #546.

by **The Free Joy State** » Thu May 30, 2019 8:23 pm

Emazia wrote:Dilemma 456, Option 2. Basically, ban freeganism. So why did my income equality increase? Is it for the same reason that it did last time?

Issue 546 "Dumpster Diving Divides Denizens".

And, yes, the small rise in income equality from 2.11 to 2.14 is due to the same reason as before: it is a secondary stat that interacts differently depending on the nation, and there are a number of hidden backstage stats that influence it and which are present here.

I wouldn't worry too much about small changes in income equality, though please feel free to check it out if a change is large and alarming.

However, if you have not yet done so, I would recommend you go to your settings and turn on "Show More Stats", which will show you the raw numbers and not percentage changes.

by **Merni** » Thu May 30, 2019 10:13 pm

I selected issue 216 option 3, which explicity rules out using eminent domain for private industry, but I got the banner "Conference: partner with private industry".
(The effect line was "The government seizes private property for the 'good of the people'")
Did I misclick, or is there something wrong here?

by **The Free Joy State** » Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Merni wrote:I selected issue 216 option 3, which explicity rules out using eminent domain for private industry, but I got the banner "Conference: partner with private industry".
(The effect line was "The government seizes private property for the 'good of the people'")
Did I misclick, or is there something wrong here?

Neither.

That is the correct effect line for that option.

Banners are automatically assigned to your nation, by the game, when certain hidden stats meet a certain level (which varies depending on the banner). They are not coded by editors, but by admin. When you answered that issue, due to a combination of factors, the related stat met the assigned threshhold, which is not something that could have been prevented.

The stats assigned to that issue are correct and the issue is working as intended.

by **Woryand** » Fri May 31, 2019 4:00 pm

Today, I (on Woryand) selected #147 option 6, and it increased my tax rate. Shouldn’t this decrease it, not increase it?

EDIT: I do have bottom 1% taxation, but I still don’t get how this would increase my tax rate by .03 percentage points.

by **Father Rydzyk** » Fri May 31, 2019 5:47 pm

OK, now this is questionable.
I received issue #56 and chose option 3, which is essentially rounding up poets and executing them for fun. It sure did cause my culture to drop and nuked the book publishing industry to half its size, but how do you explain:

my public education going up a bit (892.51 → 898.77, +0.70%) (could be a random shift but sounds weird for this one particular case)
primitiveness going down (105.88 → 102.52, -3.2%)? The proposal was made by, quote unquote, Chairperson Emeritus of the Troglodyte Coalition.

Is the case that my country is so primitive that forming a social structure to execute the few poets living there is and making a show of it actually requires a novel, complex form of social organization?

Nation: The Holy Empire of Father Rydzyk
Time: around 2:30 AM, UTC+2, June 1. 2019 (about 15 minutes ago)
Issue No. 56: "Give Us Money!" Quoth The Poet
Option: 3

by **The Free Joy State** » Fri May 31, 2019 6:21 pm

Woryand wrote:Today, I (on Woryand) selected #147 option 6, and it increased my tax rate. Shouldn’t this decrease it, not increase it?

EDIT: I do have bottom 1% taxation, but I still don’t get how this would increase my tax rate by .03 percentage points.

Taxation is something of a flaw in our simulation, in that it only represents income tax.

This is explained in more detail in our OP, under "Why didn't tax / unemployment / black market do what I expected it to?".

But, the issue is working as intended.

Father Rydzyk wrote:OK, now this is questionable.
I received issue #56 and chose option 3, which is essentially rounding up poets and executing them for fun. It sure did cause my culture to drop and nuked the book publishing industry to half its size, but how do you explain:
my public education going up a bit (892.51 → 898.77, +0.70%) (could be a random shift but sounds weird for this one particular case)
primitiveness going down (105.88 → 102.52, -3.2%)? The proposal was made by, quote unquote, Chairperson Emeritus of the Troglodyte Coalition.
Is the case that my country is so primitive that forming a social structure to execute the few poets living there is and making a show of it actually requires a novel, complex form of social organization?

Nation: The Holy Empire of Father Rydzyk
Time: around 2:30 AM, UTC+2, June 1. 2019 (about 15 minutes ago)
Issue No. 56: "Give Us Money!" Quoth The Poet
Option: 3

I can see why that's happening. I've altered a bit of code on that option. It should work differently now.

by **Trotterdam** » Fri May 31, 2019 8:38 pm

Father Rydzyk wrote:Is the case that my country is so primitive that forming a social structure to execute the few poets living there is and making a show of it actually requires a novel, complex form of social organization?

I've noticed that Culture appears to be intrinsically linked to Primitiveness by the game model, so issues that affect Culture almost always also affect Primitiveness in the same direction (unless the issue is explicitly coded with other factors to counterbalance the effect). This is perhaps based on the idea that culture encourages people to use retro technology for aesthetic reasons even when more advanced options are available, or perhaps that culture promotes "wasting" time on fanciful myths and fairy tales rather than practical facts. I'm not sure what the admins' reasoning is.

Notably, Culture is so far the only stat I've definitely identified to be linked to Primitiveness that does [n]not[/i] cause a concomitant inverse effect on Scientific Advancement.

by **Father Rydzyk** » Sat Jun 01, 2019 10:35 pm

Another bizarre one.
Just now, Father Rydzyk, issue 810, option 2.
What I wanted to do: increase military discipline.
Result: The nation is famous for bravely sending wave after wave of its soldiers until the enemy runs out of bullets.
and... my citizens are becoming more obese! Obesity Rate 14.43 → 15.17, +5.1%.
How on Earth? I would expect that strong military discipline would discourage soldiers, and society in general, from pigging out.
Is it because all of my slim & buff soldiers are falling on the battlefield, so that the nation's overall obesity rate increases?

by **The Free Joy State** » Sat Jun 01, 2019 10:39 pm

Father Rydzyk wrote:Another bizarre one.
Just now, Father Rydzyk, issue 810, option 2.
What I wanted to do: increase military discipline.
Result: The nation is famous for bravely sending wave after wave of its soldiers until the enemy runs out of bullets.
and... my citizens are becoming more obese! Obesity Rate 14.43 → 15.17, +5.1%.
How on Earth? I would expect that strong military discipline would discourage soldiers, and society in general, from pigging out.
Is it because all of my slim & buff soldiers are falling on the battlefield, so that the nation's overall obesity rate increases?

This occured because obesity is a secondary stat -- meaning that it is entirely derived from primary hidden stats that are coded into the issue, playing off against each other and your nation (and not coded by editors). This can lead to some of the secondary stats being somewhat unpredictable.

The stats coded into this option are correct, and the issue is working as intended.

by **Iskadar Tusdeta** » Sun Jun 02, 2019 12:59 pm

Why did issue #895 (Stop Training and Start Coaching) not increase my Mining industry when I selected option #2? Isn't mining access one of the fundamental reasons why a nation might choose to run rails to every faintly inhabited corner of itself?

by **The Free Joy State** » Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:01 pm

Iskadar Tusdeta wrote:Why did issue #895 (Stop Training and Start Coaching) not increase my Mining industry when I selected option #2? Isn't mining access one of the fundamental reasons why a nation might choose to run rails to every faintly inhabited corner of itself?

Unless an industry is specifically mentioned in the option, you should not expect a rise.

Issue working as intended.

by **BeatsMe** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:36 am

dilemma=49
Diving for [Name of Currency]
I Enacted choice that results with “The government seizes all major gold finds.”
Problem:
The wording of choices let person (me) believe that situation is that new source of wealth is discovered (gold). The choice is between who will own this wealth: either lucky private citizens or government or wealth will remain untapped, but we will save the environment.
I choose that government owns wealth and don’t care about environment.
However the actual outcome is extremely small decrease in Environment
568.93 → 567.32 0.28%

And instead of somehow improving country income we have drop in all economic qualities:
Average Income 65,498.81 → 63,540.01 3.0%
Economic Output 50,172,000,000,000 → 48,672,000,000,000 3.0%
Economy 53.78 → 50.67 5.8%
Employment 66.45 → 66.08 0.56%

by **Candlewhisper Archive** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:06 am

BeatsMe wrote:dilemma=49
Diving for [Name of Currency]
I Enacted choice that results with “The government seizes all major gold finds.”
Problem:
The wording of choices let person (me) believe that situation is that new source of wealth is discovered (gold). The choice is between who will own this wealth: either lucky private citizens or government or wealth will remain untapped, but we will save the environment.
I choose that government owns wealth and don’t care about environment.
However the actual outcome is extremely small decrease in Environment
568.93 → 567.32 0.28%

And instead of somehow improving country income we have drop in all economic qualities:
Average Income 65,498.81 → 63,540.01 3.0%
Economic Output 50,172,000,000,000 → 48,672,000,000,000 3.0%
Economy 53.78 → 50.67 5.8%
Employment 66.45 → 66.08 0.56%

The worsening of the environment is as expected, as you're still engaging in mining.

The economic outcomes are complex. On the one hand, you're increasing mining activity to some degree. On the other, you're seizing private property, which is a disincentive for private economic activity. It's a complex sim, but in your case, the net effect was that the decision was bad for your economy. This is not always going to be the case with all nations.

by **BeatsMe** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:58 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:
BeatsMe wrote:dilemma=49
Diving for [Name of Currency]
I Enacted choice that results with “The government seizes all major gold finds.”
Problem:
The wording of choices let person (me) believe that situation is that new source of wealth is discovered (gold). The choice is between who will own this wealth: either lucky private citizens or government or wealth will remain untapped, but we will save the environment.
I choose that government owns wealth and don’t care about environment.
However the actual outcome is extremely small decrease in Environment
568.93 → 567.32 0.28%

And instead of somehow improving country income we have drop in all economic qualities:
Average Income 65,498.81 → 63,540.01 3.0%
Economic Output 50,172,000,000,000 → 48,672,000,000,000 3.0%
Economy 53.78 → 50.67 5.8%
Employment 66.45 → 66.08 0.56%

The worsening of the environment is as expected, as you're still engaging in mining.

The economic outcomes are complex. On the one hand, you're increasing mining activity to some degree. On the other, you're seizing private property, which is a disincentive for private economic activity. It's a complex sim, but in your case, the net effect was that the decision was bad for your economy. This is not always going to be the case with all nations.

The problem is if wording is correct then environment should worsen much more, but economy should improve or at least not change. I am not "increasing mining to degree", I literary starting using vast new resource. It is new created wealth, why should economy decline? Or same thing worded differently: i can't imagine real world example where starting to use large/rich new natural resource would decrease the economy, no matter if this resource is extracted by government or private citizens.
And note, there is no seizing of private property, there were specific wording that the gold was found on "government property"- it was stated specifically. The choice (as wording goes) is only about does the government should allow private citizens who made the discovery to get the money (effectively privatizing the property), The choice was not that something belonging to private citizens is nationalized.

by **The Free Joy State** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:05 am

BeatsMe wrote:
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:
The worsening of the environment is as expected, as you're still engaging in mining.

The economic outcomes are complex. On the one hand, you're increasing mining activity to some degree. On the other, you're seizing private property, which is a disincentive for private economic activity. It's a complex sim, but in your case, the net effect was that the decision was bad for your economy. This is not always going to be the case with all nations.

The problem is if wording is correct then environment should worsen much more, but economy should improve or at least not change. I am not "increasing mining to degree", I literary starting using vast new resource. It is new created wealth, why should economy decline? Or same thing worded differently: i can't imagine real world example where starting to use large/rich new natural resource would decrease the economy, no matter if this resource is extracted by government or private citizens.

As CWA explained, it's the way that the economy works. We don't have one button to make your economy rise.

The factors you highlighted are secondary -- they respond to the stats coded into them and to your own stats to produce the output. This means they can be unpredictable anyway. In this option, it is complicated by the playing off of different factors within the economy (which, in your hidden stats are already weighted differently due to the way you've previously answered issues).

Where you begin, when you answer, will impact where you end. Another nation would have gotten a rise in their economy.

If you have not yet done so, I suggest you read the OP, especially under: "Why did my civil rights / political freedom / economy move the wrong way?"

EDIT: And the option is quite explicit about taking the money from private citizens:

@@RANDOMNAME@@, a cabinet member, would like the government to seize the deposit. "This is an excellent time to boost @@NAME@@'s economy and increase our foreign trade with other countries! Who cares about the people that discovered the deposit? They've done their country a great favor and should let us have the money!"

by **BeatsMe** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 5:47 am

Definitely don’t want to argue or press that something has to be changed

I am just noting that even the text you quote is explicit in saying
“that economy should boost and foreign trade should increase”
And in my humble opinion the quoted text merely says:
“that government will use it” and “that people have only discovered it”

+ second option

2.Billy Rifkin, a civil rights activist, vehemently disagrees. "The deposit was found by private citizens and it should be their choice of what to do with the gold. If the government goes around stealing what is rightfully ours, then I shudder to think I live in such a corrupt country. These people discovered the gold, it's now their time to get rich! Nevermind the fact they were diving in a lake on government property!"

The second option explicitly states that “Nevermind the fact they they were diving in a lake on government property”
In my humble opinion The "stealing" is obviously about the fact that the people are not compensated for finding. Stealing is not about that they own the property in question. I truly don't see how someone can misread this text as "nationalizing" property.

But if it is ok with whomever wrote the text, then it is ok with me. Probably i am misreading, After all this is just a text base "game" .. and you don't argue with "developers".
And definitely no need to tell generic things like "that everyone works differently", if this doesn't help to improve the game .. then sorry for wasting your time.

I hope I didn't offend in any way ..
---
One more thing to add: in real life if I find oil on land that belongs to you. No one (including you) would not even consider compensating me for finding anything, not even thanks.
About government land the issue may be more complicated in some countries, because in theory government land belongs to the people. And in theory the laws in your country may be different.. but..

by **The Free Joy State** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:22 am

BeatsMe wrote:Definitely don’t want to argue or press that something has to be changed

Okay.

The answers you have received from two different editors are the only ones available for your query; stats do respond differently with different nations, if they didn't, the simulation would be less interesting.

Please consider your query closed.

[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

Who is online