[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

[Liberated American Provinces]

With one of my puppets, Lesser American Provinces, I chose the last option in Issue #238: "We Need a Few Good Men Who Like Men?" which gives the result of "the nation is constantly threatened with invasion but at least homosexuality in the military isn't a problem." This seemingly removes the nations's military, but the nation in question still has the policy of conscription. Is this supposed to be possible?

Edit: This was yesterday.

[The Free Joy State]

With one of my puppets, Lesser American Provinces, I chose the last option in Issue #238: "We Need a Few Good Men Who Like Men?" which gives the result of "the nation is constantly threatened with invasion but at least homosexuality in the military isn't a problem." This seemingly removes the nations's military, but the nation in question still has the policy of conscription. Is this supposed to be possible?

Edit: This was yesterday.

Taken this backstage for discussion.

[Liberated American Provinces]

With one of my puppets, Lesser American Provinces, I chose the last option in Issue #238: "We Need a Few Good Men Who Like Men?" which gives the result of "the nation is constantly threatened with invasion but at least homosexuality in the military isn't a problem." This seemingly removes the nations's military, but the nation in question still has the policy of conscription. Is this supposed to be possible?

Edit: This was yesterday.

Taken this backstage for discussion.

Epic

[Romang Oeste]

Option 4 of Issue No. 274:
"Duuude, marriage is like totally outdated", says a hippie, wearing a multi-colored robe and in need of a wash. "They're like, restrictive and they bring down the vibe, man. Why put people in a box? Ban marriage, and let us roam free and we can all be brothers and sisters! It's what's nature wanted!"

In Issue No. 274 I chose option 4 of the hippie and although I understand the decrease in Civil Rights and a bit the increase in Authoritarianism, I think it should not be as big as they are, I got Civil Rights down 8.7 % (~67 to ~61), and raised 12% the Authoritarianism (~440 to ~490) when I'm not prohibiting anything to anyone, technically anyone can meet with whomever, separate when you want, all without saying anything to the government.

I think it's understood that the government stops getting into people's relationships and not that the government enters the churches to stop a marriage, this is literally being said by a hippie. But as I say, I understand a little the statistics that varied but I don't understand the reason for the incredible massiveness of them.

(I don't speak English fluently, I am using the translator, so any errors, sorry)

[The Free Joy State]

Option 4 of Issue No. 274:
"Duuude, marriage is like totally outdated", says a hippie, wearing a multi-colored robe and in need of a wash. "They're like, restrictive and they bring down the vibe, man. Why put people in a box? Ban marriage, and let us roam free and we can all be brothers and sisters! It's what's nature wanted!"

In Issue No. 274 I chose option 4 of the hippie and although I understand the decrease in Civil Rights and a bit the increase in Authoritarianism, I think it should not be as big as they are, I got Civil Rights down 8.7 % (~67 to ~61), and raised 12% the Authoritarianism (~440 to ~490) when I'm not prohibiting anything to anyone, technically anyone can meet with whomever, separate when you want, all without saying anything to the government.

I think it's understood that the government stops getting into people's relationships and not that the government enters the churches to stop a marriage, this is literally being said by a hippie. But as I say, I understand a little the statistics that varied but I don't understand the reason for the incredible massiveness of them.

(I don't speak English fluently, I am using the translator, so any errors, sorry)

Your civil rights dropped because the option bans people from marrying -- should they so choose. Stating:

Ban marriage, and let us roam free and we can all be brothers and sisters! It's what's nature wanted!"

So, this option does have the government interfering in marriage -- by banning it entirely.

Civil rights in NS works on a specific metric -- freedom from government control.

So, if people have the right to form relationships with whoever they want, you gain civil rights. But, if you prohibit people from celebrating their love how they would choose, you generally lose civil rights -- depending on where your statistics start (all outcomes depend on where you begin).

Authoritarianism is a secondary stat that's somewhat related to civil rights and tends to rise when your civil rights fall.

The option is working as intended.

[Mostrov]

Where would discussion of policies and the various effects they have go? In this forum or in technical? It is in part nomenclature and in part a matter of labelling, although I figure my intended changes would cause quite broad effects upon some statistics.

[The Free Joy State]

Where would discussion of policies and the various effects they have go? In this forum or in technical? It is in part nomenclature and in part a matter of labelling, although I figure my intended changes would cause quite broad effects upon some statistics.

If you wish to begin a discussion along the lines of changing visible policy names, that would go in Technical, as that'd something only the Admin can do.

Before you start a discussion, please consider that there's a small team of Admin, each with a very long to-do list and that -- even if any changes you plan to propose were felt to be of benefit to the wide player community (which I can't predict from this vague description) -- they would probably take a very long time to come to fruition.

If you wish to know more about the way policies and statistics work, I suggest you start with the OP of this thread.

If you want to discuss changing the function or meaning or a specific policy or stat, that would probably also be Technical. But, I should mention that we don't change how policies work on the fly.

[LostLotheria]

Nation: LostLotheria
Date: June 5, 2019
Dilemma: Would a Rochebaron by Any Other Name Smell Just as Sweet? (507.3)
Unusual Effect: Every issue that I've had that's modified economic output has directly and inversely modified a bunch of social services (public transport, public education, public healthcare, welfare). Except this one, which boosted economic output by 1% but didn't touch any of those.

[The Free Joy State]

Nation: LostLotheria
Date: June 5, 2019
Dilemma: Would a Rochebaron by Any Other Name Smell Just as Sweet? (507.3)
Unusual Effect: Every issue that I've had that's modified economic output has directly and inversely modified a bunch of social services (public transport, public education, public healthcare, welfare). Except this one, which boosted economic output by 1% but didn't touch any of those.

Well, I can't speak for how direct the effect was in the other issues without name/numbers and dates to search. But I can say that the social services described are often partially secondary -- while not directly impacted, there are a number of stats that can play into them from a variety of different hidden stats we code into issues, and combine with the stats of your own nation to produce the outcome you see.

Here, the coded stats have no impact on the output you see.

Issue working as intended.

[Merconitonitopia]

I would like to object to one affect of 1232.4. The Theocracy policy is repealed by this option. I don't feel this is quite correct; 'Luthor' is not in the business of allowing dissent from @@RELIGION@@, but merely reforming the church and its practice (and of course, the real Luther was a fundamentalist).

[The Free Joy State]

I would like to object to one affect of 1232.4. The Theocracy policy is repealed by this option. I don't feel this is quite correct; 'Luthor' is not in the business of allowing dissent from @@RELIGION@@, but merely reforming the church and its practice (and of course, the real Luther was a fundamentalist).

Theocracy is not an on/off policy (coded by editors). It's what's known as a pseudo-policy, one that turns on or off automatically when freedoms cross certain thresholds. For more information about pseudo-policies, I suggest you read the OP of this thread, especially under: "Why did THIS policy switch on or turn off out of line with the issue's story?"

In brief, by giving Luthor the freedom to reform @@FAITH@@, that level was crossed, thus repealing the policy.

The issue is working as intended.

[The Free Joy State]

With one of my puppets, Lesser American Provinces, I chose the last option in Issue #238: "We Need a Few Good Men Who Like Men?" which gives the result of "the nation is constantly threatened with invasion but at least homosexuality in the military isn't a problem." This seemingly removes the nations's military, but the nation in question still has the policy of conscription. Is this supposed to be possible?

Edit: This was yesterday.

Taken this backstage for discussion.

Further to backstage discussion, this issue has been amended.

[Roumberre]

This nation, just now.
#897, 'The Devil’s Playground'; option 1.

“This is preposterous!” cries parent Lana Fellow, as she plasters every available surface of your vehicle with My God Loves Me bumper stickers, which she pulls from an apparently bottomless satchel. “The program even says ‘Lucifer’! Do not allow these heretics near our precious darlings. Ensure our children are only exposed to religions that are decent and founded on something real.” She runs out of space to place bumper stickers and starts hanging garlic cloves from your rearview mirror.

gave the Effect line "Children asking questions about science are referred to relevant sections in religious texts".

The speaker seems to be talking only about what religions children should be exposed, rather than what ideas about anything (such as also, for example, politics) they should encounter, and 'science' is not a religion, so this just doesn't make sense.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

In response to the increasing number of faith-based afterschool programs across Flanderlion, a prominent anti-religion organization has proposed Lessons with Lucifer, a tongue-in-cheek program designed to encourage critical thinking. The vociferous backlash comes to a head when you collect your niece from school.

The organisation is teaching the scientific method. as a protest against faith teaching.

[Bears Armed]

In response to the increasing number of faith-based afterschool programs across Flanderlion, a prominent anti-religion organization has proposed Lessons with Lucifer, a tongue-in-cheek program designed to encourage critical thinking. The vociferous backlash comes to a head when you collect your niece from school.

The organisation is teaching the scientific method. as a protest against faith teaching.

Leaving aside the fact that although critical thinking [which is what the issue actually mentions, after all, rather than the scientific method] is a core part of the scientific method it isn’t actually exclusive to ‘science’ (as most people would probably recognise the latter term, anyway)…

The basic question and the first option are specifically about being questions being asked in a religious context, but the effect line is about questions being raised about science in any context: That doesn’t really fit unless the government is assuming either that science is a religion -- which it isn't even if the first option's speaker might think so -- or that all contexts are inherently ‘religious’ in nature.

It also seems to assume that faith must also automatically be anti-science which, again, isn't inevitably the case even in RL, even if it is the case in NS for this option's speaker: In RL there have been important scientific discoveries made by believers [and even clergy] in various faiths openly using the scientific method -- for example Gregor Mendel, the pioneer of Genetics was a Roman Catholic abbot -- and even some religious leaders or theologians who've publicly praised the scientific method as a method for "improving our understanding of the wonders of Creation"...
The effect line, however, definitely seems to indicate that the nation's government thinks Science is a relgion which, to me, seems to make an unfortunate assumption that because your government listens to a pro-religion argument it must automatically be ignorant.

I still think that there's a disconnect there, but will stop arguing the point now.

[Aclion]

I just got issue 1224 and choose option 3, mass producing artifical gems and selling them as natural one. This hasn't affected my very low corruption stat at all, which seems very weird given that it's state organized fraud.

[The Free Joy State]

I just got issue 1224 and choose option 3, mass producing artifical gems and selling them as natural one. This hasn't affected my very low corruption stat at all, which seems very weird given that it's state organized fraud.

Corruption, in your nation, is so low that -- while there was an appropriately coded rise, the overall impact looks like it was so small that it didn't register frontstage.

If the overall change is fractional, less than one hundredth of a percent, you don't see them.

[Bear Connors Paradiso]

Take away copyright so people can write whatever they want, taxes go up.

Sorry I forgot which issue it was, it was the last one I answered. Wont make you go through the trouble.

[The Free Joy State]

Take away copyright so people can write whatever they want, taxes go up.

Sorry I forgot which issue it was, it was the last one I answered. Wont make you go through the trouble.

Tax is a known limitation in our simulation, referring only to income tax.

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

Take away copyright so people can write whatever they want, taxes go up.

Sorry I forgot which issue it was, it was the last one I answered. Wont make you go through the trouble.

The option proposes subsidizing writers and giving them money:

“I don’t see what the big problem is, tbh,” remarks TwiliteSlaya123 in an author’s note in the latest chapter of Fifty Shades of The Demon-Wizards. “It’s just like, I wrote this, kay? Lay off plz! Imo, the government should be supporting us artists! Like by giving me money for being awesome. Next story haz Gay Gandledore setting a dozen Angel-Dragon-Goblins ablaze. 4 teh lulz.”

So your taxation rate went from 0.26 to 0.27.

Edit: Ninja'd by Joy.

[Christian Democrats]

I don't agree with the effects of Option 1137.3. When I selected that option, my Average Income of Rich went up while my Average Income of Poor went down. That option should have the opposite effect. Economic deregulation of people who "aren't making a buttload of money" should help increase those people's incomes. If regulations that formerly applied to rich and poor alike now apply only to the rich, the incomes of poor people, who are exempt from the regulations, should increase.

[The Free Joy State]

I don't agree with the effects of Option 1137.3. When I selected that option, my Average Income of Rich went up while my Average Income of Poor went down. That option should have the opposite effect. Economic deregulation of people who "aren't making a buttload of money" should help increase those people's incomes. If regulations that formerly applied to rich and poor alike now apply only to the rich, the incomes of poor people, who are exempt from the regulations, should increase.

Average income of the rich and poor are secondary stats that are impacted by hidden stats used (appropriately) within this issue. As such, they can be somewhat unpredictable, depending on your own stats (and it's worth stating that your changes are not repeated, with testing, in all nations).

The issue is working as intended.

[Christian Democrats]

I don't agree with the effects of Option 1137.3. When I selected that option, my Average Income of Rich went up while my Average Income of Poor went down. That option should have the opposite effect. Economic deregulation of people who "aren't making a buttload of money" should help increase those people's incomes. If regulations that formerly applied to rich and poor alike now apply only to the rich, the incomes of poor people, who are exempt from the regulations, should increase.

Average income of the rich and poor are secondary stats that are impacted by hidden stats used (appropriately) within this issue. As such, they can be somewhat unpredictable, depending on your own stats (and it's worth stating that your changes are not repeated, with testing, in all nations).

The issue is working as intended.

Thanks for checking.

[Scardinius]

So I recently did the issue “Doctors orders”. The issue was about religious beliefs getting in the way of abortion. Prior to the issue my nation was a theocracy. When I chose the option to not allow abortion due to religiousness the game repealed my theocracy policy.

I don’t know why this happened, and would really like my theocracy policy back, if anyone knows how I would go about doing that or if they have any advice in regards to my problem please let me know

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

So I recently did the issue “Doctors orders”. The issue was about religious beliefs getting in the way of abortion. Prior to the issue my nation was a theocracy. When I chose the option to not allow abortion due to religiousness the game repealed my theocracy policy.

I don’t know why this happened, and would really like my theocracy policy back, if anyone knows how I would go about doing that or if they have any advice in regards to my problem please let me know

What you bring up is addressed in the FAQ found in the first post of this thread, which all are encouraged to read before posting a complaint.

As the FAQ says, the Theocracy policy is one of the many pseudo-policies. This means that the game uses your nation's stats to determine whether or not the policy is in effect, which is not a very good method. The pseudo-policies are known flaws in the game that have not yet been fixed, and all players are encouraged to ignore them and to not take them seriously.