[ABANDONED] I Love Art

[Minskiev]

Well, I assumed you can’t break a barrier, but I guess not. Also, don’t worry about the remark.

Wait a minute, let me rethink that. Editing...

[Westinor]

Well, I assumed you can’t break a barrier, but I guess not. Also, don’t worry about the remark.

However, no matter how assertive I may seem, I know there currently isn’t a policy about using pennies.

There is a tracked policy that refers to a nation [i]not[i/] using pennies, I believe.

[Minskiev]

Alright, apparently my list of policies is missing that seemingly one-off policy. Still, pennies shouldn’t be used.

Also, how DO new policies come into the game?

[Westinor]

Alright, apparently my list of policies is missing that seemingly one-off policy. Still, pennies shouldn’t be used.

Also, how DO new policies come into the game?

As far as I know, there's some sort of tracker for other "policies" such as a lack of an upper House, or no pennies. It's not a regular policy like that which appears on your nation's home page, but it's tracked and determines certain issues that you receive, much like stats.

But disclaimer, I'm not an editor, so I wouldn't know for sure. But I'm fairly sure.

[Minskiev]

Alright, apparently my list of policies is missing that seemingly one-off policy. Still, pennies shouldn’t be used.

Also, how DO new policies come into the game?

As far as I know, there's some sort of tracker for other "policies" such as a lack of an upper House, or no pennies. It's not a regular policy like that which appears on your nation's home page, but it's tracked and determines certain issues that you receive, much like stats.

But disclaimer, I'm not an editor, so I wouldn't know for sure. But I'm fairly sure.

That’s really strange, if true. Well, I apologize, but to be fair, it doesn’t appear on official lists or in home pages, apparently.

[Awesomeland012345]

The top 250 is a pretty small pool of nations, especially when you consider that some people (such as myself) have multiple accounts within the already tiny threshold. You're going to have to take a different approach at the validity

Oh crap, I forgot about that. Ima have to think about that.

the added effects would make this an insta-dismiss for most people.

meh, I just thought it would be cool to have in issue with cards. I'm still editing it though, so I'm still going to change it because I agree, the options aren't very good.

[Free Las Pinas]

I have zero experience writing issues, but I have some comments based on what I like about certain issues and some of your own statements here.

While getting into the top 250 isn't the most impressive feat, it's certainly still requires some hard work.

One, top 250 is far too restrictive. Perhaps top 10,000?

As I stated above, unless you're in around the top 250, you're generally not a serious card collector. And if international artwork wasn't a big deal in @@NAME@@, then @@LEADER@@ wouldn't have to address it. For example, you're in the top 25% of the world for international artwork, despite only joining recently and not having any card farming puppets. Other ideas are good tho.

I would prefer to define a serious card collector as someone who has exerted enough effort into creating a collection with substance or relatively high value. What you're saying here is that serious card collectors generally need to be among the top 250, which just doesn't seem right to me, since there are a lot of genuinely good card collections in nations not in the top 250. I'd also like to note that without that KK transfer card in your possession, even you wouldn't be in the top 250, but would still be considered a serious card collector. Now that that's out of the way, I have some concerns with this issue.

I don't suggest that you use "cards", their mechanics such as "junking" or "upgrading", and popular card collectors. It makes the issue feel less exciting to me personally and I'm not even sure if that's legal.

Also, the purpose of museums are to preserve artifacts, artworks, etc. It doesn't make sense to me how artworks have managed to overrun them and that it got so bad, ministers and art connoisseurs met up and invited you to discuss the future of art with them. I believe there are better ways to incorporate trading cards/international artworks in issues, and that this is not exactly one of them. That said, it's still nice to see an attempt at a cards-related issue not pertaining to laundering.

If you insist on the problem being that @@NAME@@ has too much artwork, I'd like to know a little about the story of how it got so bad. Like maybe an art expo was held in @@NAME@@ and the artworks were donated to its museums (don't do that; the example I gave is here for the sake of me giving an example). Your options and effect lines need work too. For instance, I don't understand why the nation's top art collector insists on buying for cheap (considering the fact that you're expecting this issue to be exclusive to serious card collectors) and how the option differs from option 3 since both involve selling for almost nothing. Something I do believe the Minister of Finance would do is attempt to sell/purge all art collections in @@NAME@@ to pay for other substantial things such as welfare or education.

Edit: Just re-read what I said. Sorry if I'm being mean or unhelpful.

[Australian rePublic]

Just build a new museum. It's worth the expense

[Awesomeland012345]

I would prefer to define a serious card collector as someone who has exerted enough effort into creating a collection with substance or relatively high value. What you're saying here is that serious card collectors generally need to be among the top 250, which just doesn't seem right to me, since there are a lot of genuinely good card collections in nations not in the top 250. I'd also like to note that without that KK transfer card in your possession, even you wouldn't be in the top 250, but would still be considered a serious card collector. Now that that's out of the way, I have some concerns with this issue.

Maybe I should put the below quote in the OP.

I'm tired of debating about what deck value should get this issue; the issue editors can decide when I submit the issue, if it even becomes one. I'll just keep it as is for now though

Also, let's not deal with 'ifs'. The thing is, I do have the card (Even if it's a KK transfer. that's the secret to DV jk). If I didn't, then I would just spend another month or so farming and I'd get the issue.

I don't suggest that you use "cards", their mechanics such as "junking" or "upgrading", and popular card collectors. It makes the issue feel less exciting to me personally and I'm not even sure if that's legal.

I agree using popular card collectors wouldn't fit. The 'other effect' that I put was just to literally influence cards. It wouldn't actually be said in the issue. That's actually the reason I wrote the issue; I thought it'd be cool. The thing is tho, I'm probably gonna have to take them out and edit the issue draft heavily.

Also, the purpose of museums are to preserve artifacts, artworks, etc. It doesn't make sense to me how artworks have managed to overrun them and that it got so bad, ministers and art connoisseurs met up and invited you to discuss the future of art with them.

It may not be obvious enough, but that's why the validity includes that the nation has more cards than their deck capacity.

If you insist on the problem being that @@NAME@@ has too much artwork, I'd like to know a little about the story of how it got so bad. Like maybe an art expo was held in @@NAME@@ and the artworks were donated to its museums (don't do that; the example I gave is here for the sake of me giving an example). Your options and effect lines need work too.

Most definitely. The issue so far is just the basics. I need to beef it up some. And I just noticed the similarity of the two options. I wish I were better at writing.

---

Just build a new museum. It's worth the expense

That's basically option 2. Except multiple museums.
EDIT: also kinda option 3.

[Westinor]

To answer the question of whether you should mention top card collectors - no, as the leaderboards are not static and may fluctuate. As such, if KK or TNL were to fall from the leaderboard, it would no longer make sense in the context of the issue to mention them.

And as to the requirement - though I understand you'd like to leave it to the editors, I'd just like to make the point that nothing in the issue demands that a nation has to have a certain amount of DV, only that their storage is full. Thus, the validity would probably work better simply as "has a full deck".

And it's probably best not to refer to them as cards, seeing as artwork is the sort of "IC" (as I understand it) form of what cards are.

[Awesomeland012345]

-snip-

editing issue to fit all suggestions accordingly. So much to catch up on...

EDIT: I need a synonym for 'artwork'. help.

[Noahs Second Country]

As such, if KK or TNL were to fall from the leaderboard, it would no longer make sense in the context of the issue to mention them.

This is besides the point and I generally agree with you but TNL and KK aren't going anywhere on the leaderboard

Maybe TNL will pass me but that's about it.

[Awesomeland012345]

bump

[Australian rePublic]

Option 2- Selling something=/=destroying it. Why would your minister think it does?

[Awesomeland012345]

oops. I need to change that.

[Awesomeland012345]

last bump

[The Supreme Vatican Caliphate]

It’s @@DEMONYM@@, not @@DENONYM@@. Also, you should DEFINITELY not use the effect lines that narrate the game descriptions, like junking cards until under. Totally ruins the issue.

[Awesomeland012345]

It’s @@DEMONYM@@, not @@DENONYM@@.

done.

Also, you should DEFINITELY not use the effect lines that narrate the game descriptions, like junking cards until under. Totally ruins the issue.

I know, I just put that there for the issue draft.

[The Supreme Vatican Caliphate]

It’s @@DEMONYM@@, not @@DENONYM@@.

done.

Also, you should DEFINITELY not use the effect lines that narrate the game descriptions, like junking cards until under. Totally ruins the issue.

I know, I just put that there for the issue draft.

Still not fixed. It says demomyn, when it should be demonym.

[Awesomeland012345]

oops. stupid typos.

[Great Robertia]

Not to be a buzzkill of course, but isn't the current issue premise very similar to #492: The Artwork In The Attic?

[Awesomeland012345]

Not to be a buzzkill of course, but isn't the current issue premise very similar to #492: The Artwork In The Attic?

ah frick. Ima have to rework the issue.

[Great Robertia]

Not to be a buzzkill of course, but isn't the current issue premise very similar to #492: The Artwork In The Attic?

ah frick. Ima have to rework the issue.

At least it was caught in time before submission!

[Awesomeland012345]

now hopefully it's different enough. I think it is, but it might not be.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Ignoring all the talk about validities, let's look at the story:

Description: @@NAME@@ can't hold any more artwork! Your overconfident Minister of Culture recently bought back hundreds of old @@DEMONYM@@ pieces of art that had been stolen long ago. The problem is, now museums are filled to the brim, and the storehouses jammed full! Because your @@TYPE@@ is so dedicated to these paintings, several of your ministers and art connoisseurs have met and invited you to discuss the problem.

Seems unfeasible to me. Even tens of thousands of art pieces are not going to take much room to store.

The closest thing we've got in the issue base at present is #856 You've Got Stones, which isn't so much about lack of physical storage space, but more about whether bad artwork can be treated like trash, with a surprisingly low number of issue respondents willing to consider them so. To me that issue is more subtle than it seems, as it confronts the cognitive value we place on something labelled as art, even if said art is probably worthless.

The question of finding space for the art is somewhat silly, as are the solutions. To put it in context, the USA creates 140 million tons of landfill waste every year. While that's a horrifying number in its own right, it also makes it supremely unlikely that the minimal volumes involved in a nation's art collection being trashed would make any sort of notable impact on that number.

Besides, we've already done shooting your trash into space as an issue option.