This game seems to relentlessly favor capitalists.

[Velatenia]

Apparently my nation is turning into a dictatorship all because of my somewhat socialist positions.

[Wadden-Amrum]

"citizens are barcoded to keep track of their movements"

mmk

that is what got you moved IMO

Also, wrong forum buddy.

[Annihilators of Chan Island]

And socialist positions include barcoding the citizenry and banning political parties from advertising.

Also the thread ought to be moved to Got Issues?

[Velatenia]

"citizens are barcoded to keep track of their movements"

mmk

that is what got you moved IMO

Also, wrong forum buddy.

Thanks for letting me know about the forum. Sorry about that.

As for the barcoding, that made us moralistic.

[Blakullar]

NationStates is one of those games where you have to look at LITERALLY every possible outcome that might occur with an issue. Unfortunately, that outcome will always be negative in some way or another: things are taken to the extreme in this game. You could circumvent it entirely by deciding that NS stats no longer apply to your nation, since they are very often unrealistic and some are just wildly illogical.

[The Ben Boys]

Have you ever used capitalist policies? The same ridiculousness happens. Nationstates is meant o be far fetched and ridiculous when you click a seemingly innocent decision. It's an exercise in satire to illustrate the entropy of politics.

[Pope Joan]

Have you ever used capitalist policies? The same ridiculousness happens. Nationstates is meant o be far fetched and ridiculous when you click a seemingly innocent decision. It's an exercise in satire to illustrate the entropy of politics.

I think it emphasizes the complexity of the social process, which comes across as randomness.

Consider the pool player breaking the rack. Even the most skilled player cannot predict exactly where each ball will go as they carom off each other. So the process seems random and unstructured. Yet there is clearly cause and effect! Impact and resulting angular trajectory. It is just impossible to predict or control.

[Zaolat]

"citizens are barcoded to keep track of their movements"

mmk

that is what got you moved IMO

Also, wrong forum buddy.

As for the barcoding, that made us moralistic.

If we're assuming leftist, barcoding is something a Communist totalitarian state ala USSR would probably do with modern technology of now. I can't see any reason a Socialist state that isn't totalitarian would do such a thing. Posble, completely. Likely, I don't think so personally.

Capitalism in itself isn't necessarily full of freedoms except maybe economic. Socialism doesn't have to be a freedomless or 1984 styled deal.

In NS I think barcoding implies curbing freedom in someway, therefore pushing you into dictatorship status.

Just my thoughts.

[Consular]

I take it you haven't read Max's books? Because he is definitely not relentlessly pro capitalist. This game is largely satirical and almost all issues give ridiculous responses. Their effect on your nation generally lessens the more of them you answer and your nation gets more resistant to change.

[The Mongol Swarm]

The capitalist countries get the most income, ha!

Well if yoi could just look at North Korea and the Soviet Union in the past, you would see that incomes are rather low and good are of lower quality than that of capitalists.

[Wadden-Amrum]

The capitalist countries get the most income, ha!

Well if yoi could just look at North Korea and the Soviet Union in the past, you would see that incomes are rather low and good are of lower quality than that of capitalists.

Incorrect when talking about game mechanics.

I once had a Left-wing Utopia that had a Frightening economy with a giant income per person.

[Velatenia]

I take it you haven't read Max's books? Because he is definitely not relentlessly pro capitalist. This game is largely satirical and almost all issues give ridiculous responses. Their effect on your nation generally lessens the more of them you answer and your nation gets more resistant to change.

I'll admit I haven't read them. But from what it looks like, the economy is typically good right off the bat for the capitalist nations I've seen here.

[King Avalon]

It's not the game that makes the issues that influence how your nation is, it's the people who write the issues and what you choose

[Consular]

I take it you haven't read Max's books? Because he is definitely not relentlessly pro capitalist. This game is largely satirical and almost all issues give ridiculous responses. Their effect on your nation generally lessens the more of them you answer and your nation gets more resistant to change.

I'll admit I haven't read them. But from what it looks like, the economy is typically good right off the bat for the capitalist nations I've seen here.

Well yes but that's usually accompanied by poor civil rights and a terrible environment and such -- it's easy to get a good economy when you don't care about such things! You can be anti-capitalist and have a strong economy if you are careful, I managed it on this nation.

[Harkback Union]

The capitalist countries get the most income, ha!

Well if yoi could just look at North Korea and the Soviet Union in the past, you would see that incomes are rather low and good are of lower quality than that of capitalists.

Incorrect when talking about game mechanics.

I once had a Left-wing Utopia that had a Frightening economy with a giant income per person.

Me too!
I still have the economy though.

[Maljaratas]

It depends on what you mean by favor. If you count an amazing economy, then yes the capitalists usually have very good economies. If you think winning is having best in everything, then anarchies win. (Again, usually) But for example my nation is my own little Utopia but the economy is only at 29; but has has 83 in political freedom and 63 in Civil, I am considered Democratic Socialists, but consider my self winning.

[Ryaanistan]

I've been on and off with this game for awhile now and Ive come back to see that the economy section has been totally changed and my people have an almost equal amount of income (little difference between rich and poor, which is one of the goals of communism). So a socialist or communist country is possible to achieve, but very difficult and I feel like it takes a long time to achieve this through the various issues. There is a certain amount of luck to go with this too.

[Luna Amore]

[v] summed it up nicely years ago:

in a true socialist or communist state, the economy is essentially irrelevant. Everyone gets what they need, so to mark a Communist economy as 'imploded' seems fairly incorrect; it'd be much more accurate to label it as something like Balanced, or planned. Imploded obviously has negative connotations

It's a little unrealistic to say planned economies mean "everyone gets what they need:" sure, that's the ideal, but in practice it hasn't often worked out that way (or at least, not for long). A planned economy replaces the "invisible hand" of the market with central control: in theory, that can work fine, and lead to a robust, productive economy. This was more or less the case in the USSR for a decade or two. But there are many more examples of planned economies proving to be very inefficient or corrupt or both.

As such, NS has a bias* against them; i.e. all other things being equal, your economy will do better if it's market-based rather than planned. But it's only a bias, not a rule, which means communist NS nations can have strong planned economies if they do actively run them. "Imploded" economies are usually the result of a planned economy combined with a government that is not actually doing any planning.

Fundamentally, though, the strength of the economy is relevant no matter whether it's planned or market-based: it's a measure of the industry of your people, regardless of how they're organized.

* Edit: I mean "bias" as in "statistical weighting," not "prejudice."

And this could really go in either Got Issues or Gameplay so I'll leave it be here. There's a fair bit of bleed between the two.

[Flanderlion]

[v] summed it up nicely years ago:

It's a little unrealistic to say planned economies mean "everyone gets what they need:" sure, that's the ideal, but in practice it hasn't often worked out that way (or at least, not for long). A planned economy replaces the "invisible hand" of the market with central control: in theory, that can work fine, and lead to a robust, productive economy. This was more or less the case in the USSR for a decade or two. But there are many more examples of planned economies proving to be very inefficient or corrupt or both.

As such, NS has a bias* against them; i.e. all other things being equal, your economy will do better if it's market-based rather than planned. But it's only a bias, not a rule, which means communist NS nations can have strong planned economies if they do actively run them. "Imploded" economies are usually the result of a planned economy combined with a government that is not actually doing any planning.

Fundamentally, though, the strength of the economy is relevant no matter whether it's planned or market-based: it's a measure of the industry of your people, regardless of how they're organized.

* Edit: I mean "bias" as in "statistical weighting," not "prejudice."

And this could really go in either Got Issues or Gameplay so I'll leave it be here. There's a fair bit of bleed between the two.

I believe issues in general belong in Gameplay, while individual issues belong in Got Issues. That's based on something from a while ago though.