.:The BIG Collaborative List of Suggested NS Improvements:.

[Kalasparata]

I was wondering if it would be possible to include a national sport? Essentially the same as national religion and animal, but you need to get an issue that would allows you to pick the sport depending on which option you choose. With all the sporting events that have been going on this year, I believe it'll be something that would allow us to see another side of a nation's culture.

I also believe that the entertainment industry would be a possible industry that could be added. This would include everything relating to music, movies, television, video games, etc. Some nations could base their economies on the industry or be home to some entertainment giants.

Write an issue and see if Siroco approves it...

It needs more than an issue. It requires modification to the code in order to include those items. Just writing the issue won't make the fields appear.

Oh!
Anyway there needs to be a link to the joltforum!

[Reploid Productions]

Anyway there needs to be a link to the joltforum!

No, there doesn't need to be a link to the Jolt forum. We moved Nationstates off of Jolt for several reasons. If you need to link to something on the Jolt forum, you can find it and link it yourself. Newer players since the move have no need to visit the defunct old forum, and most of the older players should already have their important threads from there backed up or copied over to here.

[Kalasparata]

Anyway there needs to be a link to the joltforum!

No, there doesn't need to be a link to the Jolt forum. We moved Nationstates off of Jolt for several reasons. If you need to link to something on the Jolt forum, you can find it and link it yourself. Newer players since the move have no need to visit the defunct old forum, and most of the older players should already have their important threads from there backed up or copied over to here.

Reasons are?

[Enn]

Kalasparata: This doesn't give everything, but one News item of particular note can be found here.
Have a look around the other News items from that period, before and after, as well.

[Zialas]

My country is vegetarian but trout farming is still the biggest industry. It doesn't make much sense. It would be nice if somebody could fix this.

[Unibot]

My country is vegetarian but trout farming is still the biggest industry. It doesn't make much sense. It would be nice if somebody could fix this.

Exportation? Possibly your industry is exporting to fish-deprived main-land places?

[Kalasparata]

I'm Capitalist Paradise but my tax is higher for the wealthy, even though the server knows that I don't want taxes higher for the wealthy
Also, the server says that my prisons resemble vampire houses and yet it also says that crime is crippling because of the utter lack of prisons. That makes no scence! I want people to be to affraid to break the law. And also, my leader has an iron fist and hates religion but
1.We are religious country (though the sever doesn't now that)
2.I'm a democrasy
Just because euthansia is legal, doesn't mean that my nation is not religious. There should be a way of fixing this!

[Hindopia]

My country is vegetarian but trout farming is still the biggest industry. It doesn't make much sense. It would be nice if somebody could fix this.

You can fix that yourself by answering the issues in a way that would make a different industry the top one.

[Pythria]

I'm Capitalist Paradise but my tax is higher for the wealthy, even though the server knows that I don't want taxes higher for the wealthy
Also, the server says that my prisons resemble vampire houses and yet it also says that crime is crippling because of the utter lack of prisons. That makes no scence! I want people to be to affraid to break the law. And also, my leader has an iron fist and hates religion but
1.We are religious country (though the sever doesn't now that)
2.I'm a democrasy
Just because euthansia is legal, doesn't mean that my nation is not religious. There should be a way of fixing this!

1. The server knows nothing. It's a computer, not a person. That clause is the result of a particular issue.
2. Stop confusing the server with the game code.
3. In Max's opinion, rehabilitation is better than prevention for stopping crime (although you don't agree).
4. It's 'sense', not 'scence'.
5. It's 'afraid', not 'affraid'.
6. You'd have to roleplay that. There's no custom field for describing your leader.
7. The server doesn't have a brain. The game describes your nation based on your issues. If you picked pro-religion options in your issues, your nation will show up as religious.
8. It's 'democracy', not 'democrasy'.
9. It's 'euthanasia', not 'euthansia'.
10. It doesn't matter. I legalized euthanasia, and 'Pythria is a huge, devout nation.'

[Nation of Quebec]

It needs more than an issue. It requires modification to the code in order to include those items. Just writing the issue won't make the fields appear.

I can't believe I forgot about my own suggestion.

Just out of curiosity, how much work would be involved in adding a new @@MAJORINDUSTRY@@ or new fields?

[The Most Glorious Hack]

Potentially? Considerable work. Adding the industry itself probably isn't anything major, nor is adding it to stuff. The heavy lifting is going through all the issues and seeing if the new industry should be added.

[Kalasparata]

I still haven't gotten the issue @@ANIMAL@@ on the dinner table, there should be a rule the sever has saying that you must have had all the issues beforeyou can get them again

[Reploid Productions]

I still haven't gotten the issue @@ANIMAL@@ on the dinner table, there should be a rule the sever has saying that you must have had all the issues beforeyou can get them again

Not gonna happen. Some issues you can't even qualify to get if you don't have certain requirements. For example, there is an issue you can only get once you've banned cars.

[Kalasparata]

I still haven't gotten the issue @@ANIMAL@@ on the dinner table, there should be a rule the sever has saying that you must have had all the issues beforeyou can get them again

Not gonna happen. Some issues you can't even qualify to get if you don't have certain requirements. For example, there is an issue you can only get once you've banned cars.

And what are the requirments for @@@ANIMAL@@ on the dinner table

[Enn]

Kalasparata, if you want to ask about specific issues, it would probably make more sense to head over to Got Issues, rather than asking here in Technical.

[Panageadom]

Is this the place to post a suggested improvement (AKA creative whining), or would it be best to post it on alternate thread, which could then in time be linked to this (if it proved important enough)?

Thanks.

[Kalasparata]

Okay, how about seperate issues for different Tech Levels?

Also, there should be an "Am I allowed to" forum where everyone can ask if they're allowed to do something

[Kryozerkia]

Okay, how about seperate issues for different Tech Levels?

Also, there should be an "Am I allowed to" forum where everyone can ask if they're allowed to do something

1. No.

2. It's called "Moderation". Just don't abuse it.

[Kalasparata]

Okay, how about seperate issues for different Tech Levels?

Also, there should be an "Am I allowed to" forum where everyone can ask if they're allowed to do something

1. No.

2. It's called "Moderation". Just don't abuse it.

1.Why? Is it too hard

2.Okay!

[Hypparchia]

Cheese Industry being my main export doesn't really seem adequate. I noticed somebody complained about the trout farming a few posts before that. It'd be good to be able to change your main export.

[Kalasparata]

What about we have a national plant as we do with animals

eg. My plant would be the Kalaspitree

[The Most Glorious Hack]

Okay, how about seperate issues for different Tech Levels?

1. No.

1.Why? Is it too hard

Because we're not going to hard code role-played stuff.

[Panageadom]

I appreciate none of this will ever happen, but oh well; you have to ask, or you'll never get anything. (As you scroll down, you will realise the ideas become less and less likely to ever happen)

Regions

1. I presume it has been said before, but I personally think some kind of regional parliaments would be a really nice idea. Not only that but the code could just be lifted from the WA.

eg. 1) [WA Code]
2) Substitute WA with @@REGION@@
...etc.
In addition to this, it would probably add a function to propose something with no effect on nations (e.g. for RMB regulations).

Not only would it be a nice feature, but it would also provide a way for regions to differentiate themselves - it would make regions of the same ideology more interesting, while regions that were not bound ideologically would simply not use the feature - and more importantly, compete (o, capitalism. >.<). For those of you vaguely remember the cesspit of NS2, my world ('53) stayed active much longer than the average because the two main alliance blocs were continually going head to head, competing for members, etc. etc. (For those of you who understand, it was very Bokononist). I suspect this competition would make regions more active and add some meaning to where you joined.

Now, there is one disadvantage that even I can see: having a WA organisation for every region is going to take up a hell of a lot of server capacity. But the solution to this is to only give parliaments to regions where it is asked for (for example, by the WA delegate asking a mod), and to then have a criterion such as only regions with over 30 members can have them.


Issues

1. Is Sirocco active? It isn't really my business, but if he isn't, then it would seem that there's no-one reviewing issues that are submitted, so it's all a bit futile.

2. I'd personally applaud some new constructs in issues (these may, of course, already exist) that reflect what your neighbours are doing, or present random events to a region as a whole (with, presumably, the outcome depending on the communal decision). For example, if all your regional comrades are "investing" in welfare, the pretext might be an ambassador advising you to - or, on a more complex level, if many have been booted out of the region, a general might reccomend that you build up your armies to show you aren't worth "messin' with". Similiarly, taxes might "need" to be imposed to keep out subsidised foreign competition, and the "response to random event" issues - if most of a region is approves a protectionist bill, it damages the outsiders more than the signers, and vice versa. "Trading" economic status in order to aid a nation whose prime volcano has just gone off to win regional prestige could be involved.

Honestly, I could ramble on for ages about ideas like that, being generally interested in issues, but that more or less encapsulates the idea. I also presume it would be a bit worthless, because it's never going to happen, because it needs new code.

3. A lot of people complain that there aren't enough issue editors because the process of submission takes years. I agree, but I can see why there aren't more: they need to be taught the code, and be of a high standard, and so on. But I think there is a way to cut down the amount of work editors have to do, and so speed up the system. It's some form of peer review - because, let's face it, there are very good reasons for rejecting a submitted issue right off the bat that it doesn't take an editor of high quality to see (e.g. spelling errors, constructs that don't exist in NS, plain idiocy). Essentially, the plan would be to force players to review an issue (or a few) before being allowed to submit their own. I imagine that in addition to some kind of ability to write suggestions "on" the original issue, there would be a generic form at the bottom asking if it should be rejected, and if so, why. The construct would have to work so that multiple people reviewed the issue, and if a majority said to reject it, it would be.

However, there's a nice puzzle do to with how many issues people should be forced to review. (Let's call this number "x"). You might just let x=1, but it's probably better to make x=3, because that way issues are reviewed by more than one person, without it being too much of a slog.

But it might be better to have the rate change, depending on how many issues are submitted, and how many issues are edited.
Let a=the number submitted in the previous month and b=the number edited in that month. Let k>1.

I think INT((a/b)/k)+1=x is a quite a good algorithm (although correct me if I'm wrong, this is all a bit back of fag packet). (The +1 is to make sure if the first part = a fraction, some issues are still reviewed. The Integral part is to make sure that people don't review 2.7 issues)

So, say 102 issues were submitted, and 20 were edited, and k=2

2+1=x=3

Of course, k would have to change on the basis of how many issues are submitted per those edited - I don't know what these are, but I presume would have to be pretty large, so players didn't end up with 400 issues to review.

A more complex algorithm involves two more constants, c and d.

cINT((a/b)/k)+d=x

c would control how many times an issue would cycle round before it went to an editor and d would be the basic number of issues you were forced to review at any one time, so some work would be getting done even if nothing was submitted, or the mods were especially assiduous.

I think that this would have the following effects:

1) More CPU consumed.
2) A high calibre of issues submitted, because you're not going to wade through three mispelt pieces of rubbish for nothing.
3) A faster editorial process, meaning more issues actually end up coded into the game!

WA Categories

1. I appreciate it's a part of the humour of NS, but it isn't somewhat annoying to log on to find that either my nation is ruled by bandits ("Anarchy"), because I have reasonable levels of freedoms, or that I run a whorehouse ("Corporate Bordello") - especially seeing as comparably extreme categories involve a "Lovefest" (which I have got sometimes, I'll admit), a "Utopia" and a "Paradise". This is more a whine than a full-bodied suggestion, but if I were to build NS from the ground up, I would get someone to write a negative clause about that type of government, and someone to a positive one. Either both would feature in the description, or there would be some mechanism for deciding if (depending on some form of hostility arrangement, or sheer proximity politically) one or the other displayed; as well as changing the "Anarchy" description and name completely - it's one of the NS paradoxes that you can have a low crime rate and a country ruled by bikers. Maybe they're really well-mannered, adventurous gentlemen of taste?

2. On a more serious, and less accomplishable note, there could be some additions to the WA category system. Now, given what the site is, and the fact that it's never going to charge, etc. etc. upgrading the 27-type grid/cube to a 64-type one is never going to happen (as well as being bloody confusing!) - but, I think that 8 more categories could be added to reflect the more extreme positions that "anarchy" and "psychotic dictatorship" occupy now. If you imagine the various categories you could have as positions on a cube, with a vertex at (0,0,0), (0,0,16), (0,16,0)...(16,16,16) (I believe there are 16 "levels" - including the very lowest one -for each ranking, although I'm not sure and correct me if I'm wrong). This is three categories long, three tall and three deep. Now, if you drew a diamond on each face, from the midpoint of each line to the midpoint of all the lines that were both on the face and perpendicular to it (from (16, 16, to (16, 8, 16) for example), you would have a surface divided into 8 parts - 4 corner diamonds, and four on the faces. If these were given a "depth" of 2 each, they would reflect extreme positions, and instead of the system going from tyrannical/centrist/anarchist it would go from tyrannical/illiberal/liberal/anarchist. Or whatever. It would also allow it to iron out the discrepancy that sometimes a higher level is commended - going from Democratic Socialists to a Scandinavian Liberal Paradise sounds great to me - and sometimes condemned as "too far": "Capitalist Paradise" to "Capitalizt" (for those that have read the novel) is a bad thing.




Anyway, that's my rant. Add to it the common whinges about war (not really designed for NS, crap in NS2, etc.) and trade (interesting, but a bugbear to program and model, I'd imagine).

[Panageadom]

Thanks to whoever moved that.

[Bears Armed]

I1. I appreciate it's a part of the humour of NS, but it isn't somewhat annoying to log on to find that either my nation is ruled by bandits ("Anarchy"), because I have reasonable levels of freedoms, or that I run a whorehouse ("Corporate Bordello") - especially seeing as comparably extreme categories involve a "Lovefest" (which I have got sometimes, I'll admit), a "Utopia" and a "Paradise". This is more a whine than a full-bodied suggestion, but if I were to build NS from the ground up, I would get someone to write a negative clause about that type of government, and someone to a positive one. Either both would feature in the description, or there would be some mechanism for deciding if (depending on some form of hostility arrangement, or sheer proximity politically) one or the other displayed; as well as changing the "Anarchy" description and name completely - it's one of the NS paradoxes that you can have a low crime rate and a country ruled by bikers. Maybe they're really well-mannered, adventurous gentlemen of taste?

In this nation they're "our traditional, cross-clan 'warrior societies" and the Survey is simply mistaken when it says that people in general fear them... just as it is mistaken when it says that we have billions of people rather than just 19 million... Evidently the Gnomes doing that survey didn't actually visit the country to see for themselves...

^_^