[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

[The Free Joy State]

In Spare The Whip, Spoil The Law, I chose an option (Option 4, I think, whichever one gives you the line "The ruling party is having a devil of a time keeping order in the ranks.") and although it caused my Corruption level to go down drastically (from 4.14 to 2.91) and rose Political Freedoms to good, I was awarded the Summer Residence banner, which apparently requires you to have deep-rooted corruption even though I just lowered it. Am I missing something?

Basically, banners are automatically assigned by the game based on your hidden stats, not your visible stats. Editors don't assign them ourselves. When you answered this option, your hidden stats reached the right threshold in the various stats to unlock that banner.

[Superbunny]

In Spare The Whip, Spoil The Law, I chose an option (Option 4, I think, whichever one gives you the line "The ruling party is having a devil of a time keeping order in the ranks.") and although it caused my Corruption level to go down drastically (from 4.14 to 2.91) and rose Political Freedoms to good, I was awarded the Summer Residence banner, which apparently requires you to have deep-rooted corruption even though I just lowered it. Am I missing something?

Basically, banners are automatically assigned by the game based on your hidden stats, not your visible stats. Editors don't assign them ourselves. When you answered this option, your hidden stats reached the right threshold in the various stats to unlock that banner.

This is a certified manwhut moment.

[Melondonia]

I know this is a really minor effect, but it's a little confusing.

Option 2, issue 1009 (1009.2), A Woman's Roll

"The Talking Point
The new national campaign exhorts men to "Show Some Class - Don't Sit On Your Ass".

This increased my...social conservatism? That's a bit odd. It's only a small change, 34.15->34.54 (+1.1%), but it seems more like the other two options for this issue would've increased that stat.

Many thanks in advance.

[The Free Joy State]

I know this is a really minor effect, but it's a little confusing.

Option 2, issue 1009 (1009.2), A Woman's Roll

"The Talking Point
The new national campaign exhorts men to "Show Some Class - Don't Sit On Your Ass".

This increased my...social conservatism? That's a bit odd. It's only a small change, 34.15->34.54 (+1.1%), but it seems more like the other two options for this issue would've increased that stat.

Many thanks in advance.

Social conservatism is a secondary stat, somewhat related to civil rights (it tends to rise when civil rights fall). As for civil rights, when you create a social obligation, as you did (here to "Show Some Class - Don't Sit On Your Ass") your civil rights may (but not always) experience a small drop, as they did here (from 71.23 to 70.93)

[Trotterdam]

The following issue options grant the Autocracy policy, but should also remove the Sortition policy when they do so, as their current behavior on some nations (ones that previously went directly from sortition to democracy before deciding to go autocratic again, or ones that were already sortitions when they were supposed to go autocratic) does not make sense:
#0 3 (*)
#54 3
#202 1
#243 5 (*)
#267 4
#1082 3
#1082 4
#1088 4
Checking through other autocracy-granting options just to be sure is a good idea. I do know that there are also some issues that do it right: #65 2 and #597 3.
Options marked with an asterisk haven't actually been observed setting Sortition, but have been observed keeping it, which indicates the same coding problems (this is confirmed by timestamps).

Meanwhile, #61 1 always removes sortition, but may switch to either autocracy or democracy when it does so, for reasons that are not clear to me (both have happened in the last few days, so it's probably not some rare fluke).

As usual, I cannot cite which actual nations this was observed on.

[Dabarastan]

Hi, this is not an usual effect but rather a typo in an issue itself. I was not sure where else to post it.

Issue Number: 806 "Unlicensed to Kill".

Error is in issue preamble.

The text with the error in bold: "...Following this development, a recent execution had to be postponed when all medical personal with the appropriate credentials to administer the execution refused to participate."

The text with the error corrected: "...Following this development, a recent execution had to be postponed when all medical personnel with the appropriate credentials to administer the execution refused to participate."

[The Free Joy State]

Hi, this is not an usual effect but rather a typo in an issue itself. I was not sure where else to post it.

Issue Number: 806 "Unlicensed to Kill".

Error is in issue preamble.

The text with the error in bold: "...Following this development, a recent execution had to be postponed when all medical personal with the appropriate credentials to administer the execution refused to participate."

The text with the error corrected: "...Following this development, a recent execution had to be postponed when all medical personnel with the appropriate credentials to administer the execution refused to participate."

This is the thread for objective spelling and grammar errors and suspected errors with macros.

This has been amended.

[Dabarastan]

I just had issue #218 - Two Mommies One Too Many? and selected option 2. It only resulted in three stat changes - religiousness, secularism and inclusiveness. I certainly understand how these three are relevant, however I've never had an issue have such minimal effects before. Is this usual?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I just had issue #218 - Two Mommies One Too Many? and selected option 2. It only resulted in three stat changes - religiousness, secularism and inclusiveness. I certainly understand how these three are relevant, however I've never had an issue have such minimal effects before. Is this usual?

You'll find that as time goes on they'll often be issues that have little or even zero effect on your nation, often because they're reinforcing currently held positions. This is explained in the FAQ on the first post of this thread.

[Loves Indecision]

QUERY
Issue #693 "Bottled Up Problems"

1) I chose Option 1, so as to promote Tap Water, however I found one of the results to make less sense to me. [Option 1 Results Below]

Talking Point: A new guerrilla marketing campaign for tap water involves government agents spraying random citizens with hose water.

Headlines:
Tax Increase Vital to Funding Loves Indecision Innovation, Economists Says
Warmer Weather on the Way, Forecast Says
Tourism Industry Braces for Influx
National Parks Proving Popular


^Given that both Health, and LifeSpan increased, and Obesity decreased as a result of my decision, how come my Human Development Index Number deceases? [The World Census compiles a “Human Development Index” by measuring citizens’ average life expectancy, education, and income.]???

[SherpDaWerp]

I can't speak for the background math, but HDI is calculated based on lifespan, education and income. Your Lifespan went up by 0.31 points, education looks unchanged, but your average income went down by 512ish points. The income reduction must be weighted slightly higher in the math to give you a net decrease in HDI of 0.34.

---

Coincidentally, your economy dropped by 0.66. 64.84, your original HDI, minus the economy drop is 64.18, plus the lifespan increase is 64.49, only 0.01 off your final HDI score. Hmmmm...

[Techolandia]

For issue #1212 (Lost at Sea), I chose option #2 (The last sentence is The Coast Guard has been underfunded for years, I’m sure they would appreciate all these fancy new toys.) with this nation a few minutes ago, and my Defense Forces stat decreased from 2,353.88 to 2,351.12. Why is this the case?

[The Free Joy State]

For issue #1212 (Lost at Sea), I chose option #2 (The last sentence is The Coast Guard has been underfunded for years, I’m sure they would appreciate all these fancy new toys.) with this nation a few minutes ago, and my Defense Forces stat decreased from 2,353.88 to 2,351.12. Why is this the case?

Worth saying that "Defense Forces" are more associated with boots on the ground, than new toys.

Though, I have amended something. It will work a little differently in future.

[Mettaton-EX]

absolutely outraged that covering my whole nation in glitter (issue 1269 option 4) has rocketed my charmlessness (2.49 → 5.13; +106%) and crashed my tourism (470.77 → 287.96; -38.8%)

[Candlewhisper Archive]

absolutely outraged that covering my whole nation in glitter (issue 1269 option 4) has rocketed my charmlessness (2.49 → 5.13; +106%) and crashed my tourism (470.77 → 287.96; -38.8%)

Turns out that not everyone finds polluted oceans and blocked storm drains nice to visit, eh?

The direction of movement of these stats is intentional and appropriate. The magnitude is a problem, especially in that Tourism is currently overly dependent on environmental quality, which is something that theoretically is meant to be getting fixed, though it's been over two years wait now and nobody is answering my e-mails to expedite it, so I guess you'll just have to live with it for now.

I ran your nation through the Beta that was set up to test that change, and your Tourists per Hour is due to shift from 287.96 to 1,273.99, which is the sort of change that is typical for nations that ought to be attracting a lot more tourism but are currently being knocked by an excessive environmental weighting on said stat.

Charmlessness, of course, used to have the title Toxicity, and is broadly a measure of how environmentally horrible your nation is, though there's some other factors on it too. Regardless, that change is appropriate in scale and direction. I mean actually, if you check your graph, your current Charmlessness is just over 1% of your peak charmlessness from a little while back, so it's not as if you're a disaster zone.

[Mettaton-EX]

absolutely outraged that covering my whole nation in glitter (issue 1269 option 4) has rocketed my charmlessness (2.49 → 5.13; +106%) and crashed my tourism (470.77 → 287.96; -38.8%)

Turns out that not everyone finds polluted oceans and blocked storm drains nice to visit, eh?

The direction of movement of these stats is intentional and appropriate. The magnitude is a problem, especially in that Tourism is currently overly dependent on environmental quality, which is something that theoretically is meant to be getting fixed, though it's been over two years wait now and nobody is answering my e-mails to expedite it, so I guess you'll just have to live with it for now.

I ran your nation through the Beta that was set up to test that change, and your Tourists per Hour is due to shift from 287.96 to 1,273.99, which is the sort of change that is typical for nations that ought to be attracting a lot more tourism but are currently being knocked by an excessive environmental weighting on said stat.

Charmlessness, of course, used to have the title Toxicity, and is broadly a measure of how environmentally horrible your nation is, though there's some other factors on it too. Regardless, that change is appropriate in scale and direction. I mean actually, if you check your graph, your current Charmlessness is just over 1% of your peak charmlessness from a little while back, so it's not as if you're a disaster zone.

i was mostly exaggerating, but thanks, this is really interesting

[Cascadiana]

Nation affected: Cascadiana
12 October at 1450 BST
Issue name/number: Death by Chocolate #882
Decision: Option #2 (desist from government interference on the issue, leave accountability and authority in parents hands)

Social Conservatism was lowered 37.82
https://imgur.com/Mxy79Ei

I selected this option to strengthen Social Conservatism for the nation.

It's counter-intuitive that it should be lowered.

[Luna Amore]

Nation affected: Cascadiana
12 October at 1450 BST
Issue name/number: Death by Chocolate #882
Decision: Option #2 (desist from government interference on the issue, leave accountability and authority in parents hands)

Social Conservatism was lowered 37.82
https://imgur.com/Mxy79Ei

I selected this option to strengthen Social Conservatism for the nation.

It's counter-intuitive that it should be lowered.

Less government restrictions on personal freedom -> less social conservatism

The census describes Social Conservatism as "Citizens in nations ranked highly tend to have greater restrictions placed on what they may do in their personal lives, whether via community values or government-imposed law."

Seems to be working as intended to me.

[Cascadiana]

Less government restrictions on personal freedom -> less social conservatism

The census describes Social Conservatism as "Citizens in nations ranked highly tend to have greater restrictions placed on what they may do in their personal lives, whether via community values or government-imposed law."

Social conservatism is focused on preservation of constitutional rights and individual liberties?

So the definition in NS is the opposite?

That would mean the Brezhnev and Putin are socially conservative while GW Bush and Ronald Reagan were pacifist liberals.

No wonder I'm confused.

UPDATE: Actually it explains the similar opposite effects I'm seeing in two other Issues

"To Catch a Beef" (#1170) [Option 1] which right to own/use firearms to protect property
"I Shot the Sherrif" (#698) [Option 1] which defends right of self-defense/right to own firearms

In NS, Social Conservatism is aligned with Authoritarianism rather than being aligned with Libertarian and Free Market. Yes?

[Candensia]

Less government restrictions on personal freedom -> less social conservatism

The census describes Social Conservatism as "Citizens in nations ranked highly tend to have greater restrictions placed on what they may do in their personal lives, whether via community values or government-imposed law."

Social conservatism is focused on preservation of constitutional rights and individual liberties?

So the definition in NS is the opposite?

That would mean the Brezhnev and Putin are socially conservative while GW Bush and Ronald Reagan were pacifist liberals.

No wonder I'm confused.

UPDATE: Actually it explains the similar opposite effects I'm seeing in two other Issues

"To Catch a Beef" (#1170) [Option 1] which right to own/use firearms to protect property
"I Shot the Sherrif" (#698) [Option 1] which defends right of self-defense/right to own firearms

In NS, Social Conservatism is aligned with Authoritarianism rather than being aligned with Libertarian and Free Market. Yes?

Not an editor, but I can break some stuff down for you.

“Constitutional rights” aren’t meaningful in determining what Social Conservatism is with regards to NS. I can enshrine the right of each citizen in Candensia to a lifetime supply of iced tea, and call it a constitutional right. What is seen as “Liberal” or “Conservative” isn’t 100% meaningful either, rather look at how social conservatism is defined in NS.

In NS, social conservatism is exactly as Luna described, the measure of restriction the government puts on the individual or personal lives of citizens. More restrictions, more social conservatism, less restriction, less social conservatism.

In #1170.1, you allow farmers more freedom to defend their livelihoods through force of arms. This is a reduction in personal restriction, and translates to a reduction in social conservatism. Whether gun rights are a “liberal” or “conservative” cause is not important in this determination.

The case is similar in #698.1. Boiled down, it’s exactly the same. The mentally ill are allowed to own firearms. Support a reduction in personal restriction, you’ll see a drop in social conservatism. Just because, in this option, you’re supporting gun rights, as in the freedom citizens have to own firearms, does not mean it’s intrinsically linked to what we see as “conservative” causes or “liberal” ones.

[Albennia]

I chose option 3 ("New "Commiserations! It's An Accident!" greetings cards for expectant mothers are selling surprisingly quickly") of issue 1142 (Womb Service), which bans abortion in all circumstances, and my civil rights went up while authoritarianism and social conservatism went down?

[The Free Joy State]

I chose option 3 ("New "Commiserations! It's An Accident!" greetings cards for expectant mothers are selling surprisingly quickly") of issue 1142 (Womb Service), which bans abortion in all circumstances, and my civil rights went up while authoritarianism and social conservatism went down?

This has come up before, so I'm going to quote myself:

Awhile back, the team (aware of the deep and personal feelings around the sensitive issue of abortion) took the -- perhaps controversial decision -- to (generally speaking, allowing for individual stats) programme a civil rights rise for both banning and allowing abortion.

Due to the strength of emotion it raises, we felt it inappropriate to come down on either side of this debate.

As for authoritarianism and social conservatism, they're secondary stats, somewhat tied to civil rights. They both tend to go down when civil rights go up.

[Great Batavica]

Today just a few moments ago, I encountered the issue "Where's The Love Gone" (Issue #1) on this nation and I chose option 3, which was to legalize same-sex marriage. As a result, Charmlessness went up by 14.2% and I found myself rather appalled. What does Charmlessness have to do with the legalisation of same-sex marriage? Because it comes across as rather offensive in my opinion and seems to convey a homophobic message, that marriage equality is something bad and appalling.

[The Free Joy State]

Today just a few moments ago, I encountered the issue "Where's The Love Gone" (Issue #1) on this nation and I chose option 3, which was to legalize same-sex marriage. As a result, Charmlessness went up by 14.2% and I found myself rather appalled. What does Charmlessness have to do with the legalisation of same-sex marriage? Because it comes across as rather offensive in my opinion and seems to convey a homophobic message, that marriage equality is something bad and appalling.

Firstly, I suggest you go into Settings and turn on 'Show More Stats'. That 14.3% (that looks so large) was only a rise from 4.38 to 5.00 (still very low).

Secondly, Charmlessness is a secondary stat. Secondary stats are a very complex mix of stats (responding to the hidden stats, your own stats and each other) to make the finished product, and not coded directly by us.

The stats do not imply that marriage equality is "something bad".

[Great Batavica]

Today just a few moments ago, I encountered the issue "Where's The Love Gone" (Issue #1) on this nation and I chose option 3, which was to legalize same-sex marriage. As a result, Charmlessness went up by 14.2% and I found myself rather appalled. What does Charmlessness have to do with the legalisation of same-sex marriage? Because it comes across as rather offensive in my opinion and seems to convey a homophobic message, that marriage equality is something bad and appalling.

Firstly, I suggest you go into Settings and turn on 'Show More Stats'. That 14.3% (that looks so large) was only a rise from 4.38 to 5.00 (still very low).

Secondly, Charmlessness is a secondary stat. Secondary stats are a very complex mix of stats (responding to the hidden stats, your own stats and each other) to make the finished product, and not coded directly by us.

The stats do not imply that marriage equality is "something bad".

Well, as a gay person it did make me raise an eyebrow, but if it is coded the way you say then I will assume it was simply a quirk of RNG. Because for the life of me, I cannot see the correlation between Charmlessness and marriage equality no matter how I look at it.