[SUBMITTED] On the Right Track

[Issues Author]

We have finally produced something. Original thread here: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=487656
This is the first project we’re pursuing, and we decided to challenge ourselves with a bit of a tricky follow-up to 634. We started out by creating a skeleton of the issue, then writing a description based on our interpretation of 634 (this would later be changed). We were able to create the first 3 options nearly immediately, with each author taking one. Once written, the whole group provided feedback and helped each author refine their option to flow with the issue. However, past this point, progress stalled a bit as we didn’t set any deadlines, so we spent a good amount of time waiting and making bad puns in the meantime. Unfortunately, one of the initial authors interested dropped out due to RL reasons, but another author stepped in and took their place. Ultimately, the major benefit of this project is access to a multitude of near instantaneous feedback from others invested in the same project, which seems to outweigh the time spent waiting for everyone to do their part. Hopefully we’ve produced a good issue here. Our next step is a meta groupthink issue, coming soon.

Hivemind moment: https://imgur.com/9sNoQsF

Title: On the Right Track
The Issue:The prototype model for the new high speed maglev railway exploded yesterday, with engineers citing the problem coming as a result of "structural failures." Various contractors wielding crayons and peanut butter have seized the opportunity to confront you with "safer" high-speed networks, ultimately culminating into a sticky yet colorful brawl over the best design right outside of your office door.
Validity: Must have answered #634.1

Option 1: "Isn't this all a little... primitive?" asks futurist CEO Efon Brusque, frantically cleaning peanut butter off his clothing. "Why not adopt my company's HyperLoop™️ design⁠—capsules traveling at extreme velocities, thanks to low pressure tunnels under every @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ city! Future! Speed! Long tunnels! Every single one of these things can be yours, in every major city for the low cost of—" It appears that his throat has closed up as medical personnel proceed to stab him with two different needles.
[effect] adrenaline junkies claim that the newest public transportation system is better every loop

Opton 2: “What a horrid man,“ scoffs bespectacled architect Walt Schwebebahn, shaking after listening to Mr. Husk’s sales pitch. “That all sounds terribly expensive and drab. With a little bit of creative tweaking, we could implement a suspended monorail system alongside the old public railway! This would streamline transportation routes and reduce environmental impact, while making smaller towns more accessible. @@LEADER@@, have you ever felt the magic of being in the open air? Sure beats being in a small, dark—” He promptly faints.
[effect] the new monorails are the best one-liners in @@REGION@@

Option 3: "Look at what I've drawn! Look at it!" shouts giddy tech designer and amateur artist @@RANDOMNAME@@, showing you a crude stick figure drawing of their design. "We don't even need to build anything new, just create road trains with a body elevated well above the road so the cars can pass right under them! How could this not be a good idea?"
[effect] double decker buses are outlawed

Option 4: Civil engineer @@RANDOMNAME@@ stops picking crayon out of @@HIS@@ hair long enough to facepalm. "We’re getting sidetracked here. The original idea was a maglev network, and that’s still the most attractive solution. I mean, that last try didn't go too well, but now we'll know about the locusts beforehand! And I really don't think that thing with the milk is going to happen again. Don't try some off-the-rails fancy project, or it’ll end up a train wreck and the taxpayers will take the bullet — stay on the beaten track, and stick with what we know."
[effect] public transit is literally up in the air

Option 5: "Great SCOTT!" shouts Doc Maroon, falling through the ceiling. "@@LEADER@@, I've made a groundbreaking discovery that enables us to teleport molecules between two different points in space. If we can move a molecule, then surely we can move a traincar full of people, right?"
[effect] the deficit in transit maintenance has been quantumly linked to an onion's velocity

[box]Title: On the Right Track
The Issue:The prototype model for the new high speed maglev railway exploded yesterday, with engineers citing the problem coming as a result of "structural failures." Various contractors wielding crayons and peanut butter have seized the opportunity to confront you with "safer" high-speed networks, ultimately culminating into a sticky yet colorful brawl over the best design right outside of your office door.
Validity: Must have answered #634.1

[b]Option 1: "Isn't this all a little... primitive?" asks futurist CEO Melon Husk, frantically cleaning peanut butter off his clothing. "Why not adopt my company's HyperLoop™️ design⁠—capsules traveling at extreme velocities, thanks to low pressure tunnels under every @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ city! Future! Speed! Long tunnels! Every single one of these things can be yours, in every major city for the low cost of—" It appears that his throat has closed up as medical personnel proceed to stab him with two different needles.
[effect] adrenaline junkies claim that the newest public transportation system is better every loop

Opton 2: “What a horrid man,“ scoffs bespectacled architect Walt Schwebebahn, shaking after listening to Mr. Husk’s sales pitch. “That all sounds terribly expensive and drab. With a little bit of creative tweaking, we could implement a suspended monorail system alongside the old public railway, which could streamline transportation routes and reduce environmental impact, while making smaller towns more accessible. @@LEADER@@, have you ever felt the magic of being in the open air? Sure beats being in a small, dark—” He promptly faints.
[effect] the new monorails are the best one-liners in @@REGION@@

Option 3: "Look at what I've drawn! Look at it!" shouts giddy tech designer and amateur artist @@RANDOMNAME@@, showing you a crude stick figure drawing of their design. "We don't even need to build anything new, just create road trains with a body elevated well above the road so the cars can pass right under them! How could this not be a good idea?"
[effect] double decker buses are outlawed

Option 4: Civil engineer @@RANDOMNAME@@ stops picking crayon out of @@HIS@@ hair long enough to facepalm. "We’re getting sidetracked here. The original idea was a maglev network, and that’s still the most attractive solution. I mean, that last try didn't go too well, but now we know about the locusts beforehand! And I really don't think that thing with the milk is going to happen again. Don't try some off-the-rails fancy project, or it’ll end up a train wreck and the taxpayers will take the bullet — stay on the beaten track, and stick with what we know."
[effect] public transit is literally up in the air

Option 5: "Great SCOTT!" shouts Doc Maroon, falling through the ceiling. "@@LEADER@@, I've made a groundbreaking discovery that enables us to teleport molecules between two different points in space. If we can move a molecule, then surely we can move a traincar full of people, right?"
[effect] the deficit in transit maintenance has been quantumly linked to an onion's velocity

Title: On the Right Track
The Issue: After caving in to intrusive petitioners' advances, you've agreed to build a nationwide high-speed maglev railway system. However, during the planning process, various peanut-butter-and-crayon wielding contractors came up with alternative high-speed networks, ultimately culminating into a sticky yet colorful brawl over the best design right outside of your office door.
Validity: Must have answered #634.1

Option 1: "Isn't this all a little... primitive?" asks futurist CEO Melon Husk, frantically cleaning peanut butter off his clothing. "Why not adopt my company's HyperLoop™️ design⁠—capsules traveling at extreme velocities, thanks to low pressure tunnels under every @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ city! Future! Speed! Long tunnels! Every single one of these things can be yours, for the low cost of-" It appears that his throat has closed up as medical personnel proceed to stab him with 2 different needles.
[effect] adrenaline junkies claim that the newest public transportation system is better every loop

Opton 2: “What a horrid man,“ scoffs bespectacled architect Walt Schwebebahn, shaking after listening to Mr. Husk’s sales pitch. “That all sounds terribly expensive and drab. With a little bit of creative tweaking, we could implement a suspended monorail system alongside the old public railway, which could streamline transportation routes and reduce environmental impact. @@LEADER@@, have you ever felt the magic of being in the open air? Sure beats being in a small, dark-” He promptly faints.
[effect] the new monorails are the best one-liners in @@REGION@@

Option 3: "Look at what I've drawn! Look at it!" shouts giddy tech designer and amateur artist @@RANDOMNAME@@, showing you a crude stick figure drawing of their design. "We don't even need tracks, just create road trains with a body elevated well above the road so the cars can pass right under them! How could this not be a good idea?"
[effect] double decker buses are outlawed

Option 4: Civil engineer @@RANDOMNAME@@ stops picking crayon out of @@HIS@@ hair long enough to facepalm. "We’re getting sidetracked here. The original idea was a maglev network, and that’s still the most attractive solution. It uses the rails we’ve already got, not massive tunnels or suspended tracks, and if you want proof it’ll work, just look at Yukishima — they’ve got a massive train system, and the reduced transit costs have made them a global business magnet! Don’t try some off-the-rails fancy project, or it’ll end up a train wreck and the taxpayers will take the bullet — stay on the beaten track, and stick with what we know."
[effect] public transit is literally up in the air

Option 5: "Great SCOTT!" shouts Doc Maroon, falling through the ceiling. "@@LEADER@@, I've made a groundbreaking discovery that enables us to teleport molecules between two different points in space. If we can move a molecule, then surely we can move a traincar full of people, right?"
[effect] the deficit in transit maintenance has been quantumly linked to an onion's velocity

Title by Honeydewistania
Description by Jutsa, Noahs Second Country, et. al
Option 1 by Noahs Second Country (Effect line by Noahs Second Country)
Option 2 by Westinor (Effect line by Noahs Second Country)
Option 3 by Honeydewistania (Effect line by Honeydewistania)
Option 4 by Authoritaria-Imperia (Effect line by Authoritaria-Imperia)
Option 5 by Socio Polor, Noahs Second Country, et. al (Effect line by Jutsa)

---

EDIT 0: Posted by Noah
EDIT 1: Clarified option 2's rail network to be alongside existing infrastructure rather than repurposing it - Jutsa
EDIT 2: Added Edit 1 to the changelog because Jutsa forgot (smh). Also, I wanted edit 2 - Noah
EDIT 3: Posted new draft - Noah
EDIT 4: Updated to last call, changed name to Efon Brusque, minor edit to option 2.
EDIT 5: I'm an idiot - Noah

[Trotterdam]

This sounds like an engineering problem, not a government problem.

It proposes several solutions to the same problem, but there's no clear political tradeoff of advantages and disadvantages for each, just "which method do you think is most likely to work?".

Nice flag, though

[Honeydewistania]

This sounds like an engineering problem, not a government problem.

It proposes several solutions to the same problem, but there's no clear political tradeoff of advantages and disadvantages for each, just "which method do you think is most likely to work?".

Nice flag, though

First one might be seen as the standard 'support corporate' option.

[Noahs Second Country]

This sounds like an engineering problem, not a government problem.

It proposes several solutions to the same problem, but there's no clear political tradeoff of advantages and disadvantages for each, just "which method do you think is most likely to work?".

Nice flag, though

That's an interesting point, but I believe that there are definitely political factors involved with each option, the primary factors being cost, environmental impact, and feasibility.

The government doesn't need to oversee small decisions pertaining to the creation of a transportation system, but I think we can safely assume that the government has allocated a significant amount of money to this project, and it's in @@LEADER@@'s best interested to determine the appropriate general methods in moving forward with their decision. After all, the government is the one responsible for funding the project. There are pretty significant differences between the systems being proposed, and it is likely that none of these would be possible to implement without some level of government approval, funds, and benefits given to these private contractors.

Also, thanks, I made the flag myself

[Trotterdam]

That's an interesting point, but I believe that there are definitely political factors involved with each option, the primary factors being cost, environmental impact, and feasibility.

I don't see it.

Premise: You have announced a decision to do X. Now, people are showing up disagreeing and telling you you should do not-X.
Option 1: Attempt to use expensive, untested technology.
Option 2: Attempt to use expensive, untested technology.
Option 3: Attempt to use expensive, untested technology.
Option 4: Do X, just like you already said you want to and probably still do, because it's established technology that is already known to work.
Option 5: Attempt to use expensive, untested technology.

Option 2 comes the closest to not matching the pattern, since it claims an environmental benefit (not sure why though), and is probably the next-closest to being real technology that we can actually get to work.

Options 1, 3, and 5, though, are just varyingly-crazy versions of the same thing.

[Jutsa]

Wellh, technically option 3 is being tested in China, and option 2 actually is in use.
Option 1, of course, remains untested I believe, but that one has some reason to believe it could be legit,
whereas option 5 is meant to be the far, out-of-left-field option.
ed: And then 4 is of course the most widely used, but again, it's not the only one being used.

Besides, I think it'd be kinda nice for transportation enthusiasts to choose what kind of futuristic network they'd like to primarily use in their nation.

[Drasnia]

This whole draft is a solution without a problem. Like Trotterdam said, Leader has already made a decision. Why should they change their mind?

It just doesn't work as a premise. Issues are very much big picture. You aren't outlining all of the minutiae, detailing which contractor works on what building or making individual hiring decisions for junior undersecretaries. Leader wants bullet trains, so unless there is actually a massive problem that comes about from trying to implement that policy, bullet trains are what Leader should get.

I would think that a big collab draft would write something a bit more meta - a celebration of GI and NS as a whole.

[Noahs Second Country]

As Jutsa said, it is notable that all of the technology besides option 5 are being used or tested somewhere IRL. With Hyperloop specifically, many consider it to be the future of public transportation systems in 10-20 years. A lot of the government benefits are implied by the options rather than outright claimed. I'll see if we can address this, which may make the "issue" more clear.

It just doesn't work as a premise. Issues are very much big picture. You aren't outlining all of the minutiae, detailing which contractor works on what building or making individual hiring decisions for junior undersecretaries. Leader wants bullet trains, so unless there is actually a massive problem that comes about from trying to implement that policy, bullet trains are what Leader should get.

Determining the type of transportation system that is to be used nationwide, placing a significant amount of strain on the government budget, should be something that Leader is concerned about.

Choosing any of the options provided would make a significant difference to the lives of citizens in the nation, and it also enables the player to decide what kind of transportation system is implemented, whereas in the current issue pool the most futuristic option they have available to them is maglev trains. Seeing as this is a followup, it effectively gives players the initial choice to implement a futuristic public transport system, where then they are given a variety of sub-options that operate under the assumption that they already chose a pro-transport, pro-future option before.

Given that Leader has already said "I want bullet trains," there appears to really be only 2 realistic ways to go about this issue. The first being what we did, and the second being that in the description of 634, Leader chose to implement a plan being pushed by a bunch of petitioners, meaning that actual implementation could run into problems. We went with the former because it made more sense once option 4 was in place.

Beyond this, I simply don't see how to address a follow-up to 634, which would be a shame.

As for a more "meta" issue, I agree and we will hopefully be pursuing that soon.

[Drasnia]

Determining the type of transportation system that is to be used nationwide, placing a significant amount of strain on the government budget, should be something that Leader is concerned about.

You are correct. That's why #634 exists.

Choosing any of the options provided would make a significant difference to the lives of citizens in the nation, and it also enables the player to decide what kind of transportation system is implemented, whereas in the current issue pool the most futuristic option they have available to them is maglev trains. Seeing as this is a followup, it effectively gives players the initial choice to implement a futuristic public transport system, where then they are given a variety of sub-options that operate under the assumption that they already chose a pro-transport, pro-future option before.

Given that Leader has already said "I want bullet trains," there appears to really be only 2 realistic ways to go about this issue. The first being what we did, and the second being that in the description of 634, Leader chose to implement a plan being pushed by a bunch of petitioners, meaning that actual implementation could run into problems. We went with the former because it made more sense once option 4 was in place.

The entire premise is framing #634.1 as short-sighted and stupid. Essentially it's just a bunch of sore losers who didn't even make the final cut of the original issue saying "b-but what about me?". It fundamentally opposes the idea of player choice. It seems like you're wanting issues to be unrealistically granular and comprehensive - two qualities issues in this game never have been and (most likely) never will be.

Beyond this, I simply don't see how to address a follow-up to 634, which would be a shame.

I don't understand why #634 needs a follow up more than 90+% of the issue base. What's so special about it?

[Minskiev]

Red is changes I’d suggest, or questions I’m asking.

Title: On the Right Track
The Issue: After caving in to intrusive petitioners' advances, you've agreed to build a nationwide high-speed maglev railway system. However, during the planning process, various peanut-butter-and-crayon wielding contractors came up with alternative high-speed networks, ultimately culminating into a sticky yet colorful brawl over the best design right outside of your office door.
Validity: Must have answered #634.1

Option 1: "Isn't this all a little... primitive?" asks futurist CEO of Mesla and OceanY Melon Husk, frantically cleaning peanut butter off his clothing. "Why not adopt my company's HyperLoop™️ design⁠—capsules traveling at extreme velocities, thanks to low pressure tunnels under every @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ city! Future! Speed! Long tunnels! Every single one of these things can be yours, for the low cost of-" @@HE@@ gets cut off as medical personnel inject anesthesiastab him with 2 different needles.
[effect] adrenaline junkies claim that the newest public transportation system is better every loop

Opton 2: “What a horrid man,“ scoffs bespectacled architect Walt Schwebebahn, shaking after listening to Mr. Husk’s sales pitch. “That all sounds terribly expensive and drab. We could instead implement a new suspended monorail system to contrast the old public railway, which could streamline transportation routes and reduce environmental impact. @@LEADER@@, have you ever felt the magic of being in the open air? Sure beats being in a small, dark-” He promptly faints.
[effect] the new monorails are the best one-liners in @@REGION@@

Option 3: "Look at what I've drawn! Look at it!" shouts giddy tech designer and amateur artist @@RANDOMNAME@@, showing you a crude stick figure drawing of their design. "We don't even need tracks, just create road trains with a body elevated well above the road so the cars can pass right under them! How could this not be a good idea?"
[effect] double decker buses are outlawed

Option 4: Civil engineer @@RANDOMNAME@@ stops picking crayon out of @@HIS@@ hair long enough to facepalm. "We’re getting sidetracked here. The original idea was a maglev network, and that’s still the most attractive solution. It uses the rails we’ve already got, not massive tunnels or suspended tracks, and if you want proof it’ll work, just look at Yukishima is that an NPC nation? Or something in the real world, that might not exist to some nations?— they’ve got a massive train system, and the reduced transit costs have made them a global business magnet! Don’t try some off-the-rails fancy project, or it’ll end up a train wreck and the taxpayers will take the bullet — stay on the beaten track, and stick with what we know."
[effect] public transit is literally up in the air

Option 5: "Great SCOTT!" shouts Doc Maroon, falling through the ceiling. "@@LEADER@@, I've made a groundbreaking discovery that enables us to teleport molecules between two different points in space. If we can move a molecule, then surely we can move a traincar full of people, right?" This seems a bit lackluster..
[effect] the deficit in transit maintenance has been quantumly linked to an onion's velocity

[Noahs Second Country]

of Mesla and OceanY

I think "Melon Husk" is direct enough a reference.

@@HE@@ gets cut off as medical personnel inject anesthesiastab him with 2 different needles.

The needles are supposed to be epinephrine, not anesthesia.

is that an NPC nation? Or something in the real world, that might not exist to some nations?

New NPC, intended to be Japan, I believe.

This seems a bit lackluster..

How so? It's intentionally short because it's equally stupid and the issue was getting long.

[Minskiev]

Alright, but CEO isn’t too clear.

Well, swap it out with epinephrine, then. Also, delete that quoted bit in black, my mistake.

Interesting.

Alright, but it’s a little underwhelming. All these proposals, and then “oh yeah lmao teleportation” out of nowhere...

[Noahs Second Country]

Determining the type of transportation system that is to be used nationwide, placing a significant amount of strain on the government budget, should be something that Leader is concerned about.

You are correct. That's why #634 exists.

Choosing any of the options provided would make a significant difference to the lives of citizens in the nation, and it also enables the player to decide what kind of transportation system is implemented, whereas in the current issue pool the most futuristic option they have available to them is maglev trains. Seeing as this is a followup, it effectively gives players the initial choice to implement a futuristic public transport system, where then they are given a variety of sub-options that operate under the assumption that they already chose a pro-transport, pro-future option before.

Given that Leader has already said "I want bullet trains," there appears to really be only 2 realistic ways to go about this issue. The first being what we did, and the second being that in the description of 634, Leader chose to implement a plan being pushed by a bunch of petitioners, meaning that actual implementation could run into problems. We went with the former because it made more sense once option 4 was in place.

The entire premise is framing #634.1 as short-sighted and stupid. Essentially it's just a bunch of sore losers who didn't even make the final cut of the original issue saying "b-but what about me?". It fundamentally opposes the idea of player choice. It seems like you're wanting issues to be unrealistically granular and comprehensive - two qualities issues in this game never have been and (most likely) never will be.

Beyond this, I simply don't see how to address a follow-up to 634, which would be a shame.

I don't understand why #634 needs a follow up more than 90+% of the issue base. What's so special about it?

I believe this viewtopic.php?f=13&t=159868&p=34837606&hilit=634#p34837606 is the reason why we decided to write this in the first place.

Though this is the first time I've actually read the comment, so maybe I should bring up this particular portion up with the rest of the group.

but which isn't JUST about speed vs cost.

[Noahs Second Country]

Alright, but CEO isn’t too clear.

Well, swap it out with epinephrine, then. Also, delete that quoted bit in black, my mistake.

Interesting.

It’s a little short, and very underwhelming. Plus, the other options are far longer.

I'm curious as to why specifying epinephrine is important here. The context of peanut butter + throat closing up should imply allergies well enough.

As for a short last option, I believe that's actually pretty common for issues, especially ones that surpass 3 or 4 options. I don't see a need to expand on an option about teleportation when it is quite obvious that the proposed solution will not work.

I'll bring these things up anyway and see what we can do.

[Minskiev]

Oh, allergies totally flew over my head. That makes far more sense.

[Jutsa]

The entire premise is framing #634.1 as short-sighted and stupid. Essentially it's just a bunch of sore losers who didn't even make the final cut of the original issue saying "b-but what about me?". It fundamentally opposes the idea of player choice. It seems like you're wanting issues to be unrealistically granular and comprehensive - two qualities issues in this game never have been and (most likely) never will be.

I don't understand why #634 needs a follow up more than 90+% of the issue base. What's so special about it?

I do understand what you mean by that, and normally I'd agree (and I'm sure some other folks might), but...

wellh, here's the thing. We originally built this without realizing that 634's description specifically mentions a maglev.
But the main idea behind this is was to be an issue about proposing creative or new public transport ideas to a playerbase.
After all, it'd be kinda hard to write an issue about a hyperloop, or teleportation, or those stacked bus train things.

An argument, of course, could still be made that an issue containing those simply shouldn't exist, but I kinda feel like it'd be nice to reward
nations with more futuristic alternatives, and more specifically plans for how the infrastructure should be built itself.
Of course, maybe we should've leaned in even heavier with that last aspect, though I know that's not what you're pointing out.

For instance, hyperloops were supposed to be fast and boost scientific research but mainly for large cities, road busses being effective for all places but could distract cars,
maglevs utilizing old infrastructure at the expense of planning around current infrastructure,
and suspended monorails being built with efficient routes to contrast existing infrastructure sacrificing speed for beauty and environment.
And then teleportation being, of course, the funny option that, while good for scientific research, would actually cripple public transit.

Admittedly, framing it as "caving to public petitioners" is a bit... suggestive. But it was sorta meant to be a humorous reference to how issue 634
itself is an issue specifically about protesters petitioning the government to build a bullet train. (which, again, we later found out was specifically a maglev.)
I get how it could come across in questionable taste though.

Longwided way of coming around to it, though: I'm not so sure why this sort of granularity in public transport (which imo could use more love anyway) would be so bad. After all, issue 634 was "build the maglev", "let others build the maglev", "DON'T build the maglev", and "Build a slower train", which... is really low granularity when you think about it.

Frankly the only issue I find with the issue at present is "questioning @@LEADER@@'s choice to make a maglev". But when you think about it,
the choice was less "Lets specifically choose to build a maglev rail" and more "Have the government fund a massive project to upgrade our rail networks".
Now, for sure, we'll discuss the possibility of rewording the issue description to maybe be less accusatory, but I think this issue stands substantially different from 634,
and remains something that very much is a matter of government funding and implementation. Though, again, perhaps we could work on making that more clear.

[Australian rePublic]

Maglev=/=Japenese bullet train
And maglev=/=existing train tracks

[Candlewhisper Archive]

As usual (when it comes to criticising issues) I agree with Trotterdam.

The writing isn't bad, but the issue premise is a little thin. Essentially you've decided to do something, and people are saying "do this instead". That doesn't really work in the expected model of NS.

Rather, if you do a consequence issue it should normally be more along the lines of "you decided to do this, and as a result now THIS UNEXPECTED THING HERE is happening."

[Issues Author]

Draft 2 is out, featuring an unexpected explosion, which should inevitably lead to questions about maglev's reliability without introducing other issues, keeping a lot of the original writing.

Additionally, we've added small features to options 1&2 that hint at the accessibility of these systems, bringing socioeconomic factors into play.

Option 4 was also adjusted to account for the new description.

[Jutsa]

I'll be honest, it hasn't been particularly easy thinking up a significant downside to maglev rails that would raise the issue.
I figured that some significant test mishap might be the only way to deal with both the "maglevs are generally good" problem and the "Rubyna added the word maglev to the description" issue.

In all seriousness, we started this focusing on the option being non-particular and just "high-speed rail network", and frankly I still think this issue should exist for future-techy railway nations;
it's just proven more difficult than we would've hoped due to one overlooked word in the description.
Not for that, I'd be content not even having the train explode. But in light of that, having trains explode is about the worst thing we can think of.
(aside from something involving magnetism, but we couldn't even think of a realistic thing for that.)

[Australian rePublic]

Option 3- What do you think that a road train is? Because this is a road train

[Issues Author]

Option 3- What do you think that a road train is? Because this is a road train

(Image)

Well, the option is intended to be a fairly abstract one (drawn with crayons, after all), however the real world grounding is in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPdl3uxW3aI

[Fauxia]

Haven’t we used Melon Husk before? His name changes every time.

[Jutsa]

Yeah, my bad. For some reason I forgot it was used before.

I thought about Oolong something but Oolong's been used too smh.

Miraculously, though, Must seems to be free...

[Paffnia]

I ended up cutting "Allen Musket" from the issue I just submitted; feel free to use it if you like.