[SUBMITTED] Boom Which Beach?

[The Python]

(I totally did not steal one of Jutsa's suggestions from here XD)

First time writing an issue! Advice would be appreciated Also huge thanks to Fauxia, Daarwyrth, Minskiev, Jutsa, The Atlae Isles and everyone else who helped write this

@@NATION@@ has developed its first nuclear bombs! However, there is now the dilemma of where to test them.

Option 1. "What? I thought this country was peaceful," argues ardent pacifist and animal rights activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Where ever we test our nuclear weapons, they're going to cause deaths and destruction, whether of humans or @@ANIMALPLURAL@@! We should destroy these weapons of mass murder NOW."

Result: "The nation is bombarded with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NATION@@ doesn't retaliate"

Option 2. "Don't listen to that lunatic" says @@RANDOMNAME@@, engineer at the @@CITY@@ project which developed the first @@DEMONYM@@ nuclear bomb. "We should test them on @@ANIMAL@@ island, as it's remote and no humans will be harmed... well, a few @@ANIMAL@@s in the island might, but they don't have a voice, do they?"

Result: "Nuclear weapons are tested at the cost of @@ANIMAL@@"

Option 3. General @@RANDOMNAME@@ says "We're actually going to waste them on some random island or destroy this powerful weapon? Come on, we should just test them on our enemy Maxtopia."

Result: "Maxtopia is bombarded by untested nuclear weapons from @@NATION@@"

Scientists from the @@CITY@@ project that develop nuclear weapons are asking you where they can test their weapons.

Option 1. "Do we really need nuclear weapons?" argues ardent pacifist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "They are designed to cause mass murder, and we are not murderers. We should destroy these weapons NOW."

Result: "The nation is attacked with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NATION@@ doesn't retaliate."
Removes policy: Weapons of Mass Destruction

Option 2. "Don't listen to that lunatic" says @@RANDOMNAME@@, engineer at the @@CITY@@ project which developed the first @@DEMONYM@@ nuclear bomb. "We should test them on @@ANIMAL@@ island, as it's remote and no humans will be harmed... well, a few @@ANIMAL@@s in the island might, but they don't matter, do they?"

Result: "Nuclear weapons are tested at the cost of @@ANIMALPLURAL@@."

Option 3. "How about we test them in space?" argues @@RANDOMNAME@@, an engineer with a PhD for Rocket Science. "No @@ANIMALPLURAL@@, @@DEMONYM@@ or anything lives there, it is the perfect place to test this powerful weapon."

Result: "Nuclear weapons are created only to be sent into space."
Enacts policy: Space Program

Option 4. "What would happen if we tested them underground?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@ rhetorically. "It would prevent radioactive materials going into the atmosphere, and would be extremely safe."

Result: "Earthquakes are often actually nuclear weapon tests."

Option 5. General @@RANDOMNAME@@ says, "We're actually going to waste them on some random island or destroy this powerful weapon? Come on, we should just test them on our enemy Maxtopia."

Result: "Maxtopia is bombarded by untested nuclear weapons from @@NATION@@."

Validity: Nations with WMD policy.

The @@CAPITAL@@ Project has developed new, more powerful, nuclear weapons, however they are asking you where they can test their weapons.

Option 1. "We should test them on @@ANIMAL@@ Island, as it's remote and no humans will be harmed" says @@RANDOMNAME@@, lead engineer in the @@CAPITAL@@ Project, "Well, a few @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ in the island might, but they don't matter, do they?"

Result: "small islands that were once tourist attractions are now nuclear testing sites"

Option 2. "How about we test them in the desert?" argues @@RANDOMNAME@@, another engineer in the project. "Nobody, except possibly a few @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ live there; it is the perfect place to test this powerful weapon."

Result: "nuclear weapons are literally deserted in testing"

Option 3. "What would happen if we tested them underground?" rhetorically asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, a noted environmentalist who happens to live in a literal bunker underground. "It would prevent radioactive materials going into the atmosphere, and would be extremely safe and eco-friendly."

Result: "earthquakes are often actually nuclear weapon tests"

Option 4. General @@RANDOMNAME@@ arrives in your office wearing full military uniform. "We're actually going to waste them on some random island or destroy this powerful weapon?" @@HE@@ says. "Come on, we should just test them on our enemy Maxtopia."

Result: "Maxtopia is bombarded by untested nuclear weapons from @@NAME@@"

Option 5. "Do we really need nuclear weapons?" argues ardent pacifist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "They are designed to cause mass murder, and we are not murderers. We should destroy these weapons NOW."

Result: "the nation is attacked with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NAME@@ doesn't retaliate"
Removes policy: Weapons of Mass Destruction

Validity: Nations with WMD policy.

The @@CAPITAL@@ Project is looking for places to radiate into oblivion to test their ambitious new nuclear projects.

Option 1. "We should test them on @@ANIMAL@@ Island, as it's completely remote and no humans will be harmed", says @@RANDOMNAME@@, the eccentric lead engineer in the @@CAPITAL@@ Project who denies rumours of sleeping in the Project's lab. "I mean, a few non-voting @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ in the island might be harmed, but they don't matter, do they?"

Result: small islands that were once tourist attractions are now nuclear testing sites

Option 2. "How about we test them in the desert?" argues @@RANDOMNAME@@, another engineer in the project. "Many of our islands are tourist attractions or environmental sanctuaries, and we're not seriously going to destroy those over this weapon", @@HE@@ says. "After all, nobody except possibly a few unintelligent animals actually live in the desert, and who cares about them?"

Result: nuclear weapons are literally deserted in testing

Option 3. Spymaster @@RANDOMNAME@@ quietly tip-toes into your office, wearing a spy cloak and dark sunglasses. "What would happen if we tested them underground?", @@HE@@ argues. "It would be much harder for other countries and national enemies to learn about these very useful and powerful weapons. Other than possibly it being a bit more expensive, I don't see any downsides!"

Result: earthquakes are often actually nuclear weapon tests

Option 4. General @@RANDOMNAME@@, who is known for always wearing full military uniform in public, formally marches into your office. "We're actually going to waste them on some random island or in some desert in the middle of nowhere?", @@HE@@ says. "Come on, we should just test them on our enemy Marche Noir. That would finally make them fear and respect our might. Might makes right, you know!"

Result: Maxtopia is bombarded by untested nuclear weapons from @@NAME@@

Option 5. "The country's seriously even considering these Weapons of Mass Murder?", says @@RANDOMNAME@@, a notorious anti-war activist who is wearing an anti-WMD T-shirt. "We are not murderers, and we MUST destroy these superweapons NOW. Just think of the thousands of children that will inevitabely perish whenever - hold on, I need to go attend an anti-war protest march!" and @@HE@@ rushes out of your office.

Result: the nation is attacked with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NAME@@ doesn't retaliate
Removes policy: Weapons of Mass Destruction

Validity: Nations with WMD policy.

The @@CAPITAL@@ Project is looking for places to radiate into oblivion to test their ambitious new nuclear projects.

Option 1. "We should test them on @@ANIMAL@@ Island, as it's completely remote and no humans will be harmed", asserts Dr. @@RANDOMNAME@@, the eccentric lead engineer who seems to have bought a map and plastic @@ANIMAL@@ figures to illustrate @@HIS@@ point. "I mean, a few @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ in the island might be harmed, but they don't matter, do they?"

Result: small islands that were once tourist attractions now try to sell tickets to watch the weekly mushroom cloud

Option 2. Spymaster @@RANDOMNAME@@ quietly tip-toes into your office, wearing a dark cloak and sunglasses. "We should test them underground", @@HE@@ says quietly. "It would be much harder for other countries and national enemies to learn about these very useful and powerful weapons. Other than possibly some tree huggers moaning about groundwater contamination, I don't see any real downsides!"

Result: earthquakes are often actually nuclear weapon tests

Option 3. "How about we test them in space?" argues @@RANDOMNAME@@, a military official whose house is, for some reason, in the shape of a rocket. "Not only does nothing live there, not even @@ANIMALPLURAL@@, but it would announce our power to the world and make everyone fear and respect us. It is the perfect place to test this powerful weapon."

Result: astronomers often mistake nuclear weapons tests for supernova explosions

Enacts policy: Space Program

Option 4. General @@RANDOMNAME@@ marches into your office in @@HIS@@ full military uniform. "Why should we be blowing up our own precious land, or wasting them in outer space?" @@HE@@ thunders bombastically, decorated with so many medals on @@HIS@@ uniform that the compass on your desk is pointing at @@HIM@@. "If we're going to test them for use in war, we should just test them on our enemy Marche Noire! That would finally make Marche Noire and the entire world respect us. Might makes right, you know!"

Result: citizens of Marche Noire find nuclear duds in their gardens

Option 5. "The country's seriously even considering using these Weapons of Mass Murder?", exclaims @@RANDOMNAME@@, a notorious anti-war activist wearing a "CIVILIAN LIVES MATTER" T-shirt made by a Tasmanian refugee collective. "We MUST destroy these superweapons NOW, or we will be nothing except cold-blooded killing machines! @@LEADER@@, just think of the thousands of innocent women and children that will inevitably perish whenever these doomsday machines are used!"

Result: the nation follows the policy of mutually unassured destruction
Removes policy: Weapons of Mass Destruction

[Thialrer]

@@NATION@@ has developed it's first nuclear bombs! However, there is now the dilemma of where to test them.

Should be "@@NATION@@ has developed its first nuclear bombs"; "it's" is a contraction for "it is". Most of my criticism is just going to be stuff like this, by the way.

Option 1. "What? I thought this country was peaceful." argues ardent pacifist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Where ever we test our nuclear weapons, they're going to cause deaths and destruction, whether of humans or @@ANIMAL@@! We should destroy these weapons of mass murder NOW."

It should be "'I thought this country was peaceful,' argues ardent pacifist..." Additionally, you should change "@@ANIMAL@@" to @@ANIMALPLURAL@@.

Result: "The nation is bombarded with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NATION@@ doesn't retaliate"

I don't think being bombarded by nukes would realistically happen if you decide not to use them. You might want to should change that.

Option 2. "Don't listen to that lunatic" says @@RANDOMNAME@@, engineer at the @@CITY@@ project which developed the first @@DEMONYM@@ nuclear bomb. "We should test them on @@ANIMAL@@ island, as it's remote and no humans will be harmed... well, a few @@ANIMAL@@s in the island might, but they don't have a voice, do they?"

It should be "Don't listen to that lunatic," says..." Additionally, you should change "engineer" to "an engineer". Also, change @@DEMONYM@@ to @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@. Also, change @@ANIMAL@@s to @@ANIMALPLURAL@@, as one country's national animal might be the goose, moose, et cetera.

Result: "Nuclear weapons are tested at the cost of @@ANIMAL@@"

It should be "Nuclear weapons are tested at the cost of @@ANIMALPLURAL@@".

Option 3. General @@RANDOMNAME@@ says "We're actually going to waste them on some random island or destroy this great weapon? Come on, we should just test them on our enemy Maxtopia."

It should be "General @@RANDOMNAME@@ says," with a comma.

Result: "Maxtopia is bombarded by untested nuclear weapons from @@NATION@@"

There should be a period after this.

---

---

Anyways, that's my advice. Hope you found it helpful.

[The Python]

Scissors go "snip"

Done! but:

Result: "The nation is bombarded with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NATION@@ doesn't retaliate"

I don't think being bombarded by nukes would realistically happen if you decide not to use them. You might want to should change that.

Would "The nation is attacked with nuclear weapons by national enemies but @@NATION@@ doesn't retaliate." be better?

[Daarwyrth]

One of the issues I'm looking at is the fact that Time For A Colonyoscopy! has option 4, wherein Brasilistan (it's part of that issue chain) can be designated a testing site. I wouldn't say there is a question of overlap, but it's more that the current premise feels a little standard in comparison. What I mean to say with this is, do you think you could make the premise a little bit more exciting? Option 4 is fairly dramatic, you just acquired a new colony, Brasilistan is in shambles etc etc. My suggestion is to spice up the scenario a little bit, revolving around weapon's testing. Perhaps look at what the USA did with Bikini Atoll. There's a very interesting video on YouTube by Kyle Hill wherein he explains what happened during the USA's nuclear weapon's testing. Perhaps the video will inspire something for this issue draft

Also, I am looking through the issue base, because somewhere in my mind floats the thought around that there is already an issue on weapons testing, but that could just be a false memory floating around. There is "Build Bigger Bombs, Advise Scientists", but that isn't really overlap. However, perhaps that issue could precede your proposed draft? Might be a thought worth considering!

[Reuteria]

I think a humorous alternative to result 2 is something like: "@@ANIMALPLURAL@@ often grow three heads after nuclear tests". Something along the lines of mutating animals would be funny.

[The Python]

One of the issues I'm looking at is the fact that Time For A Colonyoscopy! has option 4, wherein Brasilistan (it's part of that issue chain) can be designated a testing site. I wouldn't say there is a question of overlap, but it's more that the current premise feels a little standard in comparison. What I mean to say with this is, do you think you could make the premise a little bit more exciting? Option 4 is fairly dramatic, you just acquired a new colony, Brasilistan is in shambles etc etc. My suggestion is to spice up the scenario a little bit, revolving around weapon's testing. Perhaps look at what the USA did with Bikini Atoll. There's a very interesting video on YouTube by Kyle Hill wherein he explains what happened during the USA's nuclear weapon's testing. Perhaps the video will inspire something for this issue draft

Also, I am looking through the issue base, because somewhere in my mind floats the thought around that there is already an issue on weapons testing, but that could just be a false memory floating around. There is "Build Bigger Bombs, Advise Scientists", but that isn't really overlap. However, perhaps that issue could precede your proposed draft? Might be a thought worth considering!

One posibillity would be if this issue happens straight after the WMD policy is passed. And yes I watched the video.

[Daarwyrth]

One of the issues I'm looking at is the fact that Time For A Colonyoscopy! has option 4, wherein Brasilistan (it's part of that issue chain) can be designated a testing site. I wouldn't say there is a question of overlap, but it's more that the current premise feels a little standard in comparison. What I mean to say with this is, do you think you could make the premise a little bit more exciting? Option 4 is fairly dramatic, you just acquired a new colony, Brasilistan is in shambles etc etc. My suggestion is to spice up the scenario a little bit, revolving around weapon's testing. Perhaps look at what the USA did with Bikini Atoll. There's a very interesting video on YouTube by Kyle Hill wherein he explains what happened during the USA's nuclear weapon's testing. Perhaps the video will inspire something for this issue draft

Also, I am looking through the issue base, because somewhere in my mind floats the thought around that there is already an issue on weapons testing, but that could just be a false memory floating around. There is "Build Bigger Bombs, Advise Scientists", but that isn't really overlap. However, perhaps that issue could precede your proposed draft? Might be a thought worth considering!

One posibillity would be if this issue happens straight after the WMD policy is passed. And yes I watched the video.

Yes, that's what I was thinking as well, that this could be the follow-up issue. I would suggest to add in a little flavour of excitement, to make the issue have that something extra. However, if you prefer to keep it simple, please do!

[Baggieland]

My problem with this issue in its current state is that the premise states "where should we test our new nukes?"

Option 2 is good.

Option 1 says "get rid of our nukes" this has nothing to do with where to test them.

Option 3 says "test them on another nation" this fits with the standard "crazy 3rd option" that NS issues like to have, still a bit extreme.

You need more options like option 2. An isolated island, the desert, underground, outer space - possibly.

[The Python]

My problem with this issue in its current state is that the premise states "where should we test our new nukes?"

Option 2 is good.

Option 1 says "get rid of our nukes" this has nothing to do with where to test them.

Option 3 says "test them on another nation" this fits with the standard "crazy 3rd option" that NS issues like to have, still a bit extreme.

You need more options like option 2. An isolated island, the desert, underground, outer space - possibly.

I added the sea and outer space.

[Fauxia]

Hey Python. Welcome to GI.

Premise is fine, but the whole issue feels kind of off balance right now.

In the first place, I don't think these should be @@NAME@@'s first nukes. The game tends to assume @@NAME@@ can already build nukes. This is asking for a continuity error.

Option 1 should definitely not be option 1. I have mixed feelings about an "ABOLISH NUKES" option, because we have many of those, but it could at least stand to be more diplomatic and less exaggerated here.

The options themselves here are very barren. There's very little explanation to them, to the point where there seems to be almost no difference between the sea option and the island option and the space option. Right now, it's like picking from sixteen identical loaves of bread at the store. They all taste the same anyway. You have to show us what is different about each one.

The other problem is that the issue is missing the only site really used for nuclear testing since 1963 - underground.

This can be a good issue, but there is a lot of work that has to be done on it right now. Good luck, Python

[The Python]

Hey Python. Welcome to GI.

Premise is fine, but the whole issue feels kind of off balance right now.

In the first place, I don't think these should be @@NAME@@'s first nukes. The game tends to assume @@NAME@@ can already build nukes. This is asking for a continuity error.

OK

Option 1 should definitely not be option 1. I have mixed feelings about an "ABOLISH NUKES" option, because we have many of those, but it could at least stand to be more diplomatic and less exaggerated here.

Is this better?

The options themselves here are very barren. There's very little explanation to them, to the point where there seems to be almost no difference between the sea option and the island option and the space option. Right now, it's like picking from sixteen identical loaves of bread at the store. They all taste the same anyway. You have to show us what is different about each one.

The other problem is that the issue is missing the only site really used for nuclear testing since 1963 - underground.

So I replaced the sea option with underground.

This can be a good issue, but there is a lot of work that has to be done on it right now. Good luck, Python [/quote]

[Australian rePublic]

Do nations even test nukes any more? I feel as if this is a 1950's thing

[Trotterdam]

Do nations even test nukes any more?

Nations that are newly developing them do. Nations that have had working nukes for decades have less reason to keep testing them, as do nations that just don't want nukes, and nowadays most nations fall into one or the other camp.

[The Python]

With the issue contest, I plan to submit this as an entry for the contest.

[Electrum]

I suggest following Fauxia's comments more closely, since yes, once you have a nuclear program, it is assumed you know how to build one, which means you need to amend the premise slightly. I would suggest getting rid of the no nuclear option, because we already have so many issues that repeal them, and focus the issue on where to test the weapons.

In space doesn't make too much sense - there's nuclear fallout, and you're basically announcing to the world that you have weapons. Option 5 stretches verisimilitude. Countries don't nuke other countries just to test nuclear weapons. That's never happened in history. Focus on the advantages and disadvantages of each option to give them more heft, and add another option for an above ground option, like in an uninhabited desert. On an island, on land and underground are the three ways that nukes have been tested historically.

[The Python]

I suggest following Fauxia's comments more closely, since yes, once you have a nuclear program, it is assumed you know how to build one, which means you need to amend the premise slightly. I would suggest getting rid of the no nuclear option, because we already have so many issues that repeal them, and focus the issue on where to test the weapons.

In space doesn't make too much sense - there's nuclear fallout, and you're basically announcing to the world that you have weapons. Option 5 stretches verisimilitude. Countries don't nuke other countries just to test nuclear weapons. That's never happened in history. Focus on the advantages and disadvantages of each option to give them more heft, and add another option for an above ground option, like in an uninhabited desert. On an island, on land and underground are the three ways that nukes have been tested historically.

I still think that the removing nuclear weapons option should exist - if the issue is "where to test nukes" then there may as well also be the abolish them option.

I replaced space with the desert, that's a good idea. Option 5, I personally think such an extreme option is fun, though I could remove that I guess.

The idea, at least how it is now, is not that these are the first nukes (though it was in the original draft), but I reworded it to make that clearer.

[The Python]

Bumping before this slides into the second page.

[Minskiev]

Is @@CITY@@ even a macro? I thought it was @@CAPITAL@@.

Your options are too numerous and too short. They all also do the same thing, basically. You're missing the WMD validity. There are a few grammatical errors (option 3, replace the last comma with a semicolon/option 2, put a comma after lunatic and before the ").

Oh, an option 1 feels like it should be at the end. Why would the first response to where to test nukes be "ban them" instead of a location? Doesn't flow well.

And some more notes: Island in @@ANIMAL@@ island should be capitalized, @@ANIMAL@@s should be @@ANIMALPLURAL@@, project in @@CITY@@ project should be capitalized, and @@NATION@@ should be @@NAME@@.

[The Python]

Is @@CITY@@ even a macro? I thought it was @@CAPITAL@@.

Oh really? I thought it was @@CITY@@. Whatever, that's been fixed

Your options are too numerous and too short. They all also do the same thing, basically.

Option 1, I changed the result a bit
Option 2, I left it like it is rn
Option 3, Added more of an emphasis on eco-friendliness.

You're missing the WMD validity.

That's assumed, but I added it to the OP anyway.

There are a few grammatical errors (option 3, replace the last comma with a semicolon/option 2, but a comma after lunatic and before the ").

Solved

Oh, an option 1 feels like it should be at the end. Why would the first response to where to test nukes be "ban them" instead of a location? Doesn't flow well.

Fixed

And some more notes: Island in @@ANIMAL@@ island should be capitalized, @@ANIMAL@@s should be @@ANIMALPLURAL@@, project in @@CITY@@ project should be capitalized, and @@NATION@@ should be @@NAME@@.

Solved :>

[The Python]

I intend to submit this now in about 1 or 2 weeks.

[USS Monitor]

There's just not enough flavor. Options 1 and 2 both use the reasoning that nobody lives there except @@ANIMALPLURAL@@.

[The Python]

There's just not enough flavor. Options 1 and 2 both use the reasoning that nobody lives there except @@ANIMALPLURAL@@.

So I updated Option 2 to put less of an emphasis on that, so is this better?

[Daarwyrth]

I still think each of the speakers could receive a lot more characterisation that they're currently missing. There's a scientist, then there's another scientist, a military official, but all of them are a little mundane. I think they could benefit a lot from funny characterisations, perhaps one's a very nerdy scientist, the other a dashing, charming one etc. and then you could toy around with those characterisations, see if there's interesting ways to have them interact with one another. Because the issue is solidly written and straight to the point, but I am missing the flavouring that's a defining characteristic of NS, if you know what I mean?

[The Python]

I still think each of the speakers could receive a lot more characterisation that they're currently missing. There's a scientist, then there's another scientist, a military official, but all of them are a little mundane. I think they could benefit a lot from funny characterisations, perhaps one's a very nerdy scientist, the other a dashing, charming one etc. and then you could toy around with those characterisations, see if there's interesting ways to have them interact with one another. Because the issue is solidly written and straight to the point, but I am missing the flavouring that's a defining characteristic of NS, if you know what I mean?

Good idea/point. So:
In Option 1, the speaker now "[lives] in the @@CAPITAL@@ Project lab"
Option 2, Left it as-is for now
Option 3, also left it as it is, as the speaker already "happens to live in a literal bunker underground"
The speaker in option 4, now "is known for always wearing full military uniform in public" because why not

[Noahs Second Country]

Your longest option is probably around half the length of most options in successful issues. Currently, this reads as if you've filled in a template for an issue using the minimum word count.

You need to do a better job of making each character unique through their actions, dialogue, and reactions. There are definitely more arguments to be made for these stances than a single sentence.