[Abandoned] Payback Time?

[Marxist Germany]

First attempt at writing an issue, would love to get feedback on it.

Title: Payback time?

Description: 99 years ago, @@NAME@@ leased the territory of South Kong from Blackare, the lease has expired, and Blackare is demanding the land be returned back to them.

Option 1: "This is outrageous!" exclaims your Minister of Defence, "The place was just a fishing village when we took it, now it's one of the richest places in @@REGION@@! We developed it so we must send troops to the border and protect it until Blackare backs up and gives it's claim."

Effect Line: @@NAME@@ has a reputation for invading countries it is in debt to

Option 2: "I agree with crazy man, but we shouldn't take the land by force. We must try to negotiate with Blackare to extend the lease, and... well... we might have to spend a bit of money along the way, but I'm pretty sure we can afford it..." He quickly sneaks out of the room.

Effect Line: @@NAME@@'s public services are one of the least funded in @@REGION@@

Option 3:" I have an idea, " snaps your Minister of Intelligence," how about we carpet bomb the city and build a small fishing village, just like how we got it, I mean, they didn't specify how they wanted the city," he turns to a mirror, "oh @@RANDOMENAME@@ you're so smart".

Effect Line: @@NAME@@ frequently carpet bombs it's own cities

Option 4: "How about we just return the city?" exclaims your minister of foreign affairs, "@@NAME@@ should be known for sticking to the deals it signs, plus we really need an ally in the north to prevent those pesky Maxtopians from invading in the future."

Effect: several nations in @@REGION@@ are claiming that @@CAPITAL@@ is leased territory

[Necroviribus]

exclaims your minister of Defence @@RANDOMMALENAME@

I believe that you should either change 'minister of defence' to something more broad, like 'helper of the minister of defence' to make it so people who might of put down the minister of defence's name, or just not even use the @@RANDOMMALENAME@@. That way it seems more realistic and people won't be like "That's not the name of the minister of Defence!" Just helping out though, ask me if I need to clarify this.

[USS Monitor]

Government ministers are normally @@RANDOMNAME@@ with no gender. You can also just say "your Minister of Defense" without any name attached.

[Marxist Germany]

Government ministers are normally @@RANDOMNAME@@ with no gender. You can also just say "your Minister of Defense" without any name attached.

Fixed

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I see this is about the 1997 handover of Hong Kong from Britain to China, which was a very interesting event with a lot of complicated geopolitical issues around it. It's a great source of inspiration for issues, but I think this issue may be attempting to do too much and too little.

Too much, because it's overly assumptive to have every nation to have a 99-year lease agreement over part of their sovereign territory. Also too much as it tries to cover what was a really complicated and multi-faceted handover with too much simplicity.

Too little, because it doesn't flesh out any single dilemma with sufficient detail, and the lack of narrative focus means there's not an interesting question to answer.

I'd suggest using the HK handover as a source of inspiration for issues rather than trying to port the whole event over wholesale. Instead, focus on a single aspect of that event (such as the worry that democracy might be lost, or the handing back a territory that has gained a lot of value in the interim, or dealing with the requests for retainin @@NAME@@ citizenship... or from the Chinese side, worries about cultural reintegration, the impact of a sudden wealth gap magnification, the disruption to the political status quo from pro-democracy ideologies, and so on). Then take that single aspect, and weave a new narrative that works within NS's acceptable set of assumptions about player nations, and ask the questions arising from that aspect.

[Marxist Germany]

I see this is about the 1997 handover of Hong Kong from Britain to China, which was a very interesting event with a lot of complicated geopolitical issues around it. It's a great source of inspiration for issues, but I think this issue may be attempting to do too much and too little.

Too much, because it's overly assumptive to have every nation to have a 99-year lease agreement over part of their sovereign territory. Also too much as it tries to cover what was a really complicated and multi-faceted handover with too much simplicity.

Too little, because it doesn't flesh out any single dilemma with sufficient detail, and the lack of narrative focus means there's not an interesting question to answer.

I'd suggest using the HK handover as a source of inspiration for issues rather than trying to port the whole event over wholesale. Instead, focus on a single aspect of that event (such as the worry that democracy might be lost, or the handing back a territory that has gained a lot of value in the interim, or dealing with the requests for retainin @@NAME@@ citizenship... or from the Chinese side, worries about cultural reintegration, the impact of a sudden wealth gap magnification, the disruption to the political status quo from pro-democracy ideologies, and so on). Then take that single aspect, and weave a new narrative that works within NS's acceptable set of assumptions about player nations, and ask the questions arising from that aspect.

Thanks for feedback, I will take that into consideration