Mikitivity
28-06-2004, 01:33
OOC:
Admittedly we all play for completely reasons, so what I have to say here is completely biased. Read it is an opinion, but I hope some of you will come to see it as an opinion born of experience of tweaking around with the game.
First, as most of you are aware, the number of options / classifications / impacts of UN proposals available in Nation Staes v1.7 is limited. This is fair, as a very complicated set of rules means more moderation.
I'd rather not add a greater work load to our moderators, so instead I'm hoping to appeal to your "real-world" sense of practicality ...
It is hardly worth crying about "spilt milk", and with that in mind, the game stats impacts of UN resolutions are often spilt milk (this is my opinion).
I accept 2 issues / day. I dismiss most of the issues on the basis of the stated impacts rarely match what I'd consider realistic game stats changes. For example: no issue gives you a CHOICE on how significant your change in policy is. When I choose to increase funding for re-education that murder (human sacrafice) is actually bad, the game hints that it will destroy my economy. Is this the case? No way, most of us are taught this as children while learning to count to ten.
This in mind, we all can easily feel our way through the daily issues to pick issues that move our government into a category we feel meets our role-playing image. For example: I'm playing the part of something between a cross of Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Meaning, my nation *will* reluctantly send in peace keeping troops, looks the other way towards recreational drugs, and will tax the hell out of people. There are other factors in mind, but that is whom I'm playing and I've easily been about to "repair" my game stats.
When a UN resolution passes, the game stats will change. But given that only 2-4 resolutions tend to pass every 2 weeks, I get 14x2 = 28 chances to undone the game stats changes.
With this in mind, when a resolution comes to a vote, I ask that if you agree that game stats are milk, that worried about the "hidden" costs is less important than roleplaying an international diplomat who is building international law.
DISCLAIMER: I'm bringing this up now, because soon my proposal "Tracking Near Earth Objects" will hit. This proposal is based on a previous resolution (which I'll recover and repose the PRO and CON arguments for so we all can make an informed debate), but sadly the debate focused on what I consider to be lame OOC arguments instead of roleplaying.
My proposal will increase your military budgets slightly because I was given NO option to increase your science budgets. If you read the resolution, it is clear that it is more akin to the real world World Meterological Organization or UNESCO than it is to being police forces.
But at the same time, the moderators were completely correct to suggest that in our game that Military Budgets are the best tool for my resolution. Nobody will be trying to lie or trick you. I specifically added a clause stating that the military spending is assumed to be in the space sciences, which again is true in the real world.
Only in the past few years have private American firms managed to put a human being into space. Before that time, cutting edge space programs have been exclusively the domain of defense contractors and government programs.
This will change in time, but in the here and now, I felt bringing up a future area that the UN will address someday in the real world would be more interesting to many of us. That and obviously this is something that I think is fun to read about.
Thanks,
10kMichael
Admittedly we all play for completely reasons, so what I have to say here is completely biased. Read it is an opinion, but I hope some of you will come to see it as an opinion born of experience of tweaking around with the game.
First, as most of you are aware, the number of options / classifications / impacts of UN proposals available in Nation Staes v1.7 is limited. This is fair, as a very complicated set of rules means more moderation.
I'd rather not add a greater work load to our moderators, so instead I'm hoping to appeal to your "real-world" sense of practicality ...
It is hardly worth crying about "spilt milk", and with that in mind, the game stats impacts of UN resolutions are often spilt milk (this is my opinion).
I accept 2 issues / day. I dismiss most of the issues on the basis of the stated impacts rarely match what I'd consider realistic game stats changes. For example: no issue gives you a CHOICE on how significant your change in policy is. When I choose to increase funding for re-education that murder (human sacrafice) is actually bad, the game hints that it will destroy my economy. Is this the case? No way, most of us are taught this as children while learning to count to ten.
This in mind, we all can easily feel our way through the daily issues to pick issues that move our government into a category we feel meets our role-playing image. For example: I'm playing the part of something between a cross of Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Meaning, my nation *will* reluctantly send in peace keeping troops, looks the other way towards recreational drugs, and will tax the hell out of people. There are other factors in mind, but that is whom I'm playing and I've easily been about to "repair" my game stats.
When a UN resolution passes, the game stats will change. But given that only 2-4 resolutions tend to pass every 2 weeks, I get 14x2 = 28 chances to undone the game stats changes.
With this in mind, when a resolution comes to a vote, I ask that if you agree that game stats are milk, that worried about the "hidden" costs is less important than roleplaying an international diplomat who is building international law.
DISCLAIMER: I'm bringing this up now, because soon my proposal "Tracking Near Earth Objects" will hit. This proposal is based on a previous resolution (which I'll recover and repose the PRO and CON arguments for so we all can make an informed debate), but sadly the debate focused on what I consider to be lame OOC arguments instead of roleplaying.
My proposal will increase your military budgets slightly because I was given NO option to increase your science budgets. If you read the resolution, it is clear that it is more akin to the real world World Meterological Organization or UNESCO than it is to being police forces.
But at the same time, the moderators were completely correct to suggest that in our game that Military Budgets are the best tool for my resolution. Nobody will be trying to lie or trick you. I specifically added a clause stating that the military spending is assumed to be in the space sciences, which again is true in the real world.
Only in the past few years have private American firms managed to put a human being into space. Before that time, cutting edge space programs have been exclusively the domain of defense contractors and government programs.
This will change in time, but in the here and now, I felt bringing up a future area that the UN will address someday in the real world would be more interesting to many of us. That and obviously this is something that I think is fun to read about.
Thanks,
10kMichael