NationStates Jolt Archive

These are just a couple small gripes I have with some issues in NS that I suppose will likely be fixed with NS2, but as the staff says that NS1 will be kept around for the unforeseen future, it would be nice to see a fix for the current version:

1. Issues that are unduly effected by @@animal@@ and other randomness:

The issue on a national animal ending up on the dinner table is a broad example of this gripe. The problem is that this question can come off quite different depending on what animal is selected at the beginning of the game. That being said, I can't believe that the turnout on this question could be altogether fair.

While this is the only example of randomness effecting issues that I can come up with, I'm sure there are other problems than @@animal@@ that should be avoided in certain issues.

2. Dismissing

While at first I thought this was an issue of of issues that would be silly to just dismiss with no consequences, instead I've decided that those are the best issues and the ability to dismiss should be taken away.

In place of the ability to dismiss should be two more options per question, or one where the one covers the territory of the other as well: One answer that would be considered the moderate approach (note that this should still have consequences, although perhaps less than the other options) and another answer that is the equivalent of dismissing the issue (and this one should have *big* consequences!*).

Other than that, love the game, bought the book! Keep it up. =)

These are just a couple small gripes I have with some issues in NS that I suppose will likely be fixed with NS2, but as the staff says that NS1 will be kept around for the unforeseen future, it would be nice to see a fix for the current version:

1. Issues that are unduly effected by @@animal@@ and other randomness:

The issue on a national animal ending up on the dinner table is a broad example of this gripe. The problem is that this question can come off quite different depending on what animal is selected at the beginning of the game. That being said, I can't believe that the turnout on this question could be altogether fair.

While this is the only example of randomness effecting issues that I can come up with, I'm sure there are other problems than @@animal@@ that should be avoided in certain issues.

2. Dismissing

While at first I thought this was an issue of of issues that would be silly to just dismiss with no consequences, instead I've decided that those are the best issues and the ability to dismiss should be taken away.

In place of the ability to dismiss should be two more options per question, or one where the one covers the territory of the other as well: One answer that would be considered the moderate approach (note that this should still have consequences, although perhaps less than the other options) and another answer that is the equivalent of dismissing the issue (and this one should have *big* consequences!*).

Other than that, love the game, bought the book! Keep it up. =)
You aren't gonna force me to make it legal to push the big "Do Not Push" red button! ;)

Point 2 - issues don't get changed (except for typos) once they've been put into the game. So you won't get your extra options put in for existing issues. Also, moderate options take the fun out of the game. By forcing you to take the extreme option you disagree with the least, it makes it far more interesting.

Some nations prefer to dismiss issues to keep their stats how they want them. Some options notably the beauty pageant issue have no options that people want to choose and forcing a choice upon them will do no good and I doubt would ever happen.

Point 2 - issues don't get changed (except for typos) once they've been put into the game. So you won't get your extra options put in for existing issues. Also, moderate options take the fun out of the game. By forcing you to take the extreme option you disagree with the least, it makes it far more interesting.

A moderate answer (with lesser repercussions) would be more challenging than a dismissal with no repercussions, which I'm proposing should be removed. That isn't to say that the moderate answer would be the one that people always pick, as you'll likely notice most governments are somewhere along the extremes.

This game shouldn't be about making the perfect government and then dismissing everything, but also upkeep of a nation. I fear that some people do this and replace the fun of the nation-building part of the game with the fun of politicking in the UN. While that's also fun, it shouldn't necessarily be the focus.

Yes but a lot of people prefer to do this (I do it with puppets or annoying issues) and by changing it you would end up angering a lot of people.

And some issues aren't really appropriate for certain nations that would be asked to anser them anyway, for example the 'Supreme Court Nomination' one for any nation whose government doesn't have a 'Supreme Court', so removing the right to dismiss them would force all nations into a single pattern...

A moderate answer (with lesser repercussions) would be more challenging than a dismissal with no repercussions, which I'm proposing should be removed. That isn't to say that the moderate answer would be the one that people always pick, as you'll likely notice most governments are somewhere along the extremes.

This game shouldn't be about making the perfect government and then dismissing everything, but also upkeep of a nation. I fear that some people do this and replace the fun of the nation-building part of the game with the fun of politicking in the UN. While that's also fun, it shouldn't necessarily be the focus.
Please-read the FAQ. The extreme options are because this game has a lot of inherent comedy in it.

A moderate answer (with lesser repercussions) would be more challenging than a dismissal with no repercussions, which I'm proposing should be removed. That isn't to say that the moderate answer would be the one that people always pick, as you'll likely notice most governments are somewhere along the extremes.
True, but choosing extreme options and trying to maintain a balance is even more challenging still.

This game shouldn't be about making the perfect government and then dismissing everything, but also upkeep of a nation. I fear that some people do this and replace the fun of the nation-building part of the game with the fun of politicking in the UN. While that's also fun, it shouldn't necessarily be the focus.
I pity anyone who gets a 'perfect' government and then dismisses all issues (or chooses not to receive any). As far as I'm concerned, that's not what the point of the game is - it's a challenge to maintain your chosen government type, or, possibly, to take the government all over the shop.

I've dismissed to avoid stats bias.... why should my economy take a hit if I continue to do what I did to get it to powerhouse?