NationStates Jolt Archive

I feel like either my issues are counter productive or they are just not selected right by the game play engine.

All recreational drugs are legal, euthanasia is illegal, the nation is ravaged by daily union strikes, and meat-eating is frowned upon.

I banned all drugs
ok, I did make euthanasa illegal
I gave the workers 20% more wages (one of the two option), how can they still strike?
And I banished the most harsh animal cruelty.

So.... I feel these lines are strange, or am I so totally out of sink here?

Commonly, issue decisions you make will have unexpected consequences. For instance, if you ban cruelty to animals, people will come to think of animals as having at least similar rights to humans and thus meat-eaters will be thought less of. Likewise, if you cave in so easily to one union's demands, it won't be long before other unions are also striking in the hope of getting higher wages, et cetera.

Therefore, when you select an issue decision, you have to carefully consider what consequences this may have on your nation. For instance, imagine what would happen if a government made that choice in real life. Alternately, just ignore the NS page listings (like I do) or dismiss all issues (like many players I know do).

EDIT: Oh, and future questions about issues should go in the "Got Issues?" forum, as a fyi.

Actually.


Haterd. Are you using a Web Accelerator for dial-up? Problems like that can be caused by a Web Accelerator. Turn it off for NationStates and you should see the correct effects with the next few issues that you answer.

Actually.


Haterd. Are you using a Web Accelerator for dial-up? Problems like that can be caused by a Web Accelerator. Turn it off for NationStates and you should see the correct effects with the next few issues that you answer.

Well, the last three issue effects are consistent with his choices; if he is using a web accelerator, only one of the last four issues he answered was affected by it. Given that I'm not all too sure how web accelerators work, I'm not sure how plausible that would be, but I suppose it's possible.

the nation is ravaged by daily union strikes, and meat-eating is frowned upon.

I gave the workers 20% more wages (one of the two option), how can they still strike?
And I banished the most harsh animal cruelty.By caving in to the workers, they will now strike at the drop of a hat in order to get even more benefits. The old "give an inch, they'll take a mile".

The second is just the descriptor for the choice you made; people who continue to eat meat are looked upon with suspicion as many citizens feel any meat is cruel.

As mentioned in the FAQ, issue choices often have extreme results.

Ok, thank you, much better understood now.
and sorry for choosing the worng forum.