Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, I have a new Iidea

It’s about social Policy 

no one country gave a polygamy marriages 

NOBODY!!!!

I offer change the issue about polygamy marriges

 Society have more actual issues

i offer change issue about polygamy to issue about prostitution

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, polygamy is indeed a thing that cultures do tend to disagree on. Several places permit it and indeed expect it, other places criminalize it.

That said, you do raise a good point about prostitution as an issue, it would be a fair question to ask in the RP policies page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 6:01 AM, KirillSharapov358 said:

Hi, I have a new Iidea

It’s about social Policy 

no one country gave a polygamy marriages 

NOBODY!!!!

I offer change the issue about polygamy marriges

 Society have more actual issues

i offer change issue about polygamy to issue about prostitution

This is not Nation States. Feel free to play on that website though.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Deulos said:

This is not Nation States. Feel free to play on that website though.

They didn't say that it was Nation States. Did you read their post?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Zephyr said:

They didn't say that it was Nation States. Did you read their post?

I did, and much like Scarf, came to the conclusion he would be better off there. There are no meaningful social or government policies in this game, its not what PW is about. If he wants to have an IRL debate he is free to post it up in the off topic section. As it is, there is no reason for this post, if it can be charitably called such, to be in Game Suggestions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mikey said:

I did, and much like Scarf, came to the conclusion he would be better off there. There are no meaningful social or government policies in this game, its not what PW is about. If he wants to have an IRL debate he is free to post it up in the off topic section. As it is, there is no reason for this post, if it can be charitably called such, to be in Game Suggestions.

Your argument is that they shouldn't play P&W because their suggestion does not fit with your opinion which you conflate as an authority in defining "what PW is about". I wouldn't argue that you shouldn't express your preferences for the game's development, but going into a game suggestion forum and telling people to go away and stop playing the game when they make suggestions you don't like is just unproductive and disruptive to the purpose of the forum.

To address your concern about the suggestion, the game actually already has social policies incorporated as one of its various roleplay elements and this suggestion is simply an expansion on an existing game component.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zephyr - If you've played P&W for any amount of time, it's impossible not to notice that Politics and War is a down-and-dirty Geopolitical simulation game. Social policies of any nation have NO EFFECT on the only three things that matter in Geopolitics, in-game or in reality. The three things that matter are:

Political Factors     - Associations between nations (individual players), alliances (groups of players), and blocs (groups of alliances). Of course, it's obvious that selection of leaders, advisors, etc. in Political, Economic, and Military affairs is also a Political matter;

Economic Factors - Monies collected through amount of infrastructure, city improvements, drilling and mining, manufacturing, banking and commodities/stock trading. Also maximizing city efficiencies through pollution, crime and disease control. At the Alliance level, setting levels of taxation, and the alliance bank turning an extra buck or two through trades,  interest charges on loans, etc.;

Military Factors     - Size and composition of national forces, national and alliance war stocks in money and manufactured materials, and effective protection of national and alliance monies and war materials.

All of the above have a DIRECT or INDIRECT effect on EVERY nation in P&W. Social policies have ZERO effect on ANY nation in Politics and War. I haven't bothered looking at my nation's social policies since I set it up. Why bother? For what?

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mikey said:

I did, and much like Scarf, came to the conclusion he would be better off there. There are no meaningful social or government policies in this game, its not what PW is about. If he wants to have an IRL debate he is free to post it up in the off topic section. As it is, there is no reason for this post, if it can be charitably called such, to be in Game Suggestions.

 

8 hours ago, Gudea said:

All of the above have a DIRECT or INDIRECT effect on EVERY nation in P&W. Social policies have ZERO effect on ANY nation in Politics and War. I haven't bothered looking at my nation's social policies since I set it up. Why bother? For what?

Things like social policies are supplementary content that adds to P&W. They’re a lot like the Baseball and casino games on the site; you can play them if you want to, but you don’t have to. Some people, believe it or not, like to rp their nations and like to use the optional rp content of P&W. Telling someone to “go to Nationstates” is  like telling someone that their favorite music genre is the worst genre ever. It’s very elitist.

I don’t get why people are hostile towards rp elements in P&W. Are they afraid it would turn into Nationstates 2, filled with pixelhuggers?

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, AwesomeNova said:

 

Things like social policies are supplementary content that adds to P&W. They’re a lot like the Baseball and casino games on the site; you can play them if you want to, but you don’t have to. Some people, believe it or not, like to rp their nations and like to use the optional rp content of P&W. Telling someone to “go to Nationstates” is  like telling someone that their favorite music genre is the worst genre ever. It’s very elitist.

I don’t get why people are hostile towards rp elements in P&W. Are they afraid it would turn into Nationstates 2, filled with pixelhuggers?

*Beeeep* Wrong. Those games are actual mechanics built into the game itself and therefore not equivalent to flavor text.

This game also has a near non-existent RP community meaning any such people would likely leave the game anyway if RP is really what they were looking for. Best to explain their dissapointment to them now rather than later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Gudea said:

@Zephyr - If you've played P&W for any amount of time, it's impossible not to notice that Politics and War is a down-and-dirty Geopolitical simulation game. Social policies of any nation have NO EFFECT on the only three things that matter in Geopolitics, in-game or in reality. The three things that matter are:

Political Factors     - Associations between nations (individual players), alliances (groups of players), and blocs (groups of alliances). Of course, it's obvious that selection of leaders, advisors, etc. in Political, Economic, and Military affairs is also a Political matter;

Economic Factors - Monies collected through amount of infrastructure, city improvements, drilling and mining, manufacturing, banking and commodities/stock trading. Also maximizing city efficiencies through pollution, crime and disease control. At the Alliance level, setting levels of taxation, and the alliance bank turning an extra buck or two through trades,  interest charges on loans, etc.;

Military Factors     - Size and composition of national forces, national and alliance war stocks in money and manufactured materials, and effective protection of national and alliance monies and war materials.

All of the above have a DIRECT or INDIRECT effect on EVERY nation in P&W. Social policies have ZERO effect on ANY nation in Politics and War. I haven't bothered looking at my nation's social policies since I set it up. Why bother? For what?

I don't understand the relevance of your response. Neither the original poster or myself suggested that the proposed change replace existing game features, nor did we suggest that they affect other game features. Unless what you're suggesting is that you believe existing game features and the proposed change cannot possibly exist simultaneously, but you'll have to explain to me how you came to that conclusion.

11 hours ago, Akuryo said:

This game also has a near non-existent RP community meaning any such people would likely leave the game anyway if RP is really what they were looking for. Best to explain their dissapointment to them now rather than later.

It is not your responsibility to explain anything to anyone or protect them from disappointment, nor do you make a compelling argument against building on roleplay elements to potentially give the game a wider appeal. Your argument is literally, "Why bother when it could just fail?".

Edited by Zephyr
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Zephyr said:

I don't understand the relevance of your response. Neither the original poster or myself suggested that the proposed change replace existing game features, nor did we suggest that they affect other game features. Unless what you're suggesting is that you believe existing game features and the proposed change cannot possibly exist simultaneously, but you'll have to explain to me how you came to that conclusion. 

It's not about replacing or changing game features. I explained to you what the game IS - a Geopolitical simulator. What you expect @Alex to do is a somewhat extensive redesign of P&W. That's like expecting Milton Bradley to redesign Monopoly to please an insignificant minority of people that want to pretend it's a RPG! P&W, like Monopoly, is not really a RPG. Get it now? If you want to pretend it is, that's fine by me.

Now, I fully realize that Alex is tearing off more $$$ with P&W than Buffett and Munger could ever tear down in a thousand years, but have some mercy on the dude. Balancing out a Geopolitical sim is work enough, especially after counting all the dough he hauls in per day. Seriously though - Trying to balance out the Political, Economic, and Military spheres is good enough, without worrying about adding useless fluff. Just that seems like it's still a work in progress after a bunch of years.

Maybe the RPG crowd can ask Alex if he can design a Geopolitical RPG. I'll bet he'll do it....and be more than happy to! Oh hell yeah!!! But, when he starts throwing price quotes around, I know you RPG guys are gonna fund it, right?

Personally, I outgrew RPG's back in the 1980's. They were fun for awhile....but always somewhat pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Gudea said:

It's not about replacing or changing game features. I explained to you what the game IS - a Geopolitical simulator. What you expect @Alex to do is a somewhat extensive redesign of P&W. That's like expecting Milton Bradley to redesign Monopoly to please an insignificant minority of people that want to pretend it's a RPG! P&W, like Monopoly, is not really a RPG. Get it now? If you want to pretend it is, that's fine by me.

Now, I fully realize that Alex is tearing off more $$$ with P&W than Buffett and Munger could ever tear down in a thousand years, but have some mercy on the dude. Balancing out a Geopolitical sim is work enough, especially after counting all the dough he hauls in per day. Seriously though - Trying to balance out the Political, Economic, and Military spheres is good enough, without worrying about adding useless fluff. Just that seems like it's still a work in progress after a bunch of years.

Maybe the RPG crowd can ask Alex if he can design a Geopolitical RPG. I'll bet he'll do it....and be more than happy to! Oh hell yeah!!! But, when he starts throwing price quotes around, I know you RPG guys are gonna fund it, right?

Personally, I outgrew RPG's back in the 1980's. They were fun for awhile....but always somewhat pointless.

Are we reading the same thread? The original poster's suggestion was to modify or add a social issue to the policies page. I have no idea what point you think you're making or how you relate it to the subject of the thread unless you genuinely believe that expanding or modifying the issues already incorporated in the game policies is equivalent to an 'extensive redesign of P&W'. Talk about hyperbole.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.