Implementation of Politics

[Broke]

As you guys all know, Politics and War fulfils the "war" part of it's name, but not the "politics" part. I was thinking that maybe we should include policies that affect the growth of your nation, as it does irl. Also I think we should have approval rating affect the tax income, since nobody likes to pay taxes to a terrible government.

[Lancer]

It is a good idea, but there are a lot of bugs that I think need to be fixed with the system before anything new is added in (eg the multi-attack glitch).

[Roq]

I completely disagree with this.

This would, quite frankly, mess up the game a bit further than it already is.

Let me explain a tad bit.

1 hour ago, Broke said:

As you guys all know, Politics and War fulfils the "war" part of it's name, but not the "politics" part.

The Politics part of Politics and War is alliance wide. It's not with-in the nations. Alliances - for the most part - control when wars (the other part of Politics and War) occur. Also, in-nation politics would require Alex to restructure approval rating. It's almost impossible to have a nation older than a year and still have decent approval rating.

 

Point being. This would cause older nations to lose out. The older your nation is, the harder it is to be positive.

 

Not going to lie to you chief,  this doesn't seem like something that you will be able to keep high enough for nations to be profitable.

(This would also piss off a lot of people who tried to intentionally get their Approval Rating as low as they can.)

[Tiberius]

I think the idea has merit. Allowing more political decisions within your Nation would give some more gameplay. The larger the Nation the bigger the hit certain politics would have. The benefit is that younger Nations would be able to catch up somewhat before themselves being slowed down. I'd be interested to hear more on this from you. 

[Indominus]

I agree, that politics should play a bigger part. However, majority of this game is about alliance politics. So, perhaps suggest less drastic methods for your nation, and focus on aspects that could change up the alliance politics. 

[deletethisaccount]

I agree with you in that it'd be cool to have more decisions to make, more things to do with your personal nation, but this doesn't have much to do with politics - politics is done at the alliance level, with other players, not in your actual nation. After all, given its an online game played with other players, why would you just focus on your own nation's politics?

My other issue with this idea is that everyone would find the meta policies, share it within their alliances, and then I think everyone would just be on an equal footing because we'd all just use the meta policies. 

[Pasky Darkfire]

#nationstates

[zigbigadorlou]

15 hours ago, CitrusK said:

Numbers

For my reference, where'd you get these numbers? I've always wondered if there's a list of equations somewhere, but most sources are either vague or broken or old. 

[Roq]

4 hours ago, zigbigadorlou said:

For my reference, where'd you get these numbers? I've always wondered if there's a list of equations somewhere, but most sources are either vague or broken or old. 

https://politicsandwar.fandom.com/wiki/Approval_Rating

[Broke]

20 hours ago, CitrusK said:

The Politics part of Politics and War is alliance wide. It's not with-in the nations. Alliances - for the most part - control when wars (the other part of Politics and War) occur. Also, in-nation politics would require Alex to restructure approval rating. It's almost impossible to have a nation older than a year and still have decent approval rating.

That is a decent point, however, it would be more interesting to actually have politics within the nation affect you, because at this stage, it seems as an alliance is a nation and all the nations are actually just citizens, which, does not seem to be the point of the game.

[Roq]

1 hour ago, Broke said:

That is a decent point, however, it would be more interesting to actually have politics within the nation affect you, because at this stage, it seems as an alliance is a nation and all the nations are actually just citizens, which, does not seem to be the point of the game.

While alliance affairs is 75% of the game, the other 25% of the game is nation to nation politics.

Think of it as your ability to communicate with other people. You need this to get loans, get good trades, and have fun with the game.

The nation to nation politics of this game is also important.

Politics with-in the nation would be distracting and unneeded.

If I'm already dealing with Sphinx of TcW, as he is not giving me city 18 (even though I totally said he would), I should not also have to deal with trying to fix my approval rating (which is not fixable, unless I play this game for the next four years, with my approval rating being my sole purpose) just to earn money.

[Sir Scarfalot]

A. approval rating has nothing to do with tax burden even IRL

B. %-687 approval rating, do I pay my citizens or....?

[True King]

My approval rating is permanently in the negatives pretty much from having a mostly maxed production build ignoring pollution in almost all my cities between the Ask Alexio War & joining BK. November through February or something, so lets not. Also the politics come from players interacting & how you have your cities setup on whether disease, crime, overpopulation, etc, is a factor. So already domestic factors which matter.

Although kind of prefer the game doesn't reward/penalize certain social policies, unless Libertarianism is made better than the rest. Although assuming the game doesn't agree with me on which is best & make that the best meta; better it doesn't really effect anything.