“A Citizen is Aligned if they have an Adherent”

A Citizen can’t have an Adherent - should this be Cell?

“and optionally a Cell or Idle Cell to which they are an Adherent (defaulting to no Cell)”

So the only established relationship is “A Citizen is an Adherent to a Cell”

how the possession of an Adherent works seems to be a bit vague. its not actually clearly defined what it means to be somethings Adherent

With the lack of a formal definition, and the established “Adherent” relationship between Citizen and Cell, seems to me its clear enough to talk about a Citizen’s Adherent and a Cell’s Adherents. But I suppose it doesn’t hurt to clarify. We just also might want to clarify the relationship the other way so people don’t go “Cells don’t actually have Adherents”

You’ve changed the wording - but it now says “A Citizen is Aligned if they have are an Adherent of a Cell” - which is if anything even less clear

Cool.

I’m probably a bit against on this, as Strength in Unity will mean that most Adherents are Aligned by default and I don’t have a firm grasp on how that will impact Building progresses.

why will Strength in Unity mean Adherents are aligned by default?

Sorry, not even Strength in Unity - the recently enacted A Principled Populace, which means that whenever a Cell picks up a new Adherent that Adherent is picked from Citizens who share an Ideology with them.

Is this meant to be “the triangle number of (Citizens plus X)” or “(the triangle number of Citizens) plus X”?

The former would mean that five aligned Citizens in a building would be adding 120 progress to it every cycle.

since this does seem entirely ambiguous.

@Kevan that is a good point

also Brendan and Cuddlebeam have admitted to working together and so if they like this, its probably a good call its actually a bad idea

Hey Cuddlebeam, let’s both vote in favor of anything we want Clucky to vote against.

(The previous statement is intended as a gentle jest, not a bitter snipe.)