Sunday, August 20, 2023

Proposal: The People’s Front of Judea

Reached quorum 3 votes to 0 with an unresolved Imperial DEF. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Aug 2023 06:48:52 UTC

If Proposal: Papers, Please was not enacted then this proposal has no effect.

In the rule Factions, change “and a Loyalty which is either Loyal or Disloyal” to “and a Culture”. In the same rule, change “randomly determining its Loyalty” to “randomly determining its Culture” and remove any bracketed text that may exist.

Add a subrule to the rule Factions:

Each Faction has a Culture, which is privately tracked by the City. A Culture is a sequence of five terms, called Positions, each of which is one side of a binary statement. If a Faction has no Culture then the City may generate one for it, with each Position being secretly randomly selected. A Faction’s Culture may be:
* Progressive or Conservative
* Multicultural or Monocultural
* Acquisitive or Relational
* Anarchic or Ordered
* Loyal or Disloyal

(The City may set the Culture of the Faction named “Machinists” and the Faction named “Seafolk” to random values and repeal this bracketed text, at any time.)

Each Position (except Loyal or Disloyal) is associated with a quality that a District can have, as follows:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! Position !! Preference !! Preference Formula !! Reward
|-
| Progressive || High Ingenuity / Ingenuity cost of understood Innovations || Ingenuity + Ingenuity cost of all understood Innovations || 0.2 Ingenuity
|-
| Conservative || High Order || Order || 0.2 Order
|-
| Multicultural || High number of other Factions in the District || Number of Factions || 0.5 People, 0.1 Ingenuity
|-
| Monocultural || Low number of other Factions in the District || Number of Factions || 0.5 People, 0.1 Order
|-
| Acquisitive || High Food and a large number of Connections || Food + Number of Connections + Energy || 0.1 Food and 0.1 Energy
|-
| Relational || High People || People || 1 People
|-
| Anarchic || Low Defences and low Order || (Defence + Order) * -1 || 0.1 Food, 0.1 Ingenuity and 0.1 Energy
|-
| Ordered || High Defences and high Order || Defence + Order || 0.1 Defence and 0.1 Order
|}

A Faction Test is an atomic action that requires a specific District and a specific Faction to be its target. Whenever a Faction Test takes place, the District or City carrying it out undertakes the following steps:
* For the named Faction, calculate the named District’s position relative to all other Districts for each of the Preference Formulas of its Culture, with Loyal always being considered above average and Disloyal always being considered below average.
* If more than two of the results are below the mean average for all Districts then it stops housing that Faction.

Add the following as a fifth step to the Posing a Dilemma atomic action:

* Secretly randomly select a Faction. For each District where that Faction is Housed, carry out a Faction Test for that District and that Faction.

Add the following to the step of the Posing a Dilemma atomic action immediately after the one just added:

If any District ceased to House a Faction as a result of an earlier step in this Action, also announce that change in the same blog post.

The reward stuff isn’t plugged in yet, deliberately

Comments

Kevan: City he/him

20-08-2023 09:23:03 UTC

“...then it stops housing that Faction” - should the District also lose 5 People, or are the Faction members just abandoning their ideology and sticking around anonymously?

Josh: he/they

20-08-2023 10:04:01 UTC

I’m open to either. I think maybe losing a faction should be a defined interaction that can have a variety of triggers

JonathanDark: he/him

20-08-2023 16:52:14 UTC

Josh, would you be open to a mechanic where a District could reveal the Position of a Faction? Perhaps an Innovation where, if the District understands that Innovation and spends some resource, one Position of one Faction is publicly revealed by the City?

Josh: he/they

20-08-2023 17:10:03 UTC

I would prefer that it was more puzzle than pay-resource-to-solve but yes, I expect future proposals to be about the subgame of figuring out Faction characteristics.

JonathanDark: he/him

20-08-2023 17:24:35 UTC

Fair enough, I’ll have a think on the puzzle aspect.

JonathanDark: he/him

21-08-2023 07:02:53 UTC

for

Kevan: City he/him

21-08-2023 09:02:09 UTC

imperial Not sure this is going to change anybody’s tactics - if others lose a Faction that’s stuck with you, that’s just a signal to carry on doing what you were doing; if a rival wants to remove your Faction they have to pivot heavily to outdoing you at whatever you were doing - but I suppose it depends how big the Rewards turn out to be.

JonathanDark: he/him

21-08-2023 16:46:50 UTC

Add a subrule to the rule Factions:

Just curious…when there’s a directive in a Proposal to add a rule or subrule, if the Proposal does not contain a name for that rule or subrule, what does the enacting admin do?

Josh: he/they

21-08-2023 17:06:20 UTC

Ooh, whoops.

Answer:

If a rule would ever have no name, it is instead given the name of the Votable Matter that created it, or (if this is not possible) the name “Unnamed Rule”.

JonathanDark: he/him

21-08-2023 18:09:56 UTC

Well, that will be an entertaining subrule name, then. ;-)

lemon: she/her

21-08-2023 23:55:54 UTC

for interesting!