Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

Thanks for all your comments. Some responses:

NATO/NAFTA: My main inspiration for the CCS is the the Militia Movement, particularly that of its constitutionalist wing, which does seem to zealously defend national sovereignty, and alongside with Ron Paul's comments, made me think that having the USA leave NATO and NAFTA seems like something that would fit a C+ worldview. The US could still wage military commitments and support their military allies, but on its own terms, not based on being dragged into foreign wars and quagmires just because some treaty told them to do so.

EuchreJack: I consulted the Republican Party platform and the Democratic Party platform in the hopes of figuring out the mainstream L and C positions (since platforms tend to be written by party activists), and written my thoughts on it here. Basically, I noticed that while they both supported "fair trade" and claim to support American workers, they do have different interpretations of what this trade should be, with Democrats wanting trade to benefit all segments of society while Republicans want trade in general. Rereading the platforms again made me realize that maybe I was a bit too harsh to drawing this major distinction between the Republicans and Democrats...but I'm leaning towards  sticking with Free Trade because the Republicans and Democrats agree on a lot of international relations issues, and I at least want IR to play at least a wedge role in the game. I also making the horrible assumption that Republicans and Democrats are representative of Conservatism and Liberalism...which might not be the case (the Constitution Party, for instance, oppose free trade). Hm.

If I do toss out Free Trade, I'd likely replace it with Political Speech (aka Campaign Finance Reform). Unlike Free Trade, it does impact CCS' actions, since it could determine how effective the CCS is at donating to political causes and politicians, so it might be more interesting gameplay-wise.

Spoiler: Political Speech (click to show/hide)

L+: Politician Campaign Oversight Committees monitor every state and federal election.
L: Most political speech must be first approved by the federal government.
M: There is a nationally-imposed limit to how much an individual, party or PAC can spend on political speech.
C: There are relatively few restrictions on political speech.
C+: Political speech is unrestricted.

Johnathan S. Fox: I will need to tinker with the Corporate law though because it seems to be conveying the wrong idea. The current Corporate C+ Law was originally suggested for C+ Tax law, so I'll need to make clearer that Corporations are actually receiving tax breaks rather than Liberal subsidies.

MetalSlimeHunt: I'm probably going to have it that the more restrictive Free Speech is, the easier it is to promote your cause through your dedicated Conservative newspaper...similar to how, in LCS, burning the flag becomes more effective at swaying popular opinion illegal as the law against Flag Burning goes more conservative.

[Neonivek]

In Liberal Crime Squad crime isn't that important because you are either C+ in which case crime doesn't exist because of martial law... or your L+ where crime doesn't exist simply because everything is utopian.

However Conservative Crime Squad actually legitimately has crime built into it as part of the gameplay. How do you guess you will handle the strong focus on crime?

[EuchreJack]

It sort of goes back to the NRA's position on gun rights:

Freedom to bear arms ensures everyone can protect themselves.

Restricting gun ownership makes sure that only criminals have guns.

Essentially, in a Conservative Utopia, crime doesn't exist because the consequences of criminal actions tends to be deadly for the perpetrator.

Or, perhaps the game just admits that crime will always exist.

Speaking on International Relations, perhaps that might be a better topic than Free Trade.  With Republican Presidential Hopeful Perry, one can argue that some extreme Republicans would indeed wish to revoke all treaties.

Good luck SC!

[Zangi]

Corporate Law

I find that hilarious, how it generally meant the same thing, throw money at the corporations.  (Corporations are people too?)

[Servant Corps]

The idea I had in mind was that the CCS is self-defeating. It intentionally advocates for policies that would self-nullify its own existence. This idea is mostly due to difficulty balance, but it also has a touch of irony and hypocrisy associated with it.

Liberal laws ultimately enable criminals while Conservative laws would ultimately harm them. As the Conservative Crime Squad is a criminal squad, the CCS will have an easy time operating in a L+ Utopia (say, robbing banks with high-powered AK-47s while police feebly try negotiations) and a hard time operating in a C+ Utopia (say, every person at the bank firing their own guns at the CCS bank robbers and the survivors getting "enhanced interrogated" afterwards).

Ideally, this will extend even to a criminal justice system...the more Liberal the jury, the more likely you'll be acquitted.

[GTM]

The L+ issues seem insane enough....but the C+ issues feel like they're written to be "correct" rather than a logical extension of conservative policy to its maximum extent. There are some outcomes of vanilla LCS L+ laws that are just as absurd as their conservative counterparts.

This was the first thing that struck me reading the laws.  LCS has the caricature of the burnt out ex-hippie professor representing L+, and the fat, bald, whiskey chugging cigar puffing captain of industry representing C+.  It's funny because it makes fun of everybody - moderates see both C+ and L+ as a little scary, and idealogues think their side actually sounds cool.

The issues in the OP are clearly pro-C anti-L - it's basically republican propaganda.  Not that there's anything wrong with a republican propaganda game; he'll, I'd play it.  But it's incongruous next to LCS which toes the line a lot better.

That said, you guys are right that making an L world C is more conducive to challenging gameplay than the C->L pattern in LCS.  There's something cool about the arms race of the world becoming more secure and challenging to conquer as you get stronger.

[Jonathan S. Fox]

LCS is pretty slanted in favor of positive depiction of L+ issues; maybe a select few goofy C+ issues would help, like everyone carries a gun outside the home (or firearms classes are part of the public school curriculum), and taxes are unconstitutional.

[Reelyanoob]

Wouldn't Conservapedia be a great source for CCS issue descriptions? They're pretty unabasedly far right biased, with the right sort of jingoism.

Gun Control :-

"liberals push gun control because it increases the dependency of voters on government for protection. "

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I think Liberality for All would make a decent base for an Elite Liberal Dystopia.

[Neonivek]

Well high crime rates can make the game extremely difficult as well. (So that L+ isn't super easy)

The LCS could gain huge boosts of power... or real crime could start to be a real hinderance (For example a location could already have max graffiti and have everything stollen from it in advance... Or just that the place is SWARMING it with gunweilding serial killing sociopaths)

Afterall "Criminals" tend to be Liberal. So when things are L+ shouldn't ordinary criminals be set against you?
-Hmm I guess that is the difference. the CCS in LCS are corperately funded... the LCS in CCS are Mafia funded.

I still think the game should keep the same idea of a difficulty curve LCS did... Where the more neutral things are the easier the game is while the extremes on both sides are large barriers.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Why would the Mafia fund the LCS? Legal drugs means that the Mafia can't directly sell them on the black market and have competition that they otherwise would not have.

The LCS could be funded by special interest groups out to tear apart The American Way (TM) for their petty demands, or the Liberal Media Conspiracy, or The Communists/Terrorists. Or maybe they could just be stereotypical hippie losers who want the government to give them everything because they're lazy.

[Neonivek]

Why would the Mafia fund the LCS? Legal drugs means that the Mafia can't directly sell them on the black market and have competition that they otherwise would not have.

The LCS could be funded by special interest groups out to tear apart The American Way (TM) for their petty demands, or the Liberal Media Conspiracy, or The Communists/Terrorists. Or maybe they could just be stereotypical hippie losers who want the government to give them everything because they're lazy.

Because the LCS needs to be funded by something scroupulous.

If organised hippies are beating you down then you really shouldn't form the CCS should you?

[Jonathan S. Fox]

Perhaps they could be funded by their own illicit drug dealing.

[Neonivek]

Perhaps they could be funded by their own illicit drug dealing.

But then that hit the exact same problem MetalSlimeHunt mentioned... That they would stop making money off it through their own actions.

Though they could make a HUGE drug lab and sell it legally.

[nenjin]

I could see, in a CCS world, the LCS getting their funding from narco-terrorists, foreign special interests groups like "Friends of Open Borders" and the media. CCS would get their funding from domestic narco traffickers, domestic special interests groups and PACs.

Remember, it's all about how you frame your activities and who your bed fellows are. Both sides sell drugs, but it's the political motivation they serve by doing so that really makes them distinct from each other. Coke is to Xanax what the Cali Cartel is to Pfizer. Legality is the only real demarcation. So for the CCS, maybe the drug laws are such that at C+, there is no thing as an uncontrolled substance. Not "all drugs are illegal" but "the private citizen has absolutely no rights to manufacture, produce, distribute or sell any substance." Therefore to stay alive through drug profits in a C+ CCS world....you're providing an invaluable service to those companies who you basically helped put out of business.

The moral of LCS seems to me to be that, liberalism pushes the world into a state of anarchy by the lack of control. So the inverse moral of CCS to me feels like it should be, conservatism pushes the world into a state of anarchy by the over application of control. Liberals loose the screws and the world can't hold together.....conservatives tighten the screws until the world flies apart under the pressure.