AMPU: Suggested Fixes from Playtests

[Vols21]

7 hours ago, Cal said:

I see. Maybe change it to be where it can be a skill the Protege has, but only if the Kingmaker’s skill is higher? That way they can transfer a higher understanding of a skill but it’s limited to the level of the Kingmaker. 

devil's advocate for a minute.   since the Kingmaker is taking a young usually 25 year old under his wing, could John McCain have changed the course of history some with his protege Donald Trump (using your example) and convinced him to overcome his bone spurs and enroll in a military academy (to help him obtain the military skill)?

I was trying to rationale the other skills - and stumbled with Judicial but starting thinking the Kingmaker helped them enroll in law school, and calling in favors to make them DA and then a local judge.     I do like the idea that if the Kingmaker and protege already have the same skills, that the KM could increase one if he's higher in that area.

* I had one Kingmaker whose only traits to pass were Kingmaker (not eligible to pass) or Controversial (gee thanks).   Should you really gain Controversial in such a manner?  (in my case the guy didn't really earn that trait for another 20 years, but who's counting)

[matthewyoung123]

1. In brief, what is the issue? There doesn't seem to be a bonus/penalty for admitting new states that are either FREE or SLAVE under the CPU Rules.
 
2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue?  CPU Northerners voted overwhelmingly to admit both TX and FL as states without seeking to balance their admissions with IA and WI.  Therefore, slave states had more Senators than Free states, something that the Compromise of 1820 wouldn't have allowed and a situation that Northern abolitionists would have railed against.
 
3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue? In all starts after 1820, have a severe penalty for Southerners if a slave state is not admitted with a free state.  Have a penalty for Northerners if a free state is not admitted in the same cycle as a slave state.  Likewise, a bonus to Southern politicians if they manage to admit a slave state while not having to admit a free state.  Same for Northern politicians if they get a free state admitted without a slave state admitted in the same cycle.
 
4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example).  https://www.britannica.com/event/Missouri-Compromise

[Arkansas Progressive]

1. Clarification on General Event: Major Diplomatic Conference.

2. The text I am confused about reads: Improve Rev budget and relations with nations with which you are currently not at war by 1.

3. That should be credit-debt, not rev budget

[Vols21]

23 hours ago, Arkansas Progressive said:

1. Clarification on General Event: Major Diplomatic Conference.

2. The text I am confused about reads: Improve Rev budget and relations with nations with which you are currently not at war by 1.

3. That should be credit-debt, not rev budget

I think it is 2 separate thinGs, but they run together making it look like they apply to foreign countries.    It improves relations with those countries, but then also improves our meter for rev-budget (not theirs).  The meter makes sense to me because I envision it being trade deals which can increase revenue and help with the budget ( less likely that we’d be at a big summit begging for a loan)

[Vols21]

1. In brief, what is the issue?

Rule 2.5 says that ADMIN is used during the lingering phases to adjust meters for the cabinet/level positions.  This works for the most part except in the case of Chairmen of Joint Chiefs, Senior Generals, etc.  Current process having 0 admin crashes Military Prep every single time and nothing can be done to fix it, unless this is fixed first.
also note Rule 2.4.3 (events) says that "Cabinet members will generally use their admin ability, Military officers, including Chiefs of Staff, will use their military ability"

 

2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue?
Almost none of the Generals are rated with any Admin.  In looking back at the historic Joint Chiefs we found a couple who had admin (with one being Colin Powell who also served as Sec. of State).   Plus you wouldn't want to beef up their admin, or everyone could just pull a Trump and fill their cabinet with a bunch of Generals.

 

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue?    Use Military Skills for the Generals and Joint Chiefs and consider using Admin as a bonus in these positions.  This would allow to keep their military skill at 2 (and not be a super General in the wars) but add in 1 Admin would make them basically effective in their new role.  So they would be well-rounded but not necessarily sought after for other cabinet positions outside of JCOS except those who had those roles in real life like Powell).

 

[Arkansas Progressive]

1. Can primaries be deactivated?

2. In 1962 it gives 100 pts to moderates for deactivation, but the special effects has "activate only"

3. Specify that primaries cannot be deactivated once active, and remove the bonus to moderates for deactivation

[Rezi]

1. There is a contradiction in the rules on whether politicians under 60 will retire during the random retirements phase.
2. The rules state both "No politician younger than 60 will randomly retire.", and "25-50 have a 1% chance of retirement, 50-70 have a 5% chance of retirement. "
3. Remove the section that gives 25-50 year old politicians a chance of retiring, and change the rules so that it states, "No politician younger than 50 will randomly retire". 50 is better than 60 in my eyes, because I just find that to be a more feasible age to start retirements.

 

Edited July 18, 2022 by Rezi

[Murrman104]

1. In brief, what is the issue? In the 1960 Playtest the governor of the small state of Nevada impacted a meter by ditching his state's segregation laws. It seems unlikely that the actions of such a small state would have such nationwide consequences.  Additionally, it earned him command to pursue Presidential ambitions.

 

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue? Have it so Gov actions from small states would have a 50% penalty to impacting meters on account of their small size. Consequently, governors of Large states would get a 50% bonus to their chance of impacting meters. This should keep the balance to the Gov actions but make larger states more important.

 

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example). Doing a good Job as a Governor as a Large state has often led to Presidential runs for the Governors who oversaw them.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Miracle). Additionally, most Presidents who were Governors were from Large states (OH, VA, NY,TX etc). Of the 14-19 (depending on how you count) Presidents who were governors, only 4(or 5 if you count Johnsons time as a Military Governor)  were from Medium states(Clinton, Carter, Polk,  and Wilson) and none from small states.

[Cal]

14 minutes ago, Murrman104 said:

1. In brief, what is the issue? In the 1960 Playtest the governor of the small state of Nevada impacted a meter by ditching his state's segregation laws. It seems unlikely that the actions of such a small state would have such nationwide consequences.  Additionally, it earned him command to pursue Presidential ambitions.

 

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue? Have it so Gov actions from small states would have a 50% penalty to impacting meters on account of their small size. Consequently, governors of Large states would get a 50% bonus to their chance of impacting meters. This should keep the balance to the Gov actions but make larger states more important.

 

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example). Doing a good Job as a Governor as a Large state has often led to Presidential runs for the Governors who oversaw them.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Miracle). Additionally, most Presidents who were Governors were from Large states (OH, VA, NY,TX etc). Of the 14-19 (depending on how you count) Presidents who were governors, only 4(or 5 if you count Johnsons time as a Military Governor)  were from Medium states(Clinton, Carter, Polk,  and Wilson) and none from small states.

Building on this: @vcczar has mentioned before how much he wants to emphasize larger states like Virginia, Massachusetts, and New York in the earlier eras especially. Even today, being an elected member from one of New York, Texas, or California gives a much bigger boost to National image and a higher likelihood of running for President or a congressional leadership position. 

Conversely, being in a smaller state doesn’t have that effect. Everyone talked about Newsom, Santorum, and Cuomo running for President. No one was bringing up the Governor of Hawaii or Idaho. Accordingly, I think that not only should the actions of big state governors have a larger chance to affect meters, but also to increase stats and DEFINITELY to lose obscure.

[0ccultist]

On 7/18/2022 at 5:53 PM, Murrman104 said:

1. In brief, what is the issue? In the 1960 Playtest the governor of the small state of Nevada impacted a meter by ditching his state's segregation laws. It seems unlikely that the actions of such a small state would have such nationwide consequences.  Additionally, it earned him command to pursue Presidential ambitions.

 

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue? Have it so Gov actions from small states would have a 50% penalty to impacting meters on account of their small size. Consequently, governors of Large states would get a 50% bonus to their chance of impacting meters. This should keep the balance to the Gov actions but make larger states more important.

 

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example). Doing a good Job as a Governor as a Large state has often led to Presidential runs for the Governors who oversaw them.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Miracle). Additionally, most Presidents who were Governors were from Large states (OH, VA, NY,TX etc). Of the 14-19 (depending on how you count) Presidents who were governors, only 4(or 5 if you count Johnsons time as a Military Governor)  were from Medium states(Clinton, Carter, Polk,  and Wilson) and none from small states.

I agree with the impact of the meters. But when it comes to smaller state governors entering the national stage there is precedent for it. Actions and important events/legislation have pushed people into the national stage, the one that comes to mind is Calvin Coolidge. Additionally, while he never won Howard Dean did pretty well for a Vermont governor. On the issue of him gaining command i don’t see the issue. A governor on the news for desegregation seems like a plausible way to enter into the national stage.  

[Vols21]

The command point earned by that small state Gov could also make him an attractive VP candidate.

something that I was pondering during our last Gov actions is if there could be some kind of cumulative effect?   Maybe the first Gov that succeeds with the action doesn’t move the meter, but as others follow suit, their combined effort would have an impact on helping the meter,

[MrPotatoTed]

On 7/20/2022 at 12:42 AM, Vols21 said:

The command point earned by that small state Gov could also make him an attractive VP candidate.

something that I was pondering during our last Gov actions is if there could be some kind of cumulative effect?   Maybe the first Gov that succeeds with the action doesn’t move the meter, but as others follow suit, their combined effort would have an impact on helping the meter,

This is kind of already how it works, isn't it?  There's a certain % chance that a governor's action succeeds, and THEN a small % chance that it impacts the meter.  One governor doing it alone is an extremely rare event.  It's usually multiple governors, all having a small % chance that eventually adds up enough that it might actually move the meter.

To put it another way, imagine an action (if successful) has a 10% chance of moving a meter.  

One governor successfully doing the action gives you a 10% chance of moving the meter.  But FIVE governors successfully doing the action gives you five 10% chances -- or, to put it another way, a 50% chance of moving the meter.

[Vols21]

3 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

One governor successfully doing the action gives you a 10% chance of moving the meter.  But FIVE governors successfully doing the action gives you five 10% chances -- or, to put it another way, a 50% chance of moving the meter.

statistically it doesn't work that way.  Each roll is independent so each one is 10% using your example (I know some are like 5% chances).  So you have 5 chances at 10% each.   If the first 4 governors fail to move the meter on their roll, the 5th Gov still just has a 10% chance of doing so.    In simple terms, think of a coin toss.   If the coin lands on heads 10 times in a row, you know eventually it will be tails; however, the odds of being tails on the next toss is still just 50%.    My suggestion would be to do exactly what you are saying and combine them so that it actually does accumulate and give you that 50% (or closer to it depending on how it's done).  In the current method there is a small chance you could get multiple hits, but this method gives a much better chance to at least get a positive move.

[MrPotatoTed]

5 minutes ago, Vols21 said:

statistically it doesn't work that way.  Each roll is independent so each one is 10% using your example (I know some are like 5% chances).  So you have 5 chances at 10% each.   If the first 4 governors fail to move the meter on their roll, the 5th Gov still just has a 10% chance of doing so.    In simple terms, think of a coin toss.   If the coin lands on heads 10 times in a row, you know eventually it will be tails; however, the odds of being tails on the next toss is still just 50%.    My suggestion would be to do exactly what you are saying and combine them so that it actually does accumulate and give you that 50% (or closer to it depending on how it's done).  In the current method there is a small chance you could get multiple hits, but this method gives a much better chance to at least get a positive move.

I don’t think you’re looking at it right.  You’re saying “what is the possibility that the NEXT roll lands within the 10%”, which of course is 10% regardless of the past rolls.

But I’m saying “what is the chance that  at least one of these next FIVE rolls lands within 10%?” And the answer to that is 50%.  
 

To use your coin example, the odds that a single coin flip will be heads is 50% regardless of what the previous flips have been...but the odds that it will be heads at least once in the next 20 flips is almost 100%.

[vcczar]

Alright I've gone through this and: 

• In regards to @matthewyoung123's suggestion regarding appointments and regions. The region penalty only applies if there are at least two states in a region. That is, if OH is admitted, the president won't be penalized for not having someone from OH in the cabinet. However, if IN is admitted, then the president will need to get a Midwesterner since there are now multiple Midwest states. 
• Added CPU rules for when they replace an FBI Director. Thanks @MrPotatoTed
• Added CPU rules for when the Maj/Min leader tries to block a nominee.  Thanks @MrPotatoTed
• Kingmakers cannot pass military and naval expertise. Thanks, @Cal
• Thanks to @matthewyoung123 suggestion. New rules in the miscellaneous rules section now describe penalties for upsetting the free state/slave state balance. 
• Added rules for when a Maj Ldr will override a filibuster. Thanks @MrPotatoTed
• Based of @Vols21's post regarding lingering, senior general, senior admiral, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will not impact the meters since these won't necessarily have admin ability. 
• @Arkansas Progressive Primaries in a state actually can be deactivated. It happened occasionally in the past. 
• @Rezi I've now made it where a politician under 60 will not randomly retire. 
• @Murrman104 great suggestions regarding big/small states, but as it's something that would take me a long time to alter, I'm going to wait until a day in which I have a lot less to do, hopefully next Friday will have fewer fixes. 
• and @Cal I'll look into Govs of big states more likely being able to shed obscure. 
• Won't add any new Biden Presidency things today. It's already later in the day than I want it to be and I have a lot of things I have to do before 4pm. 
• I plan on adding Lt. Gen. Michael Langley who is expected to be the first black five start marine general to the game. Will do so when I have more time. 
• Made is that a faction leader endorsement will give an extra die roll in the party leader battle. @MrPotatoTed
• Went through @MrPotatoTed's rules suggestions, accepting all of them with maybe two slight modifications. 

[MrPotatoTed]

2 hours ago, vcczar said:

 

• @Rezi I've now made it where a politician under 60 will not randomly retire.

LIAR!  Haha.  You still have %chance for retirement as low as 25 years old, in the 2.4 rules doc.

[vcczar]

27 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

LIAR!  Haha.  You still have %chance for retirement as low as 25 years old, in the 2.4 rules doc.

I put a note that says "No one under 60..." I guess I didn't see that part. 

[jvikings1]

1. In brief, what is the issue? State issues deactivated when dealt with at federal level through Congressional legislation

 

2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue? If Congress passed legislation into law addressing an issue, it stops governors from being able to address that issue (ex. debtors prisons in the play test)

 

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue? Allow states to address issues (through governors) even if the federal government has (through Congress). Maybe reduce the effects if already dealt with to represent that the issue is at least momentarily 

 

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example). States passed constitutional amendments banning slavery after the 13th Amendment. States have differed on marijuana policy from the federal government in recent years. States passed laws explicitly legalizing abortion even before Roe v Wade had been overturned (but in anticipation). States also passed laws banning/limiting abortion with the goal of them going into effect once Roe was overturned. States regularly have laws that regulate/criminalize portions of society also governed by the federal government (child labor laws; minimum wage; civil rights laws)

Edited July 28, 2022 by jvikings1

[Arkansas Progressive]

22 hours ago, vcczar said:

@Arkansas Progressive Primaries in a state actually can be deactivated. It happened occasionally in the past. 

Permanent deactivation? even after mcgovern-frasier? or just during the incumbent's re-election

[vcczar]

15 minutes ago, Arkansas Progressive said:

Permanent deactivation? even after mcgovern-frasier? or just during the incumbent's re-election

Not permanent, because it can be undone. Maybe I should make it only when there is an incumbent reelection. If you don't mind adding this to the to-do list I'll make the change next week. 

[Arkansas Progressive]

1. Issue: Unrestricted submarine warfare and Zimmerman Telegram both are in the era of Progressivism (which ends in 1916) but historically occurred in 1917

2. N/A

3. As of rn starting in Normalcy means there's no way to enter WWI without those two events (at least they historically start in Normalcy, meaning that they should fire in Normalcy), and thus no way to enter in WWI starting in 1916. I suggest either specifing that they fire in both eras or only fire in the era that includes their historically accurate firing date.

[ConservativeElector2]

1. In brief, what is the issue?

Not a really a fix, but I wondered how deceased politicians will be viewable (again)?
 
2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue? 

-
3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue?

I would find some sort of political graveyard to revisit the people and their legacies intriguing. Maybe sorted in layers of their highest ever held office. So the last layer would be people leaving the game without having ever held an office. Could also work even better if the game creates an individual death date corresponding logically to the death phase in which someone died.

I also love to view the section "Living former Governors/Senators/Secretaries whatever" for historical research. Don't know if that's difficult to code or whether others would even enjoy such dynamic pages, but that was an idea for some flavor screens to view stats.

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example).

At least for my second idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governors_of_Missouri#Living_former_governors_of_Missouri

[MrPotatoTed]

1. In brief, what is the issue?

The general event "Scandalous President" says that a President with Controversial may be impeached by the House if he does not choose to resign.  However, there are no options for this event, and thus no way for the President to actually choose to resign.
 
2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue? 

See the general event "Scandalous President."

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue?

Provide two options for the President:  Resign, or fight.  "Resign" is self-explanatory, and maybe gives points to reformists, improves honest government, etc.  "Fight" perhaps gives the President controversial, decreases Honest Government, maybe decreases domestic stability, and leads to a possible impeachment hearing?

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example).

Watergate and Nixon's resignation.

[MrPotatoTed]

1. In brief, what is the issue?

The Scripted Events tab is inconsistent in how it names eras, and thus will create problems when Anthony codes them someday, leading to some events presumably never firing.

2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue? 

Off the top of my head, there's an "Era of Ideologies" and an "Era of Ideology."  There's also an "Era of Nuclear Age" and an "Era of The Nuclear Age."  There may be more.

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue?

Review the wording of eras listed in the Scripted events tab to make sure it's consistent.

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example).

N/A

[MrPotatoTed]

1. In brief, what is the issue?

On the LegisProp sheet, there are multiple proposals referring to temporary wartime tax hikes -- but there are no requirements in place for them, so there's no requirement that it actually be wartime.
 
2. Can you give an example of the issue or provide an image of the issue? 

See LegisProp sheet.

Temporary wartime income tax hike on highest incomes to 67%

Temporary wartime income tax hike on highest incomes to 77%

3. In brief, what is your suggested fix for this issue?

Put a prerequisite that it can only be enacted during a (major?) war -- and that it automatically dissolves back to the prior tax rate after the war?

4. If applicable, please provide historical evidence to support the fix (a URL, for example).

N/A