AMPU House Poll

[vcczar]

Please Read this before Voting

 Note: Even if they Yeses win, there's a chance this change might not happen. It needs to be overwhelming and I'll need volunteers. Anthony will probably hate me for making the change as it will add a lot more work than he was expecting. 

Currently, the game uses focus reps to represent the US House. A large state has 3 Reps, Medium has 2 Reps, and a Small state has 1 Rep. The issue with this is that it can lead to unrealistic results, although close enough to not be a gamebreaker. 

If I change the game to have every house seat, keep this in mind:

• It could delay the creation of the game as I'll have to calculate historical biases and etc for every seat and create them etc.. 
• Having that many seats could slow the game down. 
• Having that many seats could really bog a player down into having way more politicians and seats to fill. 
• The US has had over 10,000 US Reps. This does not include people that almost won or politicians to fight for these offices. I'm certainly not going to add 10-20k more politicians. Somehow the politician generator will have to be employed for this and a method of getting that politician so they can be used for the election. 
• I will need volunteers if I make this change as we need to make it complete by September 1st (less than two weeks). 

@MrPotatoTed @Cal @Rodja @Rezi @matthewyoung123 and any other person leading a playtest, please tag your playtesters to this if they haven't voted yet. I'd like a vote from everyone. 

[Willthescout7]

A solution to the bogging down with players is to allow the option of automating elections. Essentially, after a certain point, the player could have the game follow CPU rules to fill in every open seat with available pols. This would allow the player to make sure their best candidates get in the races they want, but not get bogged down in tedium.

[Willthescout7]

Another option that could help avoid having to add a ton more pols: give everyone 1 legi. This would make it so everyone can enter congress therefore opening up the amount of competition for each seat. 

 

Downside is that this could lessen the historical accuracy as we see people like Zachary Taylor enter Congress

[matthewyoung123]

There is a room for compromise here I think. I think doing ALL the districts would be A LOT of work.  Perhaps not all of them need to be done.  I propose a compromise-

Mega States (currently CA, FL,TX,NY,etc) get 5 districts. Maybe state if there are 25+ Reps historically in the state, you get 5 districts with 1 having to be minority party (the Kevin McCarthy rule).  This covers NY for most of the 1800's and 1900's too.

Super States (between 18-25 Reps) get 4 districts, and again 1 must be minority party for the state.  Current states that would be here are PA & IL. 

Large states are 3 districts, 11-18 historical Reps. 1 district minority party. 

Medium states 2 districts, 6-10 historical Reps. No restrictions on party.

Small states 5 or less Reps, 1 district. No restrictions on minority party.

Just increasing the number of reps per state slightly would be a great compromise between TOO MANY REPS and historic accuracy.  For example if CA has 5 Reps, each have about 10 votes (CA has 53 districts). So roughly 43 Blue, 10 Red. The current CA congressional delegation is 42/11.

Thanks. 

Edited August 18, 2022 by matthewyoung123

[MrPotatoTed]

23 minutes ago, matthewyoung123 said:

There is a room for compromise here I think. I think doing ALL the districts would be A LOT of work.  Perhaps not all of them need to be done.  I propose a compromise-

Mega States (currently CA, FL,TX,NY,etc) get 5 districts. Maybe state if there are 25+ Reps historically in the state, you get 5 districts with 1 having to be minority party (the Kevin McCarthy rule).  This covers NY for most of the 1800's and 1900's too.

Super States (between 18-25 Reps) get 4 districts, and again 1 must be minority party for the state.  Current states that would be here are PA & IL. 

Large states are 3 districts, 11-18 historical Reps. 1 district minority party. 

Medium states 2 districts, 6-11 historical Reps. No restrictions on party.

Small states 5 or less Reps, 1 district. No restrictions on minority party.

Just increasing the number of reps per state slightly would be a great compromise between TOO MANY REPS and historic accuracy.  For example if CA has 5 Reps, each have about 10 votes (CA has 53 districts). So roughly 43 Blue, 10 Red. The current CA congressional delegation is 42/11.

Thanks. 

I think this is a great compromise @vcczar.  It helps the super important states feel super important, and it helps ensure that the Kevin McCarthys and Beto O'Rourke's of the world still have a chance at winning a house race in their state.

[Ich_bin_Tyler]

I am very much in agreement with @matthewyoung123 on this. From the playtests we all seem to have 300 guys from NY and later CA doing a whole lot of nothing except running for the same offices over and over hoping to get lucky. This can lead to scenarios where a player might just forgo drafting any pols from those states because they just aren't feasible to win. Expanding using Matt's suggestion is a great way to add variability and allow competition in states with large numbers of pols. Also with the current system you could end up with a Rep from NY holding 20 of the 30 votes in that state making them super powerful in a way that doesn't feel balanced. From a logistics side the above compromise wouldn't require the addition of too many extra polis or calculation of all of the district leans either.

[matthewyoung123]

Just FYI, going with "historical" Congressional districts means 435 House Members. @vcczar

I will AMMEND MY COMPROMISE for the RECORD.

I propose, rather than states be divided 3/2/1 for Congressional Representation, that we divide them 5/4/3/2/1.

Mega states- 5 districts. Historically 26+ Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means CA, FL, NY, TX= 20 Reps from these states.

Super states- 4 districts. Historically 18-25 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means IL, PA= 8 Reps from these states.

Large states- 3 districts. Historically 9-18 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means AZ, GA, IN, MA, MI, NJ, NC, OH, TN, WA, VA= 33 Reps from these states.

Medium states- 2 districts. Historically 5-8 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means AL, CO, CT, KY, LA, MD, MN, MO, OK, OR, SC, WI= 24 Reps from these states.

Small states- 1 district. Historically 4 or less Representatives in Congress. For 2022 that means AK, AR, DE, HI, ID, IA, KS, ME, MS, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, ND, RI, SD, UT, VT, WV, WY= 21 Reps from these states.

TOTAL REPS in 5/4/3/2/1- 106 Reps

CURRENTLY IN THE GAME structure now- 103 Reps.

So we'd add 3 total Reps.  Probably not many more politicians need to be added.  Certainly not as many as we'd need if we had 435!  It also, as @MrPotatoTed has said, means there is a better balance, and the important states are important, but it still leaves the ability for Reps to be elected in these states that aren't of the majority party.  Also, it means that the votes are a little more equal amongst the Representatives.

I'd be willing to go back to the Census/Electoral data for all the Presidential election years and see what state would fit where on this.  Thanks.

I VOTE 106 over 435!!

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by matthewyoung123

[Rodja]

@Hestia @ConservativeElector2 @Murrman104 @jnewt @Joe30330 @Vicx @Brunell @WVProgressive @Bloot911 @ebrk85 @Pringles

[10centjimmy]

1 hour ago, matthewyoung123 said:

Historically 18-25 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means IL, PA= 18 Reps from these states

Should this be 8 reps?

[matthewyoung123]

4 each so yea, 8! I was in a hurry. I can't math...

[matthewyoung123]

2 hours ago, 10centjimmy said:

Should this be 8 reps?

Fixed!  Thanks.  106 vs 435!

Edited August 18, 2022 by matthewyoung123

[Brunell]

At first, I wasn’t a fan of the three maximum two system, but it grew on me. It is much more realistic/manageable to implement than having literally every single congressman/district. Maybe that may work for AMPU 2/another update, but for realism and a timely release (hoping for September early release!) let’s just stick with what we have.

[OrangeP47]

Just adding in that I voted but I feel like what I really want is what Matt suggested, so the vote is essentially a "present" vote.

[ebrk85]

I'm in agreement with what seems like the majority so far. I'd opt with the status quo or Matt's idea which was a good one. Down the line in another version that could be something to consider but I'm afraid that might be a lot to pull off at this time and could slow the game mechanics and CPU processing down too much.

I'm all for making the game as realistic as possible (that's one of the draws for me) but it is a game and we want to make sure its playable. And comes out at some point!!

[vcczar]

On 8/18/2022 at 12:01 PM, matthewyoung123 said:

Just FYI, going with "historical" Congressional districts means 435 House Members. @vcczar

I will AMMEND MY COMPROMISE for the RECORD.

I propose, rather than states be divided 3/2/1 for Congressional Representation, that we divide them 5/4/3/2/1.

Mega states- 5 districts. Historically 26+ Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means CA, FL, NY, TX= 20 Reps from these states.

Super states- 4 districts. Historically 18-25 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means IL, PA= 8 Reps from these states.

Large states- 3 districts. Historically 9-18 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means AZ, GA, IN, MA, MI, NJ, NC, OH, TN, WA, VA= 33 Reps from these states.

Medium states- 2 districts. Historically 5-8 Representatives in Congress.  For 2022 that means AL, CO, CT, KY, LA, MD, MN, MO, OK, OR, SC, WI= 24 Reps from these states.

Small states- 1 district. Historically 4 or less Representatives in Congress. For 2022 that means AK, AR, DE, HI, ID, IA, KS, ME, MS, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, ND, RI, SD, UT, VT, WV, WY= 21 Reps from these states.

TOTAL REPS in 5/4/3/2/1- 106 Reps

CURRENTLY IN THE GAME structure now- 103 Reps.

So we'd add 3 total Reps.  Probably not many more politicians need to be added.  Certainly not as many as we'd need if we had 435!  It also, as @MrPotatoTed has said, means there is a better balance, and the important states are important, but it still leaves the ability for Reps to be elected in these states that aren't of the majority party.  Also, it means that the votes are a little more equal amongst the Representatives.

I'd be willing to go back to the Census/Electoral data for all the Presidential election years and see what state would fit where on this.  Thanks.

I VOTE 106 over 435!!

 

Thanks for this. Inspired me a lot. I am considering having a 1 Rep stand for 5 US Reps. 

So any state 5 or fewer reps has 1. 6-10 gets 2 and so on. 

Thus CA has 10. TX 7. FL 5. NY 5. PA and IL have 3. 

I have rules for gain and loss of seats now. I’ll share these when I can type them. I’m not at home and it’s all on paper. 

I also might have rules for generating politicians to challenge for a seat. This way every election can be contested. They will have an election penalty, but at least there’s a chance. May limit number of generated challenged and have some restrictions. 

[OrangeP47]

12 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Thanks for this. Inspired me a lot. I am considering having a 1 Rep stand for 5 US Reps. 

So any state 5 or fewer reps has 1. 6-10 gets 2 and so on. 

Thus CA has 10. TX 7. FL 5. NY 5. PA and IL have 3. 

I have rules for gain and loss of seats now. I’ll share these when I can type them. I’m not at home and it’s all on paper. 

I also might have rules for generating politicians to challenge for a seat. This way every election can be contested. They will have an election penalty, but at least there’s a chance. May limit number of generated challenged and have some restrictions. 

Are you referring to the census changes rules?  If not don't forget about those for ahistorical seat changes and EVs.

[MrPotatoTed]

20 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Thanks for this. Inspired me a lot. I am considering having a 1 Rep stand for 5 US Reps. 

So any state 5 or fewer reps has 1. 6-10 gets 2 and so on. 

Thus CA has 10. TX 7. FL 5. NY 5. PA and IL have 3. 

I have rules for gain and loss of seats now. I’ll share these when I can type them. I’m not at home and it’s all on paper. 

I also might have rules for generating politicians to challenge for a seat. This way every election can be contested. They will have an election penalty, but at least there’s a chance. May limit number of generated challenged and have some restrictions. 

Sure, 1=5 might be fine.  10 Rep elections in California will be a lot for google sheet playtesters, but who knows if any of our playtests will even ever get there. haha.

Are you also considering having a minimum of one Rep from each party guaranteed to win in States with at least 5 named Reps?  (This will ensure California for example gets about 20% Red Reps, which is accurate for modern day.)

There are currently no penalties to losing a House election (unless you're the incumbent).

[vcczar]

1 hour ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Are you also considering having a minimum of one Rep from each party guaranteed to win in States with at least 5 named Reps?  (This will ensure California for example gets about 20% Red Reps, which is accurate for modern day.)

Yeah, I have an idea in place for this. 

[vcczar]

Here are the new rules. @MrPotatoTed is free to suggest edits. Any of the lead playtesters not wishing to mess with 10 US Reps or whatever are free to use a number of their choosing just for the sake of keeping your sanity. Forgive the bold, it won't let me unbold it. I'll now make edits to the historical era spreadsheet and start date spreadsheet and stuff, so I can apply the new US Reps to that. I won't be able to get to your suggested fixes today as this is my project. Hopefully, can get to them tomorrow: 

3.0.16 Determining US Reps

 

Use the following to determine the number of US Reps (Note: the game may eventually allow for alternative history growth of the US based off Gov Actions and Federal legislation):

 

• First check to see if you are in a census election. A census election is the first election after a decade. Thus, the 1860 election does not calculate new EVs because that is the decade year, but the 1862 midterm will calculate new EVs and new US Reps. 

• Use the historical EVs for an election and subtract that by two to get the number of US Reps. Thus a state with 16 EVs will be said to have 14 US Reps. Modify the number based on any events or actions that might have altered the historical number. Therefore, if Ohio historically had 19 US Reps in 1864, but your Ohio happens to have 17 US Reps, then the historical number of 20 US Reps for 1872, should be 18 in your game, because your Ohio is 2 EVs (thus 2 US Reps) behind the historical value. 

• If a state joins before they did historically, then give that state 3 EVs and add it to the historical EVs for that election. They get 1 US Rep. 

• If a state has not yet joined when they did historically, then simply erase their EVs from the historical EVs for that election. 

• See the spreadsheet for ahistorical state EVs to get their US Reps. 

• Once you’ve determined the US Reps, then you will figure out the number of Focus Reps. Use this algorithm:

  • State has 5 US Reps or fewer = 1 Focus Rep

  • State has 6 to 10 US Reps = 2 Focus Reps

  • State has 11-15 US Reps = 3 Focus Reps

  • State has 16-20 US Reps = 4 Focus Reps

  • State has 21-25 US Reps = 5 Focus Reps

  • State has 26-30 US Reps = 6 Focus Reps

  • State has 31-35 US Reps = 7 Focus Reps

  • State has 36-40 US Reps = 8 Focus Reps

  • State has 41-45 US Reps = 9 Focus Reps

  • State has 46 US Reps or higher = 10 Focus Reps

 

Voting Power: The voting power of a US Rep will be divided by the number of US Reps in a state. If an odd number, then the extra vote or votes are prioritized by legislative power (randomized if tied). Thus, a state with 30 US Reps has 6 Focus Reps, which gives them each a voting power of 5 votes. If this number were 31 US reps, then the legislator with the highest legislative power would have 6 votes. 

 

Determining Bias of a new US Rep Seat:

• First, any state that is or will become a state that will have 5 Focus Reps or higher must gain a seat for the minority party if they do not have a seat biased for them. Thus, if California’s districts are all biased for the Blue Party or are toss up, their new seat will be a Red Party seat. This seat will start Bias +2 for the minority party. 

• If the above is not the case, then the new seat’s bias is determined this way:

  • 25% chance is +1 towards the majority party in the state (Gov+US Sen+US Rep, and randomize if tied)

  • 25% chance it is a tossup

  • 50% chance it goes to the party that has the most of these lobbies in these specific eras below (randomize if tied). This reflects industries and such that generally drive population growth or are generally benefited by it:

    • Prior to the Era of Progressivism:

      • Big Agriculture

      • Big Oil & Gas

      • Transportation

      • Isolationist

    • Era of Progressivism and beyond: 

      • Public Housing

      • Labor Unions

      • Technology

      • Welfare

 

Effects of Bias on Incumbent Districts in a State Gaining a US Rep district:

• Use the following to see if the biases shift in the extant districts. Roll for each district separately :

  • 50% chance no change

  • 25% chance shift towards tossup

  • 25% chance it goes to the party that has the most of these lobbies in these specific eras below (randomize if tied). This reflects industries and such that generally drive population growth or are generally benefited by it::

    • Prior to the Era of Progressivism:

      • Big Agriculture

      • Big Oil & Gas

      • Transportation

      • Isolationist

    • Era of Progressivism and beyond: 

      • Public Housing

      • Labor Unions

      • Technology

      • Welfare

 

Effects of Bias on Incumbent Districts in a State Losing a US Rep district:

• Use the following to see if the biases shift in the extant districts. Roll for each district separately :

  • 50% chance no change

  • 25% chance shift towards tossup

  • 25% chance it goes to the party that has the fewest of these lobbies in these specific eras below (randomize if tied). Especially for modern elections, states losing population, or seeing smaller growth, tend to become more nostalgic and, therefore, more conservative, while growing states see influx of immigration, technology, labor, and begin to embrace things such as welfare and public housing more readily, and they, therefore, become more liberal. Georgia, Arizona, Virginia, and Texas are examples of the latter, while Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and West Virginia are examples of the former. There are noticeable exceptions, hence the 50% chance of “no change” .:

    • Prior to the Era of Progressivism:

      • Big Agriculture

      • Big Oil & Gas

      • Transportation

      • Isolationist

    • Era of Progressivism and beyond: 

      • Public Housing

      • Labor Unions

      • Technology

      • Welfare

[Brunell]

2 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Here are the new rules. @MrPotatoTed is free to suggest edits. Any of the lead playtesters not wishing to mess with 10 US Reps or whatever are free to use a number of their choosing just for the sake of keeping your sanity. Forgive the bold, it won't let me unbold it. I'll now make edits to the historical era spreadsheet and start date spreadsheet and stuff, so I can apply the new US Reps to that. I won't be able to get to your suggested fixes today as this is my project. Hopefully, can get to them tomorrow: 

3.0.16 Determining US Reps

 

Use the following to determine the number of US Reps (Note: the game may eventually allow for alternative history growth of the US based off Gov Actions and Federal legislation):

 

• First check to see if you are in a census election. A census election is the first election after a decade. Thus, the 1860 election does not calculate new EVs because that is the decade year, but the 1862 midterm will calculate new EVs and new US Reps. 

• Use the historical EVs for an election and subtract that by two to get the number of US Reps. Thus a state with 16 EVs will be said to have 14 US Reps. Modify the number based on any events or actions that might have altered the historical number. Therefore, if Ohio historically had 19 US Reps in 1864, but your Ohio happens to have 17 US Reps, then the historical number of 20 US Reps for 1872, should be 18 in your game, because your Ohio is 2 EVs (thus 2 US Reps) behind the historical value. 

• If a state joins before they did historically, then give that state 3 EVs and add it to the historical EVs for that election. They get 1 US Rep. 

• If a state has not yet joined when they did historically, then simply erase their EVs from the historical EVs for that election. 

• See the spreadsheet for ahistorical state EVs to get their US Reps. 

• Once you’ve determined the US Reps, then you will figure out the number of Focus Reps. Use this algorithm:

  • State has 5 US Reps or fewer = 1 Focus Rep

  • State has 6 to 10 US Reps = 2 Focus Reps

  • State has 11-15 US Reps = 3 Focus Reps

  • State has 16-20 US Reps = 4 Focus Reps

  • State has 21-25 US Reps = 5 Focus Reps

  • State has 26-30 US Reps = 6 Focus Reps

  • State has 31-35 US Reps = 7 Focus Reps

  • State has 36-40 US Reps = 8 Focus Reps

  • State has 41-45 US Reps = 9 Focus Reps

  • State has 46 US Reps or higher = 10 Focus Reps

 

Voting Power: The voting power of a US Rep will be divided by the number of US Reps in a state. If an odd number, then the extra vote or votes are prioritized by legislative power (randomized if tied). Thus, a state with 30 US Reps has 6 Focus Reps, which gives them each a voting power of 5 votes. If this number were 31 US reps, then the legislator with the highest legislative power would have 6 votes. 

 

Determining Bias of a new US Rep Seat:

• First, any state that is or will become a state that will have 5 Focus Reps or higher must gain a seat for the minority party if they do not have a seat biased for them. Thus, if California’s districts are all biased for the Blue Party or are toss up, their new seat will be a Red Party seat. This seat will start Bias +2 for the minority party. 

• If the above is not the case, then the new seat’s bias is determined this way:

  • 25% chance is +1 towards the majority party in the state (Gov+US Sen+US Rep, and randomize if tied)

  • 25% chance it is a tossup

  • 50% chance it goes to the party that has the most of these lobbies in these specific eras below (randomize if tied). This reflects industries and such that generally drive population growth or are generally benefited by it:

    • Prior to the Era of Progressivism:

      • Big Agriculture

      • Big Oil & Gas

      • Transportation

      • Isolationist

    • Era of Progressivism and beyond: 

      • Public Housing

      • Labor Unions

      • Technology

      • Welfare

 

Effects of Bias on Incumbent Districts in a State Gaining a US Rep district:

• Use the following to see if the biases shift in the extant districts. Roll for each district separately :

  • 50% chance no change

  • 25% chance shift towards tossup

  • 25% chance it goes to the party that has the most of these lobbies in these specific eras below (randomize if tied). This reflects industries and such that generally drive population growth or are generally benefited by it::

    • Prior to the Era of Progressivism:

      • Big Agriculture

      • Big Oil & Gas

      • Transportation

      • Isolationist

    • Era of Progressivism and beyond: 

      • Public Housing

      • Labor Unions

      • Technology

      • Welfare

 

Effects of Bias on Incumbent Districts in a State Losing a US Rep district:

• Use the following to see if the biases shift in the extant districts. Roll for each district separately :

  • 50% chance no change

  • 25% chance shift towards tossup

  • 25% chance it goes to the party that has the fewest of these lobbies in these specific eras below (randomize if tied). Especially for modern elections, states losing population, or seeing smaller growth, tend to become more nostalgic and, therefore, more conservative, while growing states see influx of immigration, technology, labor, and begin to embrace things such as welfare and public housing more readily, and they, therefore, become more liberal. Georgia, Arizona, Virginia, and Texas are examples of the latter, while Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and West Virginia are examples of the former. There are noticeable exceptions, hence the 50% chance of “no change” .:

    • Prior to the Era of Progressivism:

      • Big Agriculture

      • Big Oil & Gas

      • Transportation

      • Isolationist

    • Era of Progressivism and beyond: 

      • Public Housing

      • Labor Unions

      • Technology

      • Welfare

 

Howdy, just curious, would these new rules push back early release a great deal?

[OrangeP47]

Alright, it still considers the ahistorical EVs, passes my muster 😃

[vcczar]

8 minutes ago, Brunell said:

 

Howdy, just curious, would these new rules push back early release a great deal?

No, because he hasn't worked on anything that involved this yet. 

[vcczar]

This new US House change is also going to change the definition of Big and Small state. A Small state will be any state with only 1 Focus Rep. A Large state will be any state with 4 or more Focus Reps. I'll make these changes to the rules at some point next week. Still working on figuring out how many US Reps each state has for the beginning of each era and what their biases are. Tomorrow I'll find Historical US Reps to fill these slots at start date. 

[matthewyoung123]

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

This new US House change is also going to change the definition of Big and Small state. A Small state will be any state with only 1 Focus Rep. A Large state will be any state with 4 or more Focus Reps. I'll make these changes to the rules at some point next week. Still working on figuring out how many US Reps each state has for the beginning of each era and what their biases are. Tomorrow I'll find Historical US Reps to fill these slots at start date. 

I'll be happy to help in any tasks associated with this work.  Just let me know what you'd like me to do.  I don't start teaching classes until Monday the 29th.  After that my time will be more limited.  Thanks!

[vcczar]

10 minutes ago, matthewyoung123 said:

I'll be happy to help in any tasks associated with this work.  Just let me know what you'd like me to do.  I don't start teaching classes until Monday the 29th.  After that my time will be more limited.  Thanks!

Actually, you can do something right now that will help me tomorrow. I'll PM you now.