Jump to content
The Political Lounge

AMPU To Do List - Completions List


vcczar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here's a list of things I could delegate, if anyone has the time:

  1. Filling out the new historical US Reps. @Willthescout7 is handling this. 
  2. Look for typos and inconsistencies in the various spreadsheet, such as inconsistent naming of the Historical Eras in the scripted Events. (Sure sounds like fun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). Multiple people could work on this. 
  3. Go through the Legis props and check to see if there are any things that shouldn't happen. For instance, demanding WWI Reparations in the year 2000. Adding a state as a slave state after slavery has been abolished. Slapping retaliatory embargos for no reason, etc. Basically, restrictions that prevent illogical proposals of legis props. Almost everything has restrictions, but some things probably were overlooked or not restricted in error. Multiple people could work on this. 
  4. Come up with token legislation for the Era of Independence so that there are more things to propose. Note: These things should probably be so worthless as to not be more enticing than legislation that exists. They'd be here just to have something to propose and award a few points. They'll need to be either historically proposed or something that reasonably would have been proposed by a wartime or post-wartime central government with almost no power whatsoever. Multiple people could work on this. 
  5. Inconsistency with rules. @MrPotatoTed is already handling this. 

That's basically all I can delegate. Let me know if you can work on #s 2, 4, and/or 4. I'll have to handle all the rest myself because I can't think of a way to delegate them. 

For #2, I'll probably have you just change the color of the cells that needs fixing unless you think you can be really careful and handle making the change yourself. Sometime it deletes everything when you type. The issue is that excel doesn't seem to have a spellcheck. 

For #3, just keep a list for me. Concisely tell me the issue. 

For #4, give me your ideas and any historical or reasonable hypothetical rationale for them.  

Will tag people now: @Arkansas Progressive @Bloot911 @Cal @ConservativeElector2 @Hestia @Ich_bin_Tyler @Lars @matthewyoung123 @OrangeP47 @Rezi @Rodja @ShortKing @WVProgressive 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll send access to volunteers at some point today or tomorrow. 

  • I just changed the CPU rules for Gov, US Sen, and US Rep. They now take the state biases under consideration. 
  • I made sure the rules regarding Big, Medium, and Small states were consistent between Presidential Elections rules and in the 3.0 rules doc. Caught an error of mine too. 

Muti-tasking with this as I work on my sidejob, so changes are slow. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I considered the proposal to make the Constitutional Amendment setting up a Unicameral Congress to include only the House option as someone suggested, but then I remembered part of the historical debate was on proportional or equal representation. As such, I'm keeping both of them. The issue with no US House = no midterms is resolved by the fact that the US Senate terms are 6 years. There will be Midterms. Also Governorships allow for that. 

 

  • Based 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The conflict between whether or not the Const Convention replaces the Legis Phase or takes place during the Scripted Event phase is settled -- it will take place with the Scripted Events. I've deleted the 3.0 reference that contradicted what the Scripted Event said. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is now a Scripted Event that ends the Rev War if is still on-going by the last 4 half-terms of the Era of Ind. This gives enough time for the Constitutional Convention to pop up. In short, war weariness pressures King George III and British warhawks to give up the fight. While we secure our independence, celebration is somewhat deflated by the fact that we couldn't secure a decisive victory on the battlefield to virtually end the war. No Yorktown. 

Therefore, the Rev War can no longer carry over into the Era of Federalism. The good thing, is that now the US can win the war just by not losing, which is kind of what they were going for, especially prior to French involvement. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I'm newer to the group I don't know that I would be as helpful with parts of 2 and 3 but I would be happy to help proofread and fix typos in the thousands of politician bios.  I have come across quite a few typos in them (as you'd expect in such a large volume).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, ebrk85 said:

As I'm newer to the group I don't know that I would be as helpful with parts of 2 and 3 but I would be happy to help proofread and fix typos in the thousands of politician bios.  I have come across quite a few typos in them (as you'd expect in such a large volume).

PM me your email address, and I'll send you access tomorrow. Thanks!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

#4 Ideas:

1. Approve a Model Treaty Committee to develop a template for international commercial agreements (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_Treaty)

2. Organize diplomatic mission to native american tribes in West and North

3. Organize military excursion against British forts in west to secure artillery

4. Fix Postage rates for interstate postal services

5. Establish Rules of Prize for capture of enemy property, specifically ships

6. Increase coordination with Committees and Councils of Safety still active following establishment of state constitutions

  • Thanks 1
  • Based 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've modified rules regarding the Constitutional Convention:

  • Anyone but the Pres of Congress, one of the committee chairs, or one of the ambassadors may be a delegate to the convention. Those on the career track are eligible, but they must be taken off the track. Update is to rules doc 3.0
  • The Amendment to call for a new Constitutional Convention now requires that Dom Stab be at the worst meter. 
  • CPU rules for ratification and ratification rules in general are now added to rules doc 3.0
  • Controverstial and ahistorical Convention Planks now have harsher penalties and negative effects. See Special Rules under each plank. Basically, unless you're playing with a lot of Human players, it will be difficult to pass an ahistorical Constitutional Convention, especially one that eliminates slavery or gives votes to women, etc. Governors will automatically oppose ratifying some planks, depending on the type of Gov and the type of plank, but all Govs can be convinced to change their mind, unless they're puritan. 
  • If slavery is abolished, all races can vote, or slaves do not count towards representation, then dom stab drops to the lowest level. There's a 50% chance of the same if women get the right to vote. Both of these apply only to the 1st Constitutional Convention, so if another one occurs down the road, and abolition and women's suffrage doesn't exist, then there's a chance to get these passed without incurring a Civil War. Now that the lowest meter only allows for a Civil War and doesn't guarantee it, someone can take the risk of abolishing slavery. 

In short, I'd estimate only a 10% chance of really having a significantly ahistorical Constitution. You might get away with adding one ahistorical plank. Probably the best strategy is to fill the delegates with a lot of people with "debate" after having helped get a lot of "pliable" governors elected. Alternatively, just have a lot of human players who want to be ahistorical. You could also play all the factions and just go crazy. 

I'm going to be headed out soon for the rest of the day, so this is possibly the last "To Do" list thing I can do today, unless I can find one that I can do in just a few minutes. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made it clearer that Govs of states leading in industries will gain or lose points depending on the type of treaty. I think @MrPotatoTed had mentioned that Govs gain points regardess of the results. This shouldn't be the case now, and actually it wasn't then either because the column said, "gain/loses on results.' That is unless I'm missing some other area where Govs are gaining points on a lost war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing on my to do list is reference to their being no rules on treaties. i think this is resolved by the fact that the military rules say to when to apply a treaty and the same section of the rules say that treaties are passed automatically. 

Since treaties are an automatic function now, there really isn't any need for specific rules. I'm okay with creating something if you still think it is necessary. @MrPotatoTed

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have now clarified how many actions each candidate/nominee gets to make during Presidential primaries, conventions, general elections. 

Another thing listed on this same to do list item was a question in what order these actions are taken, as in, who gets to go first. I am applying a note to rules doc 2.1 stating that players will always, unless the specific rule says otherwise, go in order of lowest score to highest score (randomized if tied). 

  • Like 1
  • Based 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Sure. My thinking was states should be allowed to set policy for their state even if the federal government has done so. But with the caveat of having the affects of the policy reduced to acknowledge the presence of the federal government's policy. I think this further emphasizes the federalist structure of the US government.

For example, let's say a state (governor) wants prohibition for his state but it is during federal prohibition, still allow the governor to make that his state's policy (which stays in affect even if federal prohibition goes away). In the modern context (and an opposite example), a state (governor) could legalize marijuana even if illegal at the federal level.

So to make it the most basic, allow governors to set state policy even if already addressed by federal policy (with the small cavoite that if it's an action that can't be undone, like banning slavery, governors can't do anything about it)

Edited by jvikings1
  • Based 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

I made it clearer that Govs of states leading in industries will gain or lose points depending on the type of treaty. I think @MrPotatoTed had mentioned that Govs gain points regardess of the results. This shouldn't be the case now, and actually it wasn't then either because the column said, "gain/loses on results.' That is unless I'm missing some other area where Govs are gaining points on a lost war. 

Great!  Mine only said "gains", but maybe I had an old version of the treaty sheet or something.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • vcczar changed the title to AMPU To Do List - Completions List

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...