AMPU To Do List - Completions List

[Arkansas Progressive]

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

@Willthescout7 Trait canceling. I'll polish this up at some point so it isn't just a copy+paste from the draft rules

3.0.34 Trait Canceling 

The rules will occasionally mention traits canceling out each other. Use this guide that comes from the draft rules to see which traits cancel out which traits.

 

• Charismatic (if already uncharismatic, then they get canceled out).

• Uncharismatic (if already charismatic, then they get canceled out).

• Debater (if already incoherent, then they get canceled out.)

• Incoherent (if already debater or orator, then they get canceled out).

• Orator (if already incoherent, then they get canceled out.)

• Disharmonious (if already harmonious, then they get canceled out.)

• Harmonious (if already disharmonious, then they get cancel out.)

• Integrity (if already controversial, then they get canceled out.)

• Controversial (if already integrity, then they get canceled out.)

• Likable (if already unlikable, then they get canceled out.)

• Unlikable (if already likable, then they get canceled out.)

• Manipulative (if already predictable, then they get canceled out.)

• Predictable (if already manipulative, then they get canceled out.)

• Puritan (if already pliable, then they get canceled out.)

• Pliable (if already puritan, then they get canceled out.)

• Lackey (if already leadership, then they get canceled out.)

• Cosmopolitan (if already provincial, then they get canceled out.)

• Provincial (if already cosmopolitan, then they get canceled out.)

• Delegator (if already micromanger, then they get canceled out.)

• Micromanager (if already delegator, then they get canceled out.)

Does this apply to the leaders emerge phase where traits block others?

[vcczar]

9 minutes ago, Arkansas Progressive said:

Does this apply to the leaders emerge phase where traits block others?

Yes. Let me know if it seems like an issue. 

[vcczar]

@10centjimmy Overeager and and Passive now cancel each other out.

@Cal US Constitution now deactivates Tariffs Set by States

[vcczar]

Also, changed the name of this thread.

[MrPotatoTed]

On 8/29/2022 at 5:14 PM, vcczar said:

Added this not to all the election rule docs:

Note: Prior to the first primary or general elections, players will select their candidates for every office. If a state allows primaries, and a player hasn’t an eligible candidate for office, then they have the option to generate a candidate to run for that office. This candidate will be obscure, pliable, passive, lackey, and start with a -1 election penalty. They will have the bare minimum requirement for that office. This generated candidate will be of the player’s party and share the same ideology and initial expertise as the player’s current party leader.

Because I anticipate this question: No, these people will not resign automatically should the win and serve their time or fail to win. 

Interesting!  Are there CPU rules for when to choose this option?

[MrPotatoTed]

14 hours ago, vcczar said:

Yes. Let me know if it seems like an issue. 

Just needs the wording changed in the faction leader phase.  Right now, it's worded that a candidate can (for example) get disharmonious "unless they already have harmonious."  That suggests having harmonious is a shield against getting disharmonious in this phase, when they should just cancel each other out.

Unless you've already changed that wording in the past 24 hours.

[vcczar]

2 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Interesting!  Are there CPU rules for when to choose this option?

Updated:

3.0.33 Acting Presidency

 

The VP will be given an option to refuse the title of Acting President upon the first death/resignation of a president by responding to the Pres Action “Set Precedence by Refusing to be an Acting President.” This will be prompted at the president’s exit from office, whenever it occurs. If the VP opts to take office as an Acting President, then the Pres Action will remain as an option in the future. A VP who is “pliable” or “passive,” will automatically accept being an Acting President, but he or she can opt to set the precedence via Pres Action later. A VP with Iron Fist will automatically refuse to be an Acting President, even if controlled by the player.

 

Until “Set Precedence by Refusing to be an Acting President” is issued, a VP that suddenly becomes president cannot name their own cabinet, can have only one pres action, has no veto authority, and cannot run for reelection with incumbency powers. Once the above mentioned Pres Action is issued, the former VP will have all the full powers of the presidency, and so will all future VPs that take over for a President. 

 

If the 3rd in line in succession (i.e. someone who is not Pres or VP) becomes president, then they will be Acting President. 

 

CPU Rules: If the CPU has the first VP to become president on death or resignation, and has a choice to accept/refuse being Acting President, the VP will refuse to be Acting President 75% of the time, unless they have “puritan,” “disharmonious,” or “iron fist,” in which case they will refuse to be Acting President 100% of the time.

[vcczar]

2 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Just needs the wording changed in the faction leader phase.  Right now, it's worded that a candidate can (for example) get disharmonious "unless they already have harmonious."  That suggests having harmonious is a shield against getting disharmonious in this phase, when they should just cancel each other out.

Unless you've already changed that wording in the past 24 hours.

But that's fine because it says, "but only if they don't have one of these already"

[MrPotatoTed]

1 minute ago, vcczar said:

But that's fine because it says, "but only if they don't have one of these already"

That’s the part that’s the problem.  Haha.  It sounds like they don’t cancel each other out in this one area alone — one simply blocks the other.

 

in all other areas of the game, if you gain a conflicting trait they cancel each other out and you get neither.  So an uncharismatic person who gains charismatic ends up with neither — they don’t get to keep charisma, but at least they’re not uncharismatic anymore.

[vcczar]

39 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

That’s the part that’s the problem.  Haha.  It sounds like they don’t cancel each other out in this one area alone — one simply blocks the other.

 

in all other areas of the game, if you gain a conflicting trait they cancel each other out and you get neither.  So an uncharismatic person who gains charismatic ends up with neither — they don’t get to keep charisma, but at least they’re not uncharismatic anymore.

Hmm. I wonder if I shouldn't have traits canceling out traits. I sort of fear that traits overtime will sort of just disappear because there are too many areas where a trait can cancel out. I think the block method might be better.

[MrPotatoTed]

 

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Hmm. I wonder if I shouldn't have traits canceling out traits. I sort of fear that traits overtime will sort of just disappear because there are too many areas where a trait can cancel out. I think the block method might be better.

Maybe.  I think I was the one who pushed for them to cancel out.  For example, it's believable that someone who starts with integrity might find themselves a little more corrupted by power over time.  Or that someone who is uncharismatic could learn with practice to become slightly less off-putting.  Some traits are especially devastating to one's career ambitions, so there's also the hope that maybe you'll get lucky and catch the trait that cancels it out.

But I could see the argument that the traits should be for life as well.  I'll defer to whichever you want, it should just be consistent for all parts of the game.

[10centjimmy]

18 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

For example, it's believable that someone who starts with integrity might find themselves a little more corrupted by power over time.  Or that someone who is uncharismatic could learn with practice to become slightly less off-putting.

This^

Without trait fluidity, you lose the potential for change and growth,  which then prevents poor drafters or performers from getting a chance to get powerful pols. It's far more likely for a "rich get richer" or "poor get poorer" outcome for factions. 

Instead of an outright block or cancelation maybe this as a suggestion:

if the alternate trait exists when it's counter is successfully rolled (say likable vs. Unlikable), then a secondary roll occurs with a 90% Chance of mutual cancelation, 5% of keeping original trait,  5% of new alternate trait (or 33% for all options, if that's too rare)

Edited August 31, 2022 by 10centjimmy

[vcczar]

2 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

This^

Without trait fluidity, you lose the potential for change and growth,  which then prevents poor drafters or performers from getting a chance to get powerful pols. It's far more likely for a "rich get richer" or "poor get poorer" outcome for factions. 

Instead of an outright block or cancelation maybe this as a suggestion:

if the alternate trait exists when it's counter is successfully rolled (say likable vs. Unlikable), then a secondary roll occurs with a 90% Chance of mutual cancelation, 5% of keeping original trait,  5% of new alternate trait (or 33% for all options, if that's too rare)

Yeah, maybe something like this. I'll type out new rules in 3.0 and then @MrPotatoTed can refer to 3.0 wherever he sees rules that need to refer to it. I'll get on to a calculation like this in an hour or so. 

[MrPotatoTed]

4 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

This^

Without trait fluidity, you lose the potential for change and growth,  which then prevents poor drafters or performers from getting a chance to get powerful pols. It's far more likely for a "rich get richer" or "poor get poorer" outcome for factions. 

Instead of an outright block or cancelation maybe this as a suggestion:

if the alternate trait exists when it's counter is successfully rolled (say likable vs. Unlikable), then a secondary roll occurs with a 90% Chance of mutual cancelation, 5% of keeping original trait,  5% of new alternate trait (or 33% for all options, if that's too rare)

@vcczarI'm fine with the idea of a die roll, but I'd leave the options as just "Mutual cancellation" or "Keep original trait."

Jumping straight from charismatic to uncharismatic or straight from incoherent to debater feels like too large of a leap.

[vcczar]

Update:

3.0.34 Trait Conflictions 

The rules will occasionally create a situation in which conflicting traits are in play, such as with the draft or when players earn a trait. For instance, someone can’t be both charismatic and uncharismatic.  Use this guide that comes from the draft rules to see which traits cancel out which traits.

 

When posed with a trait conflict scenario, do the following. Roll a 6-sided die:

• Roll 1-2 = Mutual Cancelation. (i.e. if they have Charisma and earn Uncharismatic, they cancel out, and the politician ends up with neither).

• Roll 3-6 = Keep original trait (i.e. they have Charisma and earn Uncharismatic, they keep Charisma)

 

Below are Traits and their Conflictions. 

[Note: The following have multiple conflicts below – incoherent, Efficient, Iron Fist, Puritan, Incompetent, Bookkeeper, Geostrategist, Domestic Warrior, Cop, Overeager, Easily Overwhelmed

 

• Bookkeeper & Incompetent

• Bookkeeper & Numberfudger

• Celebrity & Obscure [Special Case: Celebrity will always exist over obscure]

• Charismatic & Uncharismatic

• Cop & Incompetent

• Cop & Illicit

• Cosmopolitan & Provincial

• Crisis Admin & Incompetent or Easily Overwhelmed

• Crisis Gov & Incompetent or Easily Overwhelmed

• Crisis Manager & Incompetent or Easily Overwhelmed

• Debater & Incoherent 

• Decisive General & Incompetent or Easily Overwhelmed

• Delegator & Micromanager

• Disharmonious & Harmonious

• Domestic Warrior & Incompetent

• Domestic Warrior & Domestic Apathy

• Efficient & Easily Overwhelmed

• Efficient & Incompetent

• Egghead & Low Brow

• Frail & Hale

• Geostrategist & Incompetent

• Geostrategist & Naive Strategist

• Integrity & Controversial

• Iron Fist & Passive

• Iron Fist & Lackey

• Jurisprudence & Incompetent

• Lackey & Leadership

• Late Bloomer & Overeager

• Likable & Unlikable

• Magician & Incompetent

• Manipulative & Predictable

• Master Kingmaker & Incompetent

• Master Kingmaker & Kingmaker [Special Case: Master Kingmaker will always exist over Kingmaker]

• Orator & Incoherent

• Passive & Overheager

• Puritan & Pliable

• Puritan & Harmonious

• Two-Faced & Flipflopper [Special Case: Two-Faced will always exist over Flipflopper]

The following traits have no conflicts: Military Leader, Propagandist, Teflon, Carpetbagger, and Southern Unionist

[MrPotatoTed]

@vcczar Would it be possible to get a sentence or two on what each trait is?  For example, I don't know what "cop" is supposed to actually represent.

[vcczar]

1 minute ago, MrPotatoTed said:

@vcczar Would it be possible to get a sentence or two on what each trait is?  For example, I don't know what "cop" is supposed to actually represent.

Yeah, I can do that. Let me put it on to do list. Won't do it today.

[vcczar]

I'm creating a new section that describes what each trait is. 

Also @ConservativeElector2 added 5 more politiicans to fill out when you have the time. 

[vcczar]

I've given Thomas Jefferson "teflon." He won landslide victories in 1800 and 1804 despite having been accused of having children with Sally Hemings (which ended up being true) and being accused of deviant religious behavior, sparked probably from the creation of the "Jefferson Bible," which is mainly the Bible but with all the miracles and humanly impossible stuff taken out of the book. 

[vcczar]

@MrPotatoTed I have a first draft of definition of terms in 3.0.19 . I put it there because the only 3.0.19 was deleted. 

[Bushwa777]

If you still need help let me know.  I can do something to help while we wait and wait and wait 

[vcczar]

Updated: 

Difficult battles have a 5% chance of killing the General or Admiral and a 7% chance of killing a random politician on the military career track.  Medium battles have a 1% chance of killing the General or Admiral and a 3% chance of killing a random politician on the military career track. Easy battles have a 1% chance of killing a general or admiral and a 2% chance of killing a random politician on the military career track.

[vcczar]

Based on @MrPotatoTed's and @Arkansas Progressive's playtests of the Era of the Future, I'm splitting this into two era's usng @MrPotatoTed's suggested names for now. I may change them. 

I think the final names may be based on events or legis props in these eras. 

I'll start editing the legis prop, pres actions, etc tonight or tomorrow.

[Arkansas Progressive]

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Based on @MrPotatoTed's and @Arkansas Progressive's playtests of the Era of the Future, I'm splitting this into two era's usng @MrPotatoTed's suggested names for now. I may change them. 

I think the final names may be based on events or legis props in these eras. 

I'll start editing the legis prop, pres actions, etc tonight or tomorrow.

Noice

[Arkansas Progressive]

Also since we changed state biases, we need to return to the d6 die in the elections, and not use the d3