Constructive Results of AMPU Summer Playtest

[MrPotatoTed]

4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

@MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal

Think tank question: I'm considering making those that start with "celebrity" ineligible for the Career Track and available for office only once they are marked for "Obscure remove," which is a category I created for various start dates. 

That is, while Trump would be drafted in like 1976 or something, he would be eligible to use until 1984. 

Here's my rationale. Celebrities are only politician options in the game because they were famous for something not politically-related. At 25, Trump, Oprah, PT Barnum, etc. were not on any sort of political track. Much of there appeal and influence comes from their celebrity status. They were not celebrities at 25. They were celebrities later. 

I could make a setting that allows "celebrities" to go on the track or be usable immediately, but I think for the sake of making their "celebrity" status make sense, that something like this should be a drawback of drafting a "celebrity" politician. It's sort of like drafting a late-bloomer. They'll have payoff for you, but you have to be comfortable with waiting on them. Basically, they kind of come with a built-in career track, which is their "celebrity" trait.

I actually pitched the idea of a celebrity career track before, you didn't like it.  Haha.

But in my head, Trump, Oprah, and PT Barnum were on the "Private Sector" career path in real life.  It's one of the reasons one of the things it has a chance to give you is Celebrity.  

 

[MrPotatoTed]

@vcczar I actually wonder if Celebrity should be given to anyone at all pre-draft.  Unless they were already a celebrity by the time they turned 25. 

Most of the skills/traits are indeed skills and traits.  Charisma, leadership, pliable, these all make sense to have before you became "known" for them.  But awarding celebrity to someone at 25 if they didn't become famous until they were, say, 60, seems incorrect.  I'd propose that nobody enter the game with celebrity unless they were celebs by the time they were 25.  Otherwise, they need to earn it on a career track (probably private sector) or elsewhere.

[vcczar]

19 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

I actually pitched the idea of a celebrity career track before, you didn't like it.  Haha.

But in my head, Trump, Oprah, and PT Barnum were on the "Private Sector" career path in real life.  It's one of the reasons one of the things it has a chance to give you is Celebrity.  

 

Yeah, I still don't like the celebrity career track idea. 

The Private Sector is mainly for people wanting to get into national politics but want to influence it via the private sector first. So it's actually more specific than a general "Private Sector." It would encompass owning a circus. Of these, Trump is probably the closest celebrity that would fit my definition of Private Sector. 

19 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

@vcczar I actually wonder if Celebrity should be given to anyone at all pre-draft.  Unless they were already a celebrity by the time they turned 25. 

Most of the skills/traits are indeed skills and traits.  Charisma, leadership, pliable, these all make sense to have before you became "known" for them.  But awarding celebrity to someone at 25 if they didn't become famous until they were, say, 60, seems incorrect.  I'd propose that nobody enter the game with celebrity unless they were celebs by the time they were 25.  Otherwise, they need to earn it on a career track (probably private sector) or elsewhere.

Nah. I want the playthroughs to be at least about 50% accurate. This means most of the time Trump, Barnum, and Oprah won't have celebrity, which means most of the time you won't really have Trump, Barnum, or Oprah. So definitely not doing that. 

I'm really leaning towards my idea that "celebrities" not be eligible until their obscure remove date, which would solve your "But awarding celebrity to someone at 25 if they didn't become famous until they were, say, 60, seems incorrect." since they'll be eligible when they "gain" their celebrity status via the obscure remove date. 

In short, I'm strongly opposed to a game that is too random from history. I might as well just make all the politicians fictional like in the Political Process game. The appeal for drafting any of these "celebrities" is that they're celebrities. That's the fun part. 

I'll probably implement a new celebrity rule soon, and it will likely follow the lines of my new idea. So I'm looking for ways to modify my idea, rather than go the reverse of my idea. 

[Cal]

Might need to make a tweak to the rules about eligibility for Constitutional Delegate. George Washington was general at the time and attended, but his office would disallow him in game despite the rule for Constitutional Convention President (for celebrity and military leader) that would otherwise guarantee him presidency in most normal games seeming to imply that he should be allowed, just like he did historically. 

[vcczar]

Just now, Cal said:

Might need to make a tweak to the rules about eligibility for Constitutional Delegate. George Washington was general at the time and attended, but his office would disallow him in game despite the rule for Constitutional Convention President (for celebrity and military leader) that would otherwise guarantee him presidency in most normal games seeming to imply that he should be allowed, just like he did historically. 

Good catch.

[vcczar]

@Cal I've made it so that any incumbent military leader with both "Military Leader" and "Celebrity" is eligible. 

[vcczar]

Added some bonuses to the Constitutional Convention for the delegates. 

[Cal]

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

@Cal I've made it so that any incumbent military leader with both "Military Leader" and "Celebrity" is eligible. 

I've been using something I call the "Benedict Arnold Rule" which is how I've been looking for ways to exploit the way the rules are written to get a statesman who is worthless, Benedict Arnold, to become powerful through loopholes. In this case, I see a way to exploit the rules to have him join the Constitutional Convention as he has both Military Leader and Celebrity. Yay!

Currently the way its worded it seems that it would allow anyone who fulfills those two requirements to serve no matter what, regardless of whether or not they have legislative. This is because it is separated by rules about governors joining the convention as well. If that is your intent, I'd leave it but still move it a few sentences back so that it's more cohesive. If that's not your intent, I'd move that bit a few sentences back AND change it to Also eligible is any incumbent military officer with “Military Leader” and “Celebrity" who must have at least 1 legislative power.

[Cal]

It would make SOME sense for the legislative requirement to be waived in that scenario (after all, they are a war hero with incredible influence) but I'm not sure if that was your intent. 

[vcczar]

5 minutes ago, Cal said:

I've been using something I call the "Benedict Arnold Rule" which is how I've been looking for ways to exploit the way the rules are written to get a statesman who is worthless, Benedict Arnold, to become powerful through loopholes. In this case, I see a way to exploit the rules to have him join the Constitutional Convention as he has both Military Leader and Celebrity. Yay!

Currently the way its worded it seems that it would allow anyone who fulfills those two requirements to serve no matter what, regardless of whether or not they have legislative. This is because it is separated by rules about governors joining the convention as well. If that is your intent, I'd leave it but still move it a few sentences back so that it's more cohesive. If that's not your intent, I'd move that bit a few sentences back AND change it to Also eligible is any incumbent military officer with “Military Leader” and “Celebrity" who must have at least 1 legislative power.

 

3 minutes ago, Cal said:

It would make SOME sense for the legislative requirement to be waived in that scenario (after all, they are a war hero with incredible influence) but I'm not sure if that was your intent. 

My intent is that they have Legis since it is a legislative process to make the Constitution. Yeah, my intent is that as a baseline everyone must have at least 1 Legis. I'll make that clear. 

[vcczar]

@Cal I've updated the rules to reflect that the politician has to have some capability for legislating to be invited as a delegate to craft a Constitution. 

[ConservativeElector2]

@vcczar I just read the rules for the Speaker of the House (below). Correct me if I am wrong, but I couldn't see the fact covered, that a Speaker technically hasn't to be part of the House. I thought about how to balance obscure picks while still having the possibility to elect a Speaker from outside the House. I'd say unemployed people with 4 or even 5 Legis ability, or leadership/manipulative or similar attributes could have a chance to be viable contenders.

 

"Speaker of the House -- This office is created with the creation of the US House following the Constitutional Convention. Must be a US Representative with at least 5 Legislative ability, previously served as a committee chair, and have the Leadership trait. If no politician is applicable, then any US Rep is eligible.  If the minority offices have been created and are active, then this officer must be a member of the majority party (randomized if tied).  Being elected/re-elected speaker gives you a 50% chance of losing obscure, 50% chance of gaining the Leadership skill, a 50% chance of gaining +1 Legislative ability (if you’ve managed to reach the seat without already having met these max prerequisites), a 50% chance of gaining Kingmaker, a 25% chance of gaining manipulative, and a 25% chance of gaining unlikable. This position earns 50 pts for the player each time a politician is elected or reelected during this phase."

Edited September 16, 2021 by ConservativeElector2

[Cal]

18 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

at least 5 Legislative ability

I'm scared to see what the upper bounds of this would be if 5 is the "least"

[ConservativeElector2]

4 minutes ago, Cal said:

I'm scared to see what the upper bounds of this would be if 5 is the "least"

EDIT: Not my sentence hahaha

Edited September 16, 2021 by ConservativeElector2

[MrPotatoTed]

1 hour ago, Cal said:

I'm scared to see what the upper bounds of this would be if 5 is the "least"

Ha, good catch.

[vcczar]

1 hour ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

@vcczar I just read the rules for the Speaker of the House (below). Correct me if I am wrong, but I couldn't see the fact covered, that a Speaker technically hasn't to be part of the House. I thought about how to balance obscure picks while still having the possibility to elect a Speaker from outside the House. I'd say unemployed people with 4 or even 5 Legis ability, or leadership/manipulative or similar attributes could have a chance to be viable contenders.

 

"Speaker of the House -- This office is created with the creation of the US House following the Constitutional Convention. Must be a US Representative with at least 5 Legislative ability, previously served as a committee chair, and have the Leadership trait. If no politician is applicable, then any US Rep is eligible.  If the minority offices have been created and are active, then this officer must be a member of the majority party (randomized if tied).  Being elected/re-elected speaker gives you a 50% chance of losing obscure, 50% chance of gaining the Leadership skill, a 50% chance of gaining +1 Legislative ability (if you’ve managed to reach the seat without already having met these max prerequisites), a 50% chance of gaining Kingmaker, a 25% chance of gaining manipulative, and a 25% chance of gaining unlikable. This position earns 50 pts for the player each time a politician is elected or reelected during this phase."

For game purposes it will be a member of the House. Otherwise I think people will be too eager to have a non-Rep speaker. Will allow it once it actually happens. 

[ConservativeElector2]

15 hours ago, vcczar said:

Otherwise I think people will be too eager to have a non-Rep speaker. Will allow it once it actually happens. 

Yeah, I agree on that

[Cal]

I think Celebrity should also give a +1 in Governor elections. Maybe House/Senate as well. Right now, the fact that Bloomfield won the Revolutionary War means nothing if he's seeking statewide election in New Jersey, but he suddenly gets a +1 in New Jersey from the celebrity trait for a national campaign? It just feels inconsistent. 

[vcczar]

2 hours ago, Cal said:

I think Celebrity should also give a +1 in Governor elections. Maybe House/Senate as well. Right now, the fact that Bloomfield won the Revolutionary War means nothing if he's seeking statewide election in New Jersey, but he suddenly gets a +1 in New Jersey from the celebrity trait for a national campaign? It just feels inconsistent. 

I’ll need some historical examples of National celebrity status being crucial to victory for Governor or senator. There might be some but I can’t think of any off the top of my head. I think I only added it because of Trump. Maybe Schwarzenegger is enough. But Caitlin Jenner was just crushed in the recall election. Might make it a % chance for +1

[Cal]

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I’ll need some historical examples of National celebrity status being crucial to victory for Governor or senator. There might be some but I can’t think of any off the top of my head. I think I only added it because of Trump. Maybe Schwarzenegger is enough. But Caitlin Jenner was just crushed in the recall election. Might make it a % chance for +1

The issue for me personally is that it doesn't give a boost to war heroes that should probably be due. Washington IRL would have definitely had better chances due to his war service if he ran for Governor. Teddy Roosevelt went from military service to governor. WH Harrison definitely grew more popular. Others that I'm not familiar I'm sure exist out there 😛 Splitting Celebrity and War Hero again could be something to consider for that reason. 

[Rezi]

6 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I’ll need some historical examples of National celebrity status being crucial to victory for Governor or senator. There might be some but I can’t think of any off the top of my head. I think I only added it because of Trump. Maybe Schwarzenegger is enough. But Caitlin Jenner was just crushed in the recall election. Might make it a % chance for +1

I don't know if they were famous enough before running to qualify for Celebrity Status, but Al Franken, Jesse Ventura, and Reagan come to mind.

[vcczar]

3 minutes ago, Cal said:

The issue for me personally is that it doesn't give a boost to war heroes that should probably be due. Washington IRL would have definitely had better chances due to his war service if he ran for Governor. Teddy Roosevelt went from military service to governor. WH Harrison definitely grew more popular. Others that I'm not familiar I'm sure exist out there 😛 Splitting Celebrity and War Hero again could be something to consider for that reason. 

 

2 minutes ago, Rezi said:

I don't know if they were famous enough before running to qualify for Celebrity Status, but Al Franken, Jesse Ventura, and Reagan come to mind.

Good arguments to both of you. I’ll probably make it an 80% chance of +1 or something like that.  Maybe 75%

[vcczar]

@Cal in regards to mil hero. It was basically identical to celeb so I just merged the two. There was no extra benefit. 

[vcczar]

@MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 @Rezi @Hestia @Rodja @jvikings1 @DakotaHale

• Added CPU rules for selecting nicknames for factions.
• "Celebrity" has been reduced to only 50% chance of +1 in presidential elections. But this case is now added to Gov, Sen, US Rep elections too. Additionally, a +1 is now guaranteed for any politician with both "Celebrity" and "Military Leader" in these elections. 
• I don't know why this was missing, but the US Senate rules now allows the ability to filibuster a bill, requiring a Sen Maj Ldr to invoke cloture to beat the filibuster. If this fails, then the bill/package is delayed a half-term. Only one filibuster may occur per half-term (first come first serve), but if the politician issuing the filibuster has efficient, they can do so twice. Filibustering can only be done by a Senate officer or committee member. Moreover, filibuster and invoke cloture are procedure bills that must be created and modified via a vote. Be default the US Senate will be a simple majority. 

[ConservativeElector2]

@vcczar

If interested I could add the ''Blinken dynasty''. Both Blinken's father and uncle have been ambassadors. While his uncle tried to enter the NY State Assembly unsuccessfully, he was also selected to be a Democratic nominee for US Senate in Idaho. I knew nothing of this so far, but read a bit about Secretary Blinken today. Very interesting.