Constructive Results of AMPU Summer Playtest

[vcczar]

Reminder to give both Dulles brothers “theocrat”. @ConservativeElector2 can do it if he is online now. I won’t be home for 3 hours 

[ConservativeElector2]

5 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Reminder to give both Dulles brothers “theocrat”. @ConservativeElector2 can do it if he is online now. I won’t be home for 3 hours 

Sure.

Edited September 25, 2021 by ConservativeElector2

[vcczar]

16 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

Sure.

I just read that their Cold War philosophy was more religious than geopolitical.

[vcczar]

@MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Hestia @jvikings1 @DakotaHale and anyone else interested.

I added two new traits: Cosmopolitan and Provincial. These traits only play a role in presidential elections.

Cosmopolitan are typically politicians that can seem to blend in in all regions in which their party is typically competitive; additionally, they sometimes don't really represent their own region completely. Cosmopolitan politicians have a 25% chance of gaining a +1 in all regions as President, but they offer no bonus as VP.

Provincial politicians are typically politicians that people outside of the region will have a hard time identifying with. They're often both Puritan and some sort of activist, but that isn't always the case. People with this trait have a 25% chance of getting +2 in their home state, +1 in their home region, but -1 in all other regions. As VP, they have a 25% chance of +2 in the home state, +1 in the home region, but with no penalty as a VP. This is extremely useful considering the other bonuses a VP typically get in a region. 

I've already tagged all the politicians in the master spreadsheet. This won't play a role in your playtest. 

I am yet to add the rules for these traits in the rules.

[vcczar]

@MrPotatoTed changed the filibuster rule so that "Puritan" can filibuster more than once if they also have "disharmonious" instead of "efficient," which had previously been the trait needed for extra filibuster

[vcczar]

@MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 and anyone else

Which phases/parts of the game could be automated in the event a developer feels the game will take too long to playthrough? 

Which parts, to you, are essential to the game. 

I have my own ideas. Just want to see what they are for others.

[Cal]

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

@MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 and anyone else

Which phases/parts of the game could be automated in the event a developer feels the game will take too long to playthrough? 

Which parts, to you, are essential to the game. 

I have my own ideas. Just want to see what they are for others.

The diplomatic phase could be automated somewhat. 

[vcczar]

1 minute ago, Cal said:

The diplomatic phase could be automated somewhat. 

I also think Supreme Court and Military, could as well. 

Worst case scenario is the game is almost all simulation, but you draft, pick who leads, pick who runs for election, but all the politicians operate independently. The game would go by quickly though.

[MrPotatoTed]

5 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I also think Supreme Court and Military, could as well. 

Worst case scenario is the game is almost all simulation, but you draft, pick who leads, pick who runs for election, but all the politicians operate independently. The game would go by quickly though.

I agree.  I actually think the Supreme Court “should” be automated, not just could be.  Too represent the importance of putting the right justices on the bench, and making the picks matter more.

 

 

[vcczar]

1 minute ago, MrPotatoTed said:

I agree.  I actually think the Supreme Court “should” be automated, not just could be.  Too represent the importance of putting the right justices on the bench, and making the picks matter more.

 

 

Yeah, I keep it unautomated mainly for @ConservativeElector2 might have an option to make it automated or unautomated, not sure what the default will be.

[Cal]

31 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, I keep it unautomated mainly for @ConservativeElector2 might have an option to make it automated or unautomated, not sure what the default will be.

I’d definitely say default is automated. It makes the picks more strategic. You do have other mechanics in the game for presidents to influence Supreme Court justices if they have higher justice skill or iron fist and that’s enough to handle FDR and even broader influence.

[ConservativeElector2]

10 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

I agree.  I actually think the Supreme Court “should” be automated, not just could be.  Too represent the importance of putting the right justices on the bench, and making the picks matter more.

 

10 hours ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, I keep it unautomated mainly for @ConservativeElector2 might have an option to make it automated or unautomated, not sure what the default will be.

I appreciate that. However, I am not entirely sure about what phases could be automated. Contrary to @MrPotatoTed I am the least interested into the military phase but even here I am not sure about what could be automated. As it is now it's picking the general to fight a battle in early eras. Automating this won't spare us much time I guess. In addition to my own interest for the SC I'd also like to point out the fact, that there is to my knowledge no SC game on the market. So having this institution playable (even if the default setting is on automation) might contribute to the utter uniqueness of the game. 

Furthermore I think most players playing this kind of games won't have a time issue at all. I could potentially just analyze the history tab for like an hour voluntarily without even making my next move. 

[Cal]

The shifting from the media cards is horribly unrealistic. I’d say we should have one media phase maximum for the election because that’s 8-12 years of legislation worth easily affecting the meters from one presidential election. Every ideology shifted blue +4. 

[vcczar]

25 minutes ago, Cal said:

The shifting from the media cards is horribly unrealistic. I’d say we should have one media phase maximum for the election because that’s 8-12 years of legislation worth easily affecting the meters from one presidential election. Every ideology shifted blue +4. 

I’m not home yet. If you could copy + paste this comment into the rules doc for me that would help. If not, maybe I’ll remember to check this thread when I get home. If it is causing an issue I want to remedy it. 

[vcczar]

I'll be adding some new traits. Let me know before tomorrow morning if you have any ideas:

@MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Hestia @jvikings1 @DakotaHale @Rodja @Rezi and anyone else

[MrPotatoTed]

1 hour ago, Cal said:

The shifting from the media cards is horribly unrealistic. I’d say we should have one media phase maximum for the election because that’s 8-12 years of legislation worth easily affecting the meters from one presidential election. Every ideology shifted blue +4. 

In theory, over time it would be balanced.  Red team had media cards...and I was about to say the dice didn’t go in their favor, but actually it did because two blue backfires on the dice led to a +2 to all red members in all elections for the foreseeable future. Ha.

 

 

[Cal]

1 minute ago, MrPotatoTed said:

In theory, over time it would be balanced.  Red team had media cards...and I was about to say the dice didn’t go in their favor, but actually it did because two blue backfires on the dice led to a +2 to all red members in all elections for the foreseeable future. Ha.

 

 

It might be balanced in theory, but it's still a WILD fluctuation that doesn't really fit with the slower changing of the rest of the game. For reference of how wildly unrealistic this is, I'll pose this scenario with the same rolls. 

Progressive party preference in +2 to Democrats in 2016. During the election, the media phase has the same rolls and Progressives swing 4 spaces to the Republican Party, now preferring Republicans by +2. This is a pretty drastic change, especially considering the nominee (I believe Trump is labelled as a Traditionalist? Idk). 

It would take 4 (16 years) of a player's faction being the lowest scoring to mimic that same kind of effect. The party preference is also the same for winning World War II or any other major war for the Red Team. 

While I agree that it is theoretically balanced and that Media Cards should have a role, it should be much reduced. I'd move it down to one phase and/or lower the chance of changes. If two players are tied in the same faction for a card, maybe roll twice and take the higher of two rolls for the media phase so that there is less movement but more favorable to that team. 

[vcczar]

20 minutes ago, Cal said:

While I agree that it is theoretically balanced and that Media Cards should have a role, it should be much reduced. I'd move it down to one phase and/or lower the chance of changes. If two players are tied in the same faction for a card, maybe roll twice and take the higher of two rolls for the media phase so that there is less movement but more favorable to that team. 

Added this paragraph to my to do list. 

[MrPotatoTed]

8 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Added this paragraph to my to do list. 

 

28 minutes ago, Cal said:

It might be balanced in theory, but it's still a WILD fluctuation that doesn't really fit with the slower changing of the rest of the game. For reference of how wildly unrealistic this is, I'll pose this scenario with the same rolls. 

Progressive party preference in +2 to Democrats in 2016. During the election, the media phase has the same rolls and Progressives swing 4 spaces to the Republican Party, now preferring Republicans by +2. This is a pretty drastic change, especially considering the nominee (I believe Trump is labelled as a Traditionalist? Idk). 

It would take 4 (16 years) of a player's faction being the lowest scoring to mimic that same kind of effect. The party preference is also the same for winning World War II or any other major war for the Red Team. 

While I agree that it is theoretically balanced and that Media Cards should have a role, it should be much reduced. I'd move it down to one phase and/or lower the chance of changes. If two players are tied in the same faction for a card, maybe roll twice and take the higher of two rolls for the media phase so that there is less movement but more favorable to that team. 

Fair points.  Maybe instead of limiting it in those ways, it just shouldn’t impact “all ideologies”.  Just the ideology of that faction’s candidate, or that faction’s card.

[vcczar]

6 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

 

Fair points.  Maybe instead of limiting it in those ways, it just shouldn’t impact “all ideologies”.  Just the ideology of that faction’s candidate, or that faction’s card.

ok added this to the list also

[vcczar]

Added the traits "delegator" and "micromanager" to statesmen in the master sheet:

I'm not completely sure what these will do yet. They'll have positives and negatives most likely. 

Micromanagers have generally been bad presidents--like Jimmy Carter--because they kind of get in the way with everyone and ruin harmonious relations, while not actually being disharmonious people. RFK would likely have been this way as president. 

Bill Clinton and Reagan were both "delegators." I'll think of some sort of +/- for that. 

[Cal]

4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Added the traits "delegator" and "micromanager" to statesmen in the master sheet:

I'm not completely sure what these will do yet. They'll have positives and negatives most likely. 

Micromanagers have generally been bad presidents--like Jimmy Carter--because they kind of get in the way with everyone and ruin harmonious relations, while not actually being disharmonious people. RFK would likely have been this way as president. 

Bill Clinton and Reagan were both "delegators." I'll think of some sort of +/- for that. 

I’m curious of which career tracks would be good for obtaining these traits. 

I could see Private Sector and Governing with a chance for either.
 

Administrators as far as I’m familiar have seemed more hands on but I’m less certain about that. Military idk @MrPotatoTed would probably be able to give an opinion on that. 

Judicial probably shouldn’t give either.

Backroom politics seems to lend itself well to micromanaging. 

I’ve met legislators who go both ways on the state level, which is what that career track mostly handles. Maybe to prevent the inflation of this trait just keep it out of legislative or administrative. Governors seem to fairly often exhibit one or the other in office (Governor Reagan, Governor Carter, Governor Coolidge, Governor FDR, and Governor Bush all come to mind)

[vcczar]

@MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal

Added some traits that will help/hurt with implementation while serving as president. Won't have any non-presidential role. Having the expertise will be required for some of these extra bonus effects. So if you have a guy with bookkeeper, you want to get him economics expertise to fulfill that:

• Bookkeeper (helps further with economics implementation)
• Numberfudger (hurts economic implementation)
• Cop (helps with Judicial implementation)
• Geostrategist (helps with foreignaffairs/mil implementation)
• Strategically naive (hurts with foreign affairs/mil implementation)
• Domestic Warrior (helps with domestic implementation)

Might make more negative ones.

[vcczar]

Adding Magician, which allows someone with manipulative to increase their manipulative ability by TBD % when serving in the legislature. 

[Cal]

17 minutes ago, vcczar said:

• Geostrategist (helps with foreignaffairs/mil implementation)
• Strategically naive (hurts with foreign affairs/mil implementation)

I think these could potentially be dumbed down to “strategist” and “naive” respectively. The only issue with that is that being more general terms might open them up to being interpreted to do things outside the very narrow scope you’ve prescribed.

Honestly, a lot of these traits you’re wanting to add are very minor and more about implementation style and ability modifiers than anything else. Should those be traits or be something else, like how you’ve separated expertise, interests, and personalities?