vcczar Posted October 5, 2021 Author Share Posted October 5, 2021 Wow, in the master statesmen tab, guess who has the highest number of historic expertise out of all 7,000+ politicians? No, it isn't that guy. It's Jon Tester!!!! He has 11 expertise. More contemporary politicians have higher expertise because the government is much more involved in everything than in previous times. In other news, I'm recalibrating politician value to account for the new traits I've added. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 5, 2021 Author Share Posted October 5, 2021 @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Hestia and anyone else usually interested in my AMPU posts. Here are the new top politicians after updating the ratings after having created a bunch of new traits. This is liable to change as I flesh out politicians to include some of these new traits. Most of the major figures have already had them applied. Note: Trump is #178 of 7,000+ politicians and Joe Biden is #227. Top 50 AMPU Politicians by Historic Political Value Theodore Roosevelt Henry Clay Benjamin Franklin Andrew Jackson John Quincy Adams Franklin D Roosevelt James G Blaine Ronald Reagan Thomas Jefferson Abraham Lincoln George Washington Daniel Webster John C Calhoun James Madison Charles Evans Hughes John Marshall Lyndon B Johnson Woodrow Wilson Salmon P Chase William H Seward Barack Obama Newt Gingrich Richard Russell Jr Alexander Hamilton Earl Warren Robert F Kennedy Robert La Follette Nelson Rockefeller William Jennings Bryan Adlai E Stevenson II Stephen A Douglas Robert Taft Lewis Cass Huey P Long Bernie Sanders Elihu Root Elizabeth Warren Albert Gallatin Richard Nixon George Clinton Edmund Muskie Lindsey Graham John Jay Langdon Cheves Elliot Richardson Bill Clinton William McKinley Benjamin Tillman Ted Kennedy William L Marcy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPotatoTed Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 minute ago, vcczar said: @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Hestia and anyone else usually interested in my AMPU posts. Here are the new top politicians after updating the ratings after having created a bunch of new traits. This is liable to change as I flesh out politicians to include some of these new traits. Most of the major figures have already had them applied. Note: Trump is #178 of 7,000+ politicians and Joe Biden is #227. Top 50 AMPU Politicians by Historic Political Value Theodore Roosevelt Henry Clay Benjamin Franklin Andrew Jackson John Quincy Adams Franklin D Roosevelt James G Blaine Ronald Reagan Thomas Jefferson Abraham Lincoln George Washington Daniel Webster John C Calhoun James Madison Charles Evans Hughes John Marshall Lyndon B Johnson Woodrow Wilson Salmon P Chase William H Seward Barack Obama Newt Gingrich Richard Russell Jr Alexander Hamilton Earl Warren Robert F Kennedy Robert La Follette Nelson Rockefeller William Jennings Bryan Adlai E Stevenson II Stephen A Douglas Robert Taft Lewis Cass Huey P Long Bernie Sanders Elihu Root Elizabeth Warren Albert Gallatin Richard Nixon George Clinton Edmund Muskie Lindsey Graham John Jay Langdon Cheves Elliot Richardson Bill Clinton William McKinley Benjamin Tillman Ted Kennedy William L Marcy Who is the lowest ranked? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 5, 2021 Author Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 minute ago, MrPotatoTed said: Who is the lowest ranked? There's actually a few negatives. I think Madison's incompetent and drunk adopted son--John Payne Todd--is the lowest. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 6, 2021 Author Share Posted October 6, 2021 Moving Iconic Politicians/Achievements to a Spreadsheet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 6, 2021 Author Share Posted October 6, 2021 @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Hestia @Rezi and anyone else interested in this kinds of posts. I've further recalibrated the politician value so that the politician with the highest historical value (Theodore Roosevelt) = a perfect 100. Here are the top 10 by historical value: Theodore Roosevelt 100 Henry Clay 98 Benjamin Franklin 97 Andrew Jackson 93 John Quincy Adams 85 FDR 83 James G Blaine 83 Ronald Reagan 81 Thomas Jefferson 81 George Washington 79 Abraham Lincoln 79 Here are the top 10 by historical value (note: those active before 1774 will have a larger draft value as they were already experienced): Franklin 80 Clay 75 Lincoln 64 Washington 64 FDR 62 Jackson 60 Reagan 60 JQ Adams 58 Daniel Webster 58 John Marshall 58 Who are the top 3 worst politicians? John Payne Todd, the incompetent drunk adopted son of James Madison starts with a negative 7 draft value, but he improved to negative 2 historically. William Temple Franklin, the non-entity grandson of Franklin starts as a -2 and maintains a -2. He did not have the resolve of either his father or grandfather. James Stockdale is a -2 but improves to a 3. Stockdale is famous for becoming Perot's VP nominee, one of the reason's Perot's support plummeted. Came off as senile and disinterested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 6, 2021 Author Share Posted October 6, 2021 @MrPotatoTed Each faction now has 3 ideologies they can draft from by era. This is now updated on your playtest spreadsheet too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 7, 2021 Author Share Posted October 7, 2021 Added about 5 new historical US Reps. Added more traits to some of the Speakers and other major US Reps from history. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 7, 2021 Author Share Posted October 7, 2021 @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal instead of creating accomplishments and iconic politicians for now, I’m just going to plan for a history of who dealt with all events and such. I may have some accomplishments for things that aren’t timeline related. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 8, 2021 Author Share Posted October 8, 2021 Today I'm going to work on Graphs/Charts and Terminology. I'm teaching today, but they'll be in groups almost all class, so I'll do this during class. Won't get too much done, but I'll get started. @MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 @Hestia @Rezi and anyone else. Let me know if you have any ideas for graphs/charts. I've written some vague ideas in the Graphs/Charts document on the table of contents for the rules. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 8, 2021 Author Share Posted October 8, 2021 @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal and anyone else Doing the long, slow process of filling out politician bios. Will also starting walking over to the U of Pennsylvania's library every Mon and Wed for a couple of hours to use their books to flesh out some of the politicians, and possibly other aspects of the game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConservativeElector2 Posted October 8, 2021 Share Posted October 8, 2021 13 minutes ago, vcczar said: @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal and anyone else Doing the long, slow process of filling out politician bios. Will also starting walking over to the U of Pennsylvania's library every Mon and Wed for a couple of hours to use their books to flesh out some of the politicians, and possibly other aspects of the game. I'd love to have politician biographies, but I thought the Wikipedia link is giving the most necessary infos to the players. Wouldn't relying on them be tremendously time saving? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 8, 2021 Author Share Posted October 8, 2021 1 hour ago, ConservativeElector2 said: I'd love to have politician biographies, but I thought the Wikipedia link is giving the most necessary infos to the players. Wouldn't relying on them be tremendously time saving? Anthony is really anti-wikipedia for some reason. I'll try to convince him that it isn't practical to type in 7,000+ bios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hestia Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 3 hours ago, vcczar said: Anthony is really anti-wikipedia for some reason. I'll try to convince him that it isn't practical to type in 7,000+ bios. Deep state Wikipedia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConservativeElector2 Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 8 hours ago, vcczar said: Anthony is really anti-wikipedia for some reason. I'll try to convince him that it isn't practical to type in 7,000+ bios. I don't know where I would get all the information as handily as in the Wikipedia... anyway, I'd say in that case it's better to omit biographies instead of typing 7000+ of them. I think real life biographies have little relevance in the context of the game and I guess players are more interested into the new biographies which will probably be generated as an office holder box similar to Wikipedia 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 6 hours ago, ConservativeElector2 said: I don't know where I would get all the information as handily as in the Wikipedia... anyway, I'd say in that case it's better to omit biographies instead of typing 7000+ of them. I think real life biographies have little relevance in the context of the game and I guess players are more interested into the new biographies which will probably be generated as an office holder box similar to Wikipedia As a player of historical games, I like it when games have bios. For instance, RTKIV has bios for all 1,000+ characters. I read them all the time. Even with wikipedia, there's some people that don't have wikipedia entries that need bios. I actually don't mind typing them all out. Most will be like a sentence, "Gov and US Rep during the early Cold War. Conservationist." Most had no noticeable accomplishments. People like Madison will have much more in their bio, but again, it will be truncated. Something like, "Father of the US Constitution. First floor leader of the US House. Strong Washington ally until Hamilton took over policy. Architect of the Jeffersonian Republicans. Author of most of the Federalist Papers, but also of the VA Resolution, which helped inspire Nullification and Secession. Served as president during the War of 1812, which led to his near defeat in the 1816 election, but ultimately resolved the war in a draw. Moderated the Jeffersonian Republicans to accept some Federalist policies, especially after the war, which helped cause a split in the remaining major party at the time." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 10, 2021 Author Share Posted October 10, 2021 @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Rezi @Hestia and anyone else interested. I'm considering starting the game at 1772, instead of 1774. The reason for this is because 1774 is when midterms would be if the US Presidential elections occurred at this time. That is, it's the 2nd half of a full term. This is why people with draft dates of 1772 get to go on the career track in 1774. If I push it back, then I can cut a lot of the confusing. The downside though is, 1772-1774 will have almost no phases, no Congress, etc. I'll have some scripted events and probably a guaranteed Boston Tea Party. The only phase might be Events, Career Track, Faction Leaders. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvikings1 Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 12 minutes ago, vcczar said: @MrPotatoTed @ConservativeElector2 @Cal @Rezi @Hestia and anyone else interested. I'm considering starting the game at 1772, instead of 1774. The reason for this is because 1774 is when midterms would be if the US Presidential elections occurred at this time. That is, it's the 2nd half of a full term. This is why people with draft dates of 1772 get to go on the career track in 1774. If I push it back, then I can cut a lot of the confusing. The downside though is, 1772-1774 will have almost no phases, no Congress, etc. I'll have some scripted events and probably a guaranteed Boston Tea Party. The only phase might be Events, Career Track, Faction Leaders. A good thing about this idea is that it gives the player a chance to strategize a little bot before being thrown into the full game. Get a feel for the career track, faction leaders, events, etc. Though you'll want to make it so this phase can be passed through as quickly as possible to not bog things down. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPotatoTed Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 I think 1772 is a good idea...but if you’re concerned it’s too empty, why not 1776? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 35 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said: I think 1772 is a good idea...but if you’re concerned it’s too empty, why not 1776? Because you miss out on the first 2 years of the revolution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 @MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 and anyone else interested: I've added 4 events that can appear in the 1772-1774 half-term. They're the only ones that can occur and they are guaranteed to occur: Gaspee Affair, which resulted in the Sons of Liberty creating the Committee of Correspondence. The Committee of Correspondence, which foreshadows the 1st Continental Congress The Tea Act, which leads to the Boston Tea Party The Boston Tea Party, which will lead to a strong reaction from the British central government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 I'm now updating the rules to include the extension of the game to cover 1772-1774. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 13, 2021 Author Share Posted October 13, 2021 Meters have been made for every start date (every pres term) instead of for every Historical Era. The only meters I haven't done yet are party pref and ideological enthusiasm, which I'll do tomorrow, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted October 14, 2021 Author Share Posted October 14, 2021 Game change idea: What if we change how legislative proposals are done: # of proposals per session and per house will be equal to the number of committee members. This is basically the same since they're the ones that currently propose. Instead of committee members proposing, proposers will be randomized with a higher chance for those with high legis ability. This gives this ability more appeal too. Those with efficient will be able to make two proposals. Might give some instances in which the Senate or House leaders can pick who makes a proposal. Thoughts? @MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 @Hestia @Rezi @Rodja @DakotaHale @jvikings1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvikings1 Posted October 14, 2021 Share Posted October 14, 2021 3 hours ago, vcczar said: Game change idea: What if we change how legislative proposals are done: # of proposals per session and per house will be equal to the number of committee members. This is basically the same since they're the ones that currently propose. Instead of committee members proposing, proposers will be randomized with a higher chance for those with high legis ability. This gives this ability more appeal too. Those with efficient will be able to make two proposals. Might give some instances in which the Senate or House leaders can pick who makes a proposal. Thoughts? @MrPotatoTed @Cal @ConservativeElector2 @Hestia @Rezi @Rodja @DakotaHale @jvikings1 I especially like the idea about party leadership controlling things. As much as it might suck, that is something that has been going on for a while (so it resembles what has happened). And it would make sense that a higher legislative value would be more likely since you would assume that means that know the system better. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.