Jump to content
270soft Forum

Add Probability to AI VP selection

Recommended Posts

I would like to propose a percentage/probability for a candidate to be choosen by the AI as the VP. 

¿What are the variables for the AI to choose it's VP? 

The game is still in the works to include voting blocs, so a John Thune on the ticket or a Julian Castro, will certainly not affect the national or a swing-state result. Certainly not Thune. So, given the current interface of the game, I would be inclined to suggest that the VP's list is up for grabs for anyone, Clinton can choose Kasich or McCain, and Trump can choose Bernie Sanders or even Julian Castro. Given the example I am giving, Trump would certainly not choose Sanders because Vermont is not competitive.  But in this scenario, Clinton might try a Jan Brewer to make Arizona more competitive, Marco Rubio to move Florida to the Democrats, Kasich for Ohio. 

This proposal is mainly for the swing states and the toss ups, Clinton picked Kaine because their argument or thought at the time, besides Kaine's high ranking status in the Dem Party, was that Kaine would secure Virginia for the Democrats and block the Republican win, because they were betting their lives that Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin would remain solid Democratic in 2016. So Clinton picked Kaine to put Virginia in their column and she was right. On the Republican side, Indiana was up for grabs at the time of the Rep VP short list, obviously besides the ranking of Pence in the Republican Party, but he was choosen because Indiana was competitive at the time(besides the argument to appeal the Cruz voters that in this case without voting blocs is not relevant). Conclusion; on 2016 both parties picked a "competent" VP BUT huge BUT from a Swing/Competitive state.  Romney tried to make Wisconsin competitive, McCain choice of Palin was more for the voting bloc( that has not arrived to PI) but still to make the race more competitive.

In that order VP's in recent elections have been picked because of their home state.  I don't think we should get into the debate if Pence is ready or not, or Kaine is ready or not, I think they are ready and their respective parties thought the same. 

So these lists of 20 people from Tennesse, West Virginia, South Dakota, Utah, Massachussets, Maryland, Illinois, Vermont is not very likely to happen on the current form of the strategy to win in PI without voting blocs. I do think this has the potential to expand when the voting blocs materialice, if you choose a Woman from Oklahoma, or from West Virginia, then that would definitely make in roads to gain the women vote in any state. But that's not the discussion right now because we still don't have voting blocs. 

So I think that in a scenario when Romney is loosing Ohio 50-45 by the time the VP can be picked at any moment; Portman's chances to become the VP are high. And the way the game should measure it is by probability or percentage. Electoral votes also have a weight on the VP selection. I visualize a screen like this.

Romney VP selection veting process:

Portman(OH): 44% (loosing by 3%)

McDonnell(VA): 24% (loosing by 4%)

Ryan (WI): 21% (loosing by 6%)

Pawlenty (MN): 10% (loosing by 11%)

Thune(SD): 1% (winning by 20%)

When the game(AI) sees that Romney(AI) is loosing Ohio, then Portman chances would skyrocket.  If Romney(AI) is winning the swing states (Ohio, Colorado, Florida, North Carolina), then a Ryan chance to become the VP goes high, to expand the map to Wisconsin.  What does Thune brings? Unless is a banana republic and Thune is my best friend, he is worthless as VP to put anything in play. It's a lame pick. 

Yes this is not a problem if I am the one that wants to choose from the Rep side or any side by that matter, I can edit the game and choose whoever I want, but it's a problem when I am winning Ohio by 5% and Romney(AI) chooses Gingrich or Thune(?). I am like "what?"... not even Rubio(Romney is also loosing FL)? What about Portman? So it's a problem when you see a competitive General Election and the game chooses a VP that is worthless, for the current game interface. When I pick my VP I like to pick it from a state I want to take from the other side, I certainly see Missouri, Arizona, Georgia, even Texas as a Democrat for my VP selection.  Last night I was playing as Warren and suddenly in July, Missouri was a toss up but steady 49% Trump and 46% Warren, and I went all in for McCaskill as my VP (I was winning all the swing states, so I tried to expand the map to take Missouri from the Rep); I won Missouri in the General Election.  Also in last night's game in the case of Trump (that also helps me in todays argument) he went with Jan Brewer; Arizona's lean Trump (50%-46%) after that went solid for him. 54% - 44%. I still won it because I bombarded him with negativity, but he was solid 54% for two months after Brewer's VP selection. 

I want VP's to have a meaning.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PoliticalStudent said:

I want VP's to have a meaning.


Well, to be pedantic, they don't, Constitutionally speaking, unless the Senate votes to a tie or the President dies, is impeached, resigns, or becomes incapacitated, but I do indeed understand your sentiment. :P 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of setting a VP probability. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now