Favorite Historical US Presidential Election Scenarios

[vcczar 1,224]

I'm just curious. We have scenarios of almost every US presidential election. Which elections do you like replaying the most, and why? 

[Guest]

I enjoy 1924 a lot, it's fun playing as La Folette and expanding beyond the confines of Wisconsin. Thanks to ads being broken (allowing me to spam without money consequence) I've won an almost 50 state landslide (South Carolina got me).

[vcczar 1,224]

20 minutes ago, SirLagsalott said:

I enjoy 1924 a lot, it's fun playing as La Folette and expanding beyond the confines of Wisconsin. Thanks to ads being broken (allowing me to spam without money consequence) I've won an almost 50 state landslide (South Carolina got me).

How are the ads broken, so I can fix the scenario? I made it, as well as about 90% of the historical scenarios. The ads have been one of the things I've had trouble getting right. Are they too cheap? Too powerful? If you have any specific advice on how to fix it, then I'll do an update. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, vcczar said:

How are the ads broken, so I can fix the scenario? I made it, as well as about 90% of the historical scenarios. The ads have been one of the things I've had trouble getting right. Are they too cheap? Too powerful? If you have any specific advice on how to fix it, then I'll do an update. 

Yes, they are extremely cheap. If I remember correctly it cost almost no money to constantly do ads in all states. It allowed me to get an extremely unrealistic amount of momentum and win almost every state as La Folette. 

[vcczar 1,224]

7 minutes ago, SirLagsalott said:

Yes, they are extremely cheap. If I remember correctly it cost almost no money to constantly do ads in all states. It allowed me to get an extremely unrealistic amount of momentum and win almost every state as La Folette. 

Ok. I'll just increase the cost, if I can figure out how to do that.

[Herbert Hoover 199]

54 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Ok. I'll just increase the cost, if I can figure out how to do that.

This exists in almost all of the historical scenarios. However, in many, where candidates start with lots of organization strength, they are constantly bankrupt due to organization strength still costing thousands of dollars. 

Also, my favorite ones to replay, in no particular order: 

1824, 1832, 1856, 1896, 1900, 1904, 1908, 1920, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1944. I'm very fond of gilded age up to WW2 scenarios. 

[vcczar 1,224]

5 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

This exists in almost all of the historical scenarios. However, in many, where candidates start with lots of organization strength, they are constantly bankrupt due to organization strength still costing thousands of dollars. 

Also, my favorite ones to replay, in no particular order: 

1824, 1832, 1856, 1896, 1900, 1904, 1908, 1920, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1944. I'm very fond of gilded age up to WW2 scenarios. 

Yeah, the economics of these scenarios make it difficult. Any suggestions?

[Herbert Hoover 199]

2 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, the economics of these scenarios make it difficult. Any suggestions?

Honestly, if there's a way to decrease organizational strength cost per turn that would fix the bankruptcy issue. Ad costs would need to be fixed as well, because as @SirLagsalott mentioned, the current strategy is to just spam ads with the massive amount of money you make in select scenarios (in other organization strength tanks you) and win all 50 states 80%+. 

Fundraising is pretty broken in some scenarios, but not all if I recall correctly. I can't name any offhand though. Spare CPs also give some serious cash. Overall, it's just that the money side of the scenarios is broken. 

[vcczar 1,224]

23 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

Honestly, if there's a way to decrease organizational strength cost per turn that would fix the bankruptcy issue. Ad costs would need to be fixed as well, because as @SirLagsalott mentioned, the current strategy is to just spam ads with the massive amount of money you make in select scenarios (in other organization strength tanks you) and win all 50 states 80%+. 

Fundraising is pretty broken in some scenarios, but not all if I recall correctly. I can't name any offhand though. Spare CPs also give some serious cash. Overall, it's just that the money side of the scenarios is broken. 

Yeah, I'll have to see if @admin_270 has any suggestions on how to fix these issues. I'll then make the changes. 

[jnewt 37]

1 hour ago, SirLagsalott said:

I enjoy 1924 a lot, it's fun playing as La Folette and expanding beyond the confines of Wisconsin. Thanks to ads being broken (allowing me to spam without money consequence) I've won an almost 50 state landslide (South Carolina got me).

@vcczar I vividly remember coming across this issues playing as Huey Long in the 1936 scenario.  I was able to stockpile TONS of money to use on ads and some glitch allowed me to get the Republican nominee to endorse me within a couple months of the election, leading to me defeating FDR in a landslide.  I checked to see what was wrong with the scenario, and noticed that you had the inflationary index set to 100 (the 2016 value), when it should have been set to 20.  That's why the funds were so messed up.  I'm willing to bargain this is probably the issue on many of the other historical scenarios, but this is the only one I remember for sure.  I don't know why I didn't mention it before, though.

[vcczar 1,224]

26 minutes ago, jnewt said:

@vcczar I vividly remember coming across this issues playing as Huey Long in the 1936 scenario.  I was able to stockpile TONS of money to use on ads and some glitch allowed me to get the Republican nominee to endorse me within a couple months of the election, leading to me defeating FDR in a landslide.  I checked to see what was wrong with the scenario, and noticed that you had the inflationary index set to 100 (the 2016 value), when it should have been set to 20.  That's why the funds were so messed up.  I'm willing to bargain this is probably the issue on many of the other historical scenarios, but this is the only one I remember for sure.  I don't know why I didn't mention it before, though.

Yeah, I'm not sure how the inflationary index works, so I never touched it. If you suggest 20, I'll do that. Do you have any estimates for the other scenarios? 

[Patine 468]

14 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, I'm not sure how the inflationary index works, so I never touched it. If you suggest 20, I'll do that. Do you have any estimates for the other scenarios? 

Mid-1800's Elections (1840's-1870's) should be around 5 as a general number.

[Patine 468]

15 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, I'm not sure how the inflationary index works, so I never touched it. If you suggest 20, I'll do that. Do you have any estimates for the other scenarios? 

Also, 1788-89 is a difficult one to say, as the economy was still haywire, and the first American Dollar had yet to be minted - instead, neighbouring colonial currencies, rapidly-depreciating State-minted currencies, lingering, but almost worthless Continental Dollars, and endless promissory notes indicating agreed debts were the mess of currencies being used at the time.

[vcczar 1,224]

13 minutes ago, Patine said:

Also, 1788-89 is a difficult one to say, as the economy was still haywire, and the first American Dollar had yet to be minted - instead, neighbouring colonial currencies, rapidly-depreciating State-minted currencies, lingering, but almost worthless Continental Dollars, and endless promissory notes indicating agreed debts were the mess of currencies being used at the time.

Yeah, ideally, as with any scenario I make, I wish I had more people working on the projects, since I have extensive knowledge about history, but not so much the inflationary mechanics of the game itself. Had I a "money man" that handles the costs of ads, inflationary index, power of ads, etc. then that would have been helpful. I'll make adjustments, but I could end up making everything worse. I think when I make these adjustments, I'll start adding events as well. 

[jnewt 37]

23 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, I'm not sure how the inflationary index works, so I never touched it. If you suggest 20, I'll do that. Do you have any estimates for the other scenarios? 

I thought it was set up so that each year's "index number" was 100- (2016-x), where x is the year of the scenario. So 1964's "index number" would be 48.  The only scenarios I've created have all been in the near future so when I change the inflation index I don't notice much of a change, but I think that's the way it's supposed to work. 

[vcczar 1,224]

45 minutes ago, jnewt said:

I thought it was set up so that each year's "index number" was 100- (2016-x), where x is the year of the scenario. So 1964's "index number" would be 48.  The only scenarios I've created have all been in the near future so when I change the inflation index I don't notice much of a change, but I think that's the way it's supposed to work. 

Really? Ok, that helps. I never had any clue how it was set up. 

[bruhgmger2 0]

1896 1932/1936, and 1968 

1896 because I like trying to win as Bryan

1932/1936 because I like playing as the Republican and winning (which is actually a lot easier then you might think)

1968 because I like all the possibilities and interesting match-ups that can result (like Rockefeller/ Reagan vs Johnson/Kennedy or Romney/Rockefeller vs Kennedy/Sanford)

[bruhgmger2 0]

6 hours ago, SirLagsalott said:

I enjoy 1924 a lot, it's fun playing as La Folette and expanding beyond the confines of Wisconsin. Thanks to ads being broken (allowing me to spam without money consequence) I've won an almost 50 state landslide (South Carolina got me).

How Many ads we talking about being run at once?

[Patine 468]

4 hours ago, jnewt said:

I thought it was set up so that each year's "index number" was 100- (2016-x), where x is the year of the scenario. So 1964's "index number" would be 48.  The only scenarios I've created have all been in the near future so when I change the inflation index I don't notice much of a change, but I think that's the way it's supposed to work. 

I don't think that's what was intended or that that would work. Also, most previous makers of historic scenarios and scenarios set in countries with currencies with significantly different values do not use that system, but base it on relative inflationary and/or conversions rates to the money of the default scenario of the TheorySpark game in question.

[Centrist Emperor Kerzaris 50]

The one I like is the 1944, 1948, 1952 and 1972

1944 because it was FRD's last election. 

 

1948 and 1952 because it were the only times stassen has a shot at winning. 

1972 because whoever wins the democratic primary has different general election results. Like for example, mcgovern would give a lanslide defeat, yet on the other hand a humphrey nominee would give a fairly easy win.

[Herbert Hoover 199]

9 hours ago, bruhgmger2 said:

How Many ads we talking about being run at once?

I was able to run well over 60 nationwide ads per turn, the only limit was how many times I was willing to create ads. 

[victorraiders 0]

not in order... the firsts elections none partys and good candidates,1856 for try win the first election of republican,1860 good number of partys and candidates ,1864 ,and ,1880 to 1888 with republicans and one times i like play with cleveland too,one times of others 1800's elections but i dont play this so much,1920 and 1924 i like win with coolidge but a very unrealistic for 3rd party,1952 and 56,1960 with nixon or kennedy principally,1968 possibilites,1980 i like this,2016 the official played primaries or only general with differents republican candidates.

[jnewt 37]

10 hours ago, Patine said:

I don't think that's what was intended or that that would work. Also, most previous makers of historic scenarios and scenarios set in countries with currencies with significantly different values do not use that system, but base it on relative inflationary and/or conversions rates to the money of the default scenario of the TheorySpark game in question.

When you go to constants and coefficients in the campaign editor, and then hover over the "money" box under "coefficients", a box pops up that reads "Inflationary index for money.  100 is 2016 value.  96 is 2012 value.  And so on."  I'm not sure that's the way it's supposed to work, but that leads me to believe it is.  

[vcczar 1,224]

10 minutes ago, jnewt said:

When you go to constants and coefficients in the campaign editor, and then hover over the "money" box under "coefficients", a box pops up that reads "Inflationary index for money.  100 is 2016 value.  96 is 2012 value.  And so on."  I'm not sure that's the way it's supposed to work, but that leads me to believe it is.  

Thanks, I'll assume that's correct and see what happens. 

[Guest]

@vcczar the primary issues I've been having with your scenarios is the funds issue.