Jump to content
270soft Forum

1796 Election Update (Historical Scenario Commission


Recommended Posts

I'll post the updates/improvements to the 1796 scenario here. 

The Historical Scenario Commission consists of @jvikings1 @CalebsParadox @Patine @Reagan04 @TheMiddlePolitical @SeanFKennedy @Conservative Elector 2 @Take Me to La Riva @vcczar @NYrepublican @MrPrez @msc123123, all of whom will help in improving historical presidential election at their leisure. We will go in chronological order. 

[Anyone wishing to join the HSC can do so by posting here, and can help by playing through the scenarios to find areas for improvement, providing advice for improvements, and for suggesting events, finding typos or other errors. Suggestions for historical newspapers (for interviews), events, surrogates, fixing inflationary index, etc. can also be helpful. ]

Updates will be edited in the list below as they are made. 

~~~~Updates to the scenario so far have been~~~~

  • Experience reduced for some candidates by CalebsParadox
  • Money coefficient set to 3 by Patine
  • Very slight adjustments to candidate % by VCCzar
  • Gameplay tested and okayed by ConservativeElector2, CalebsParadox, and JViking1
  • Issue images added by NYRepublican
  • Adjusted some endorsers support by VCCzar
  • Events added by VCCZar
  • Unique event for Washington if he is turned ON, in which he is talked out of retirement following his Farewell Address by VCCzar
Link to post
Share on other sites

1796:
Jefferson's title is VP
Adam's Experience is at 4, but with many other candidates having a 4 it doesn't really reflect the experience he has being the VP.


Based on many simulations run and several playthroughs, Adams is weaker than Jefferson and Burr is a joke of a candidate. I would recommend potential buffs to each of them for the purpose of balance, as Jefferson wins the election in most runs I have had. However, I have noticed that Pinckney also works his way onto the ticket very often, and is actually pretty likely to win. He has the highest vote potential by a very large margin, and in 100 simulations he hit over 75 the most often. Jefferson seems locked at 78, and Adams at 72, while Pinckney scores all the way into the 90s during a good election. Burr is pathetic, and his average over 100 simulations was less than 20 EV, and he never once got even close to getting onto the ticket. Ellsworth and Samuel Adams can beat him out a lot of the time even. The highest EV total obtained by Burr in 100 simulations was 37, and he got 0 more often than he broke 30. In every single simulation, Adams got 72 or 61 while Jefferson got 67 or 78, meaning that Maryland was the deciding state every single election with an EV of 11. Jefferson begins with a lead in this state, but I would recommend giving Adams a lead as he would go on to receive the states votes. This would go a long way to making Adams win over Jefferson more than Jefferson wins over Adams. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CalebsParadox said:

1796:
Jefferson's title is VP
Adam's Experience is at 4, but with many other candidates having a 4 it doesn't really reflect the experience he has being the VP.


Based on many simulations run and several playthroughs, Adams is weaker than Jefferson and Burr is a joke of a candidate. I would recommend potential buffs to each of them for the purpose of balance, as Jefferson wins the election in most runs I have had. However, I have noticed that Pinckney also works his way onto the ticket very often, and is actually pretty likely to win. He has the highest vote potential by a very large margin, and in 100 simulations he hit over 75 the most often. Jefferson seems locked at 78, and Adams at 72, while Pinckney scores all the way into the 90s during a good election. Burr is pathetic, and his average over 100 simulations was less than 20 EV, and he never once got even close to getting onto the ticket. Ellsworth and Samuel Adams can beat him out a lot of the time even. The highest EV total obtained by Burr in 100 simulations was 37, and he got 0 more often than he broke 30. In every single simulation, Adams got 72 or 61 while Jefferson got 67 or 78, meaning that Maryland was the deciding state every single election with an EV of 11. Jefferson begins with a lead in this state, but I would recommend giving Adams a lead as he would go on to receive the states votes. This would go a long way to making Adams win over Jefferson more than Jefferson wins over Adams. 

You must have an older version of this scenario. I just opened mine and it has Jefferson accurately labeled as Fmr Sec. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@CalebsParadox

However, I'm not sure if my later update fixed the playthrough problem you mention. I just did a playthrough right now. On election night, it was Adams, Jefferson, Burr, Pinckney, which was accurate. However, as the votes came in, the polls were wrong. It went Adams, with Burr barely sneaking past Jefferson. I think adding events could help in this; however, I may ultimately just make sure Adams and Jefferson are considerably stronger than Burr and Pinckney. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

also @vcczar I noticed in your 1788 scenario your "the states should surrender sovereignty to the state" under the States rights issue is really confusing.

A sovereign country is called a state. France is a state. Italy is a state. I see why it's confusing because we misapply the term states to our states, who are not really states at all, since they aren't under one government, but rather under two (state and federal). However, our states have changed the term to apply to entities that are really just elective administrative districts. However, I can see why this would be confusing to anyone unaware of the difference between "the states" and "the state." If I remember, I'll make this change and upload a new 1788 with an easier to comprehend issue stance description after I go through the rest of the scenarios. Thanks for pointing this out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar I played through as James Monroe. I did not encounter any problems. Here are my results (I am not very good at playing the games, but I love to watch how it plays out - I like simulating way more than campaigning myself).

1.PNG.50d6f520e7cba1050b676fda13ceef04.PNG2.PNG.c977b2fefadc70a6338ea35098192971.PNG3.PNG.d59b4d15bf9f538c02b153d1918f04bd.PNG4.PNG.955ed733b55ffc8ce0e1817f0b7b1782.PNG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have @jvikings1 @SeanFKennedy and @Patine had a chance to look through this scenario? If no problems or typos or other areas of improvement can be found, then all I have to do is add some more events. You can see what has been updated in the original post. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, victorraiders said:

seanfkennedy make 88 if he's like, i help with editing

You certainly are more than welcome to edit it my friend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Have @jvikings1 @SeanFKennedy and @Patine had a chance to look through this scenario? If no problems or typos or other areas of improvement can be found, then all I have to do is add some more events. You can see what has been updated in the original post. 

I will play though it when I get home from work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, everyone. I'm going to upload the updated scenario soon. You can see the expected changes in the original post. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I forgot to mention.  The ads are at a very high cost which make them pretty much useless.  I'm not sure if that was meant to be the case or something with the economics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Something I forgot to mention.  The ads are at a very high cost which make them pretty much useless.  I'm not sure if that was meant to be the case or something with the economics.

That's probably for the best in the old scenarios. If enough people complain, I'll adjust them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

Something I forgot to mention.  The ads are at a very high cost which make them pretty much useless.  I'm not sure if that was meant to be the case or something with the economics.

 

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

That's probably for the best in the old scenarios. If enough people complain, I'll adjust them. 

Yes, you must keep in mind, @jvikings1, in those elections, advertising consisted of cranking out (by old ink crank printer) posters, and then having people put them up by hand around select towns, or paying a literal mint for newspaper publishers to print them, or paying talented individuals to go around and spread your good word or well-composed contrafacta songs through various towns. By the standards and logistics of the day, it wasn't cheap.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...