1968 (with Primaries)

[darkmoon72 2]

Sorry, I put in a Hotmail account last time. I should have remembered.

Anyway if you could send it to deliriumtremensmusic@yahoo.com on your next update I'd be grateful.

[ElectricMonk 3]

The new main game update is out, so 1968 will either be released later today or some time tomorrow morning (depends if I get called into work).

[Kauai 0]

kandafoote@aol.com

Thank you so much for all the hardwork Electricmonk! This is by far the best scenario on here.

[ElectricMonk 3]

Swing by http://drop.io/campaign68 to pick up Release Candidate 4 of Campaign '68.

Release Notes

Typos fixed (though there are probably more).

General Election Republican funds updated to 20 million dollars, of 30 million plus raised. This should help counter the event engineered surge towards Democrats.

Humphrey given Adlai Stevenson III & his wife as Crusaders. Interestingly Adlai was one of the few younger Democratic figures not backing McCarthy or Kennedy—primarily as an anti-Kennedy stance.

RFK given four million dollars to start—this covers the 3 million RFK spent on the Indiana primary and a little extra.

American Independent Party no longer has a debate scheduled.

UFW added for California.

PIP Effect dropped to make it harder to steal endorsers.

Candidates now have regional general election bonuses.

Fund-raising, advertising, and so forth brought in line with updated TheorySpark scenarios. This is basically required given the new fund-raising system, and unfortunately reduces the importance of fund-raisers versus background fund-raising (sigh). However the Republicans retain their large advantage over the Democrats.

EMK now has 5 million dollars instead of 50.

Several Southern Governors are now swayed more by ideology (i.e. their party stance is now Lean Republican, and a centrist Republican nominee like Rockefeller might lose a couple Governors to Wallace).

Ages now properly set for candidates and VPs.

Event added to simulate Labor's 7 million bucks dumped into Humphrey's campaign. This helps the Democrats given their weak fund-raising ability.

McCarthy given 1.5 million dollars to start, this covers Humphrey's funnelling of 1 million dollars to him in order to stop RFK plus early pre-scenario start dollars.

Time to create ads reduced in order to encourage players to build full suite of 8 ads.

(Older scenario details can be read further in the thread and much of it still applies. On final release I'll put everything together into a proper readme document.)

House Rules

• Do not play as a favourite son, and do not turn them off. Playable candidates are the top ones: RFK, McCarthy, Humphrey/LBJ, Wallace (general only), Nixon, Rockefeller/Lindsay, Reagan.
  
• If Johnson is on, then favourite son John Connally should be off.
  
• The American Independent Party can only be played in the general, do not play primaries for them.
  
• National Television Ad must be run nationally, no limiting number of states.
  
• Only Rockefeller or Lindsay can be on for the primaries. Lindsay is harder.
  
• Only LBJ or Humphrey can be on for the primaries.
  

Play-balancing Notes

The Democratic primaries are best played as RFK or McCarthy, or both in a multiple human game. Playing as Humphrey is rather easy, and if a human is Humphrey against a human RFK or McCarthy (or both) the game is fiendishly tough.

The Republican primaries are fairly easy if a human is Nixon against computer players. Human Reagan or Rockefeller can beat Nixon, as can Lindsay (although he is much tougher to play as). Human Reagan versus human Nixon is tough, as is human Rockefeller and human Nixon. Humans for Nixon, Rockefeller, and Reagan provide the most fun (if rather unrealistic).

In the general election I don't have enough scripted events to model the various combinations (beyond a dozen or so events, the event engine seems to die) so I have a single event series to strengthen the Democrats. The Republicans have a poll and money advantage so the Democrats are better to play as if you're going up against the computer. That said Nixon is pretty good as well since he has the added bonus of lots of scandals against him which makes a Nixon/Republican election quite a bit tougher.

Note that if you carry through the primaries and into the general things will probably be off. Therefore primary-to-general games are only recommended if there is a human player for both Republican and Democratic sides.

Otherwise, note the nominees and VP nominees and start up a new general election game with those people.

Instructions For Installing

Double click on it and it should unzip a folder (since you're likely on Windows you should have Winzip which will automatically recognize the file. If not google WinRar and download that application, install it, and then double click on the zipped file).

The folder is named Campaign '68 RC 4

Move this folder to C:Program Files:President Forever 2008+Primaries:Scenarios if you placed the game in the default location. Next time you open the game click the scenario button and it should be there under Campaign '68 RC 4

Delete earlier versions by dragging them to the Trash. Recycle bin.

Credits

Lead Scenario Designer: Electric Monk

Scenario Designer: mokbubble2

Additional Assistance by: Forgotten Moderate

The various beta testers who helped bring this scenario to a successful release are much appreciated.

[mischaDC 0]

Something wrong in my game. I played with McCarthy and won the primaries, but then I didn't get matching funds. So the general election bankroll was:

Nixon: $20 million

McCarthy: $150,000

I wasn't sure why this happened, so I played again. Didn't win this time. Played a third time and did. AGAIN, no matching funds.

Rockefeller this time: $20 million

McCarthy: $200,000

I'm playing this most recent version, I'm pretty sure I've matched the settings properly. Any takers to explain this?

[Sean 0]

Something wrong in my game. I played with McCarthy and won the primaries, but then I didn't get matching funds. So the general election bankroll was:

Nixon: $20 million

McCarthy: $150,000

I wasn't sure why this happened, so I played again. Didn't win this time. Played a third time and did. AGAIN, no matching funds.

Rockefeller this time: $20 million

McCarthy: $200,000

I'm playing this most recent version, I'm pretty sure I've matched the settings properly. Any takers to explain this?

The Democrats start at a massive fundraising disadvantage, just like the party really did in 68.

[ElectricMonk 3]

Something wrong in my game. I played with McCarthy and won the primaries, but then I didn't get matching funds. I'm playing this most recent version, I'm pretty sure I've matched the settings properly. Any takers to explain this?

Like Warner'12 said, that's pretty much the real life difference between the parties. (Technically speaking a loan came due a few days after the convention and the Democrats were actually a few hundred grand in the hole for a little while.)

The FEC public financing system was introduced in 1974 as a reaction to Watergate, and first used on a Presidential level in 1976.

[mspewak 0]

Finally finished playing through a couple of rounds. Fortunately, no bugs to report. Just wanted to pass along my thanks for a great scenario. Keep it up!

[Abe Lincoln 9]

Sorry i got it before but I lost the email thedementors@juno.com thank you.

[Bishar 1]

here's my email-

bisharkjenkins@aol.com

[ElectricMonk 3]

Once again, for those who don't read the thread, go here to obtain the scenario.

[Abe Lincoln 9]

Thanks

[ElectricMonk 3]

Anything come up that I should address?

If not I'm going to send it in so it goes up on the proper TheorySpark scenario page.

[darkmoon72 2]

Anything come up that I should address?

If not I'm going to send it in so it goes up on the proper TheorySpark scenario page.

Yes. Congress is not Republican-controlled in 1968. John McCormack was Speaker and the Democrats controlled the House.

I played as Humphrey, won the popular vote and more electoral votes than anyone else (although not 270), and Congress picked Nixon because the game said Congress was Republican-controlled.

Other than that the game works great, as far as I can tell.

Thanks.

[ElectricMonk 3]

Yes. Congress is not Republican-controlled in 1968. John McCormack was Speaker and the Democrats controlled the House.

I played as Humphrey, won the popular vote and more electoral votes than anyone else (although not 270), and Congress picked Nixon because the game said Congress was Republican-controlled.

I know. It's a game engine bug that always calls Congress for the wrong party—nothing I can do about it.

[darkmoon72 2]

I know. It's a game engine bug that always calls Congress for the wrong party—nothing I can do about it.

Interesting. Thanks.

[Jackson 0]

Wallace was not on the ballot in DC. Also, Wallace should definitely have a charisma of 5. There is no way Reagan should be far right on Law and Order if Wallace is only Right.

Also, has is misspelled without the h on George McGovern's general election description.

[ElectricMonk 3]

Thanks.

[darkmoon72 2]

Wallace was not on the ballot in DC. Also, Wallace should definitely have a charisma of 5. There is no way Reagan should be far right on Law and Order if Wallace is only Right.

Also, has is misspelled without the h on George McGovern's general election description.

Wallace, charisma of 5? That isn't a bit much for him?

Whenever I play this scenario he does fine in the general election, close to how Wallace actually did. Giving him more charisma would skew the results, right?

[Highland Call 0]

It would be nice to have a decent space-barring candidate. If you do it using Wallace, it causes the result to change in the south, which is a annoying

[darkmoon72 2]

It would be nice to have a decent space-barring candidate. If you do it using Wallace, it causes the result to change in the south, which is a annoying

The ticket for that would be Henning Blomen and George Taylor, of the Socialist Labor party. They got a whopping 0.07% of the vote, coming in 4th behind George Wallace.

I don't think the game goes to that many decimal places, but 0.1% should be good enough.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

[ElectricMonk 3]

Wallace, charisma of 5? That isn't a bit much for him?

Whenever I play this scenario he does fine in the general election, close to how Wallace actually did. Giving him more charisma would skew the results, right?

For pure play-balancing reasons I'll likely keep his Charisma where it is, as you noted. However, the problem arises in that for groups open to Wallace he had massive appeal (even if, in states like Ohio they didn't end up voting that much for him) while other groups shut him out entirely.

He had, for lack of a better phrase, "focused charisma". He had zero appeal to a huge swath of the public, and huge appeal to another large swath (albeit one that existed mostly in industrial/southern states).

It would be nice to have a decent space-barring candidate. If you do it using Wallace, it causes the result to change in the south, which is a annoying

I don't believe in space-barring parties, or third parties unless conditions merit them (Perot in '92, Anderson in '80, Wallace in '68) or if y'all insist enough that I should include them in an official scenario—Political Wonk 2008 for instance.

There was a space-barring party during development (Peace & Freedom) but now that the scenario is basically released there isn't a need for one.

[CCA 4]

How do you accurately play-test without a spacebarring party though?

[ElectricMonk 3]

I had a spacebar party, and now I do not.

Should spacebar parties be kept forever? I choose not to do so.

[Kauai 0]

As it isn't on the theoryspark site.

Bumped, so new people can DL [ 2 pages back ] one of this games classics.