The Campaign Trail Game Has Returned.

Lacktoastandtolerant

I don't really understand how people got some of these top results.

Here is the second highest Trump - on Impossible. Trump gets 45 million votes more than Clinton and wins all but DC and Hawaii - without any of the terrorist attacks, Clinton illnesses, recessions, FBI indictments of Clinton aides, or any of that.
https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/266633

And the highest Trump win on Impossible is just absurd - Trump gets 93 percent of the vote and Clinton got 0 votes. Also, apparently there were only 0 questions in that one. Wtf?
https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/266639

Some of the other ones have unusually high first places, such as Clay on normal with a first place of 55% when none of the others got higher than 50%, but nothing as extreme as the top example...
 

jonnguy2016

Col. Angus said:
I don't really understand how people got some of these top results.

Here is the second highest Trump - on Impossible. Trump gets 45 million votes more than Clinton and wins all but DC and Hawaii - without any of the terrorist attacks, Clinton illnesses, recessions, FBI indictments of Clinton aides, or any of that.
https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/266633

And the highest Trump win on Impossible is just absurd - Trump gets 93 percent of the vote and Clinton got 0 votes. Also, apparently there were only 0 questions in that one. Wtf?
https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/266639

Some of the other ones have unusually high first places, such as Clay on normal with a first place of 55% when none of the others got higher than 50%, but nothing as extreme as the top example...
Click to expand...
There's George Wallace winning on Impossible...so yeah
 
Prussian1871

Prussian1871

I wonder if when Campaign Trail updates their 2016 scenario, they'll include Gary Johnson as playable or not, since he's made a lot of ground since March 2016.

Edit: And wow, first real big mistake he made on "Aleppo" today. That's definitely something that could be added.
 
Last edited:

Octosteel

I have yet to win a single game as Trump. Once they do the final 2016 version, it might actually be an easier race. Who knows.
 
Sabot Cat

Sabot Cat

Banned
I finally won with Douglas in 1860, or at least deadlocked the Electoral College: https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/289042

upload_2016-9-18_0-34-34.png



This is evidently good enough to land me fourth place in the Hall of Fame, yaay. :D
 

JDGiant

Col. Angus said:
I don't really understand how people got some of these top results.

Here is the second highest Trump - on Impossible. Trump gets 45 million votes more than Clinton and wins all but DC and Hawaii - without any of the terrorist attacks, Clinton illnesses, recessions, FBI indictments of Clinton aides, or any of that.
https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/266633
.
Click to expand...

I'm going to play that scenario, on the same difficulty, with the same running mate, same state visits and the same question answers (at least when those particular questions come up) as that person gave. Let's see what happens...

Clinton won with a 51-45 PV win and a 314-224 EC win. Still better than about 88% of games with Trump on that difficulty.
 
Chicxulub

Chicxulub

Banned
I think some people have figured out how to hack the game or something, because those victories should not be possible.
 

JDGiant

Another idea is that turnout should vary in this game. So if you run a hard left campaign as Trump or Romney you lose in a landslide simply due to your own base staying at home.
 

Octosteel

bobby501 said:
Another idea is that turnout should vary in this game. So if you run a hard left campaign as Trump or Romney you lose in a landslide simply due to your own base staying at home.
Click to expand...
In general, we need a much more complete presidential election game where the opponent reacts to your campaigning as opposed to everything happening in seemingly a vacuum. President Forever is like Dwarf Fortress in that it is complex but soulless. Political Machine is way too simplistic and never fucking changes. This is probably the best thing we have which is sad.
 

JDGiant

Octosteel said:
In general, we need a much more complete presidential election game where the opponent reacts to your campaigning as opposed to everything happening in seemingly a vacuum. President Forever is like Dwarf Fortress in that it is complex but soulless. Political Machine is way too simplistic and never fucking changes. This is probably the best thing we have which is sad.
Click to expand...

The best one I've come across is the 1980s' President Elect (available to play online via old gaming archive sites - such as this: https://archive.org/details/msdos_President_Elect_-_1988_Edition_1987). The main issue with that is its age, but if it were updated for this century it would surpass all others IMO. The guy who created it is still around - he was interviewed for some website a few months back in which he discussed how his game engine would view the 2016 race. But one cool thing is that you can create your race, with your own candidates, economic and political circumstances etc. The only problem is that you can't edit the numbers in the states - hence California and New Jersey are no more Democratic than the nation as a whole (as in 1988) and Texas is often competitive.

Other ancient electoral games include Power Politics and the Doonesbury Election game. They were a bit more Political Machine than President Forever but felt more intelligent. I remember there being a site, with a forum, devoted to those games and a 2004 or 2008 version was in the works but sadly the creator passed away.
 

Emperor Julian

Played as Bryan as normal. Played first time, lost. Played second time, won narrowly by flipping the west coast and Ohio. Played a third time, McKinley got wrecked:

Screen Shot 2016-09-28 at 2.53.36 PM.png


When I last checked the polls before the final question, he was ahead in Michigan and Minnesota but I got a last minute surge I guess with that final tour through the midwest. I got close in NY, if I'd managed to get the question with Tammany Hall I think I could have closed the gap.

EDIT: I just played a self-sabotage game as McKinley on impossible, and managed to do better than the above, winning Illinois and Minnesota as well.
 
Last edited:

Emperor Julian

I played 1948, except rather than playing Dewey as Dewey, I played him as if he were Robert Taft. Predictably, he did better in the Midwest but worse in the Northeast.

Screen Shot 2016-09-28 at 4.58.50 PM.png


Then I ran Truman as if he were President James Byrnes. Kept the party united in the South, but got crushed otherwise. Humphrey's reverse coattails were just too strong for me to lose Minnesota even after repudiating his civil rights stance.
Screen Shot 2016-09-28 at 5.12.47 PM.png
 

Octosteel

Emperor Julian said:
I played 1948, except rather than playing Dewey as Dewey, I played him as if he were Robert Taft. Predictably, he did better in the Midwest but worse in the Northeast.

Then I ran Truman as if he were President James Byrnes. Kept the party united in the South, but got crushed otherwise. Humphrey's reverse coattails were just too strong for me to lose Minnesota even after repudiating his civil rights stance.
Click to expand...
Poor Taft. Just the wrong guy at the wrong time.

And people here have had successful games where they repudiate civil rights, but it tends to be a bad idea. I've always been interested in the idea of a Byrnes Presidency. I wonder why Roosevelt liked him so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top