Discussion in 'Alternate History Books and Media' started by DTanza, Jul 7, 2014.
Seriously, are you guys cool with the custom titles for each of my entries?
(D: 289, R: 242, map is with regular colors, not Atlas flipped colors)
My first win as Wilson on impossible. Better than 99.5%, and apparently less than 2% of Wilson games on impossible were won, and I can see why, it took me quite a few tries to get this.
Wilson wins by a margin of just 0.7%, but slightly better in the Electoral College-he only got 277 OTL. Wilson does worse than OTL in the midwest, great plains, and west coast, but gets a win by taking New York and all of new england except Maine and Vermont. It makes for a weird looking map even for the times - Dems at the time would usually be stronger in the west coast and midwest than northeast
First time I’ve reached electoral second place as Douglas in a successful 1860 deadlock (picking up both New York AND Illinois, which I’ve never accomplished before).
Finally won as Henry Clay on normal.
How dare you invoke that song in a Bush/quayle scenario!?
This is fine. This is just plain ducky. Hunky spunky. No bad will come of this at all.
Did I mention that my sabotaging the peace talks was discovered in this scenario? And I still won with...those numbers? Yeah...
I deleted Humphrey and Nixon from the 1968 scenario and replaced them with Nader.
Edit: And here's a game where I did the same thing in 2000.
How do you do that?
1. Check the source code.
2. Lines 200 and 201 define which candidates go in which election. Copy these, and use inspect element.
3. Paste the lines into the console and move around the candidates. They appear as numbers so you have to figure out which number corresponds to which candidate, and which number corresponds to which election. (Line 205 defines the election years.)
4. This only seems to work for playable candidates. Modifying the minor candidates breaks the game. The candidate you play as cannot be deleted from the election either.
Romney/Rubio in an absolute squeaker - Obama won the popular vote by just over 930,000 votes but Romney was delivered over the line by a margin of just over 1,000 in Nevada; 9,000 in Virginia and 22,000 in Ohio.
Undoubtedly would've been recount city if it happened in real life and would've been outcry worse than 2000 I'd imagine.
Recently pulled off one of my best Ford victories:
Also ran a Hillary sabotage which also experienced bad luck (a recession and a terrorist attack). Trump-slide City. Red Illinois and Oregon, anyone?
Win with the "Duke"...
Honestly going to put my foot through my fucking screen if I lose another 1916 campaign to Wilson - literally every path (progressive, moderate, conservative, anti-war, pro-war) fails
I think a number of the scenarios are broken and getting worse. 1968 in particular frequently asks Wallace only questions to both the others. And sometimes some of the exclusive question to the other candidate.
1968 has had those issues for a while, even before the creator stopped updating the game. It has also been a thing with the 1896 election, though it is less common. I am not actually sure if they make any difference though - apart from getting the Nixon question on civil rights as Humphrey, which gives noticeable benefit if you basically sabotage Nixon by essentially giving him the most anti-civil rights answer
Good advice. I just played a Humphrey/Ted Kennedy game on Hard and picked the
We want to compete in every southern state. I will run to the right of Wallace on economic issues while lamenting the interference of the federal government in education and housing.
Question along with the Wallace campaign against Nixon. Also got the top debate performance and the last-minute surge from Nixon getting caught sabotaging the peace negotiations.
434 electoral votes, 48.1%. Nixon got only 59 which is barely more than Wallace's 45. Every single one of my visits ended up going to waste nearly. If I did a rerun with the same success with questions, I could maybe pick off Arkansas from Wallace and Iowa and Montana from Nixon. Of course, it hardly matters at such point.
The TL from this could be interesting. The Republicans getting whipped two times in a row, from two nominees that end up being trainwrecks. They might not gain any ground in the Senate at all depending on how the downballot races shakeout with coattails, or make very limited gains. Leaving Humprey with a veto-proof majority in the Senate (of course with conservative Democrats as an issue still). The Republican House gains were very small and either way don't really control the chamber, but maybe Democrats recover some of their midterm losses.
If Humphrey does actually get out of Vietnam, he could enshrine himself as one of the best Presidents by locking down and expanding the Great Society. And Republicans would be scared off by the chances of another nominee that screws everything up. Reagan might not go above California for example.
I decided to run Nixon on anti New deal platform against Kennedy quite naturally expecting to lose. I was quite surprised to see this result https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/1109259
What do you think of this? What would happen if Nixon actually won on such a platform? Do you think this happened because of Kennedy's moderate platform and more left wing campaign by Humphrey could have won this campaign
I would like to konw if more dates are available for registered players.
These are the available elections:
Separate names with a comma.