The Campaign Trail Game Has Returned.

Discussion in 'Alternate History Books and Media' started by DTanza, Jul 7, 2014.

  1. Octosteel Disciple of Ye

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Location:
    Rust Bucket, Pennsylvania
    Still waiting for the new version of 2016. I wonder what the big differences will be. Probably just less randomness.
     
    Pericles likes this.
  2. Pericles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    It'll be easier for Trump. This one it is hard to win as Trump. However IOTL Trump ran a terrible campaign and had several meltdowns, as well as being accused of sexual assault, and still won.
     
  3. Octosteel Disciple of Ye

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Location:
    Rust Bucket, Pennsylvania
    Maybe as Trump, the more competent of a campaign you run, the worse you do!
     
    Pericles likes this.
  4. Pericles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    I played the Campaign Trail game with Carter on Easy(link). Got over 500 electoral votes and did better than 96% of players.
     
  5. kyc0705 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Because we live in a cruel, cruel world.
     
  6. Galba Otho Vitelius Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    On the 2016 scenario, instead of a total overhaul, they could do some minor updates and fixes such as get the correct pictures of the campaign managers, include the actual VP nominees in the VP choices, and make some adjustments to the minor party vote totals, which in the event wound up at about 5%.

    The current scenario makes heavy use of terrorist attacks, to the point that you can tell if Trump is going to win by counting the number of terrorist attacks happening. Instead the election turned more on Clinton scandal related issues, which are barely mentioned in the scenario. Instead of Trump University, a big deal was made of sexual harassment. Trump turned out get nearly all normal GOP voters behind him, but struggled with the GOP establishment.
     
    Heat and Pericles like this.
  7. Sabot Cat A Trans Girl and Proud Of It

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Location:
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Emperor Julian likes this.
  8. King of the Uzbeks Not as big of a jerk as I could have been

    Joined:
    May 28, 2013
    Location:
    Not-Tashkent (sadly)
    Hail Madem Cat!
     
    Sabot Cat likes this.
  9. jonnguy2016 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Location:
    California
  10. Sabot Cat A Trans Girl and Proud Of It

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Location:
    Indianapolis, Indiana
  11. Col. Angus Mem8er

    Joined:
    May 15, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2016
    DJ756 likes this.
  12. jonnguy2016 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Location:
    California
    Looked through the Hall of Fame list, and here are the most common VPs for the 2016 scenario:
    Clinton:
    1. Booker
    2. Castro
    3. Warren/Brown
    4. Warren/Brown

    Trump:
    1. Brown
    2. Christie
    3. Carson
     
  13. jonnguy2016 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Location:
    California
    Honestly curious, what's the point of playing as Nader in 2000?
     
    Abraham Washington likes this.
  14. Abraham Washington Believe you can, and you're half way there.

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Location:
    Where the streets have no name...
    No idea.

    It'd be a better idea to have Perot 1992, or Teddy Roosevelt in 1912... ;)
     
  15. Galba Otho Vitelius Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    I think they mishandled their attempts at third party candidates and shouldn't have bothered. I don't think the creators of the site understand minor party candidates very well.

    Nader has to reflexively state the most liberal position on every issue even to get to his historical 2.6%, which IOTL was considered to be a disappointment, despite the fact that this is not a fair description of his politics, and he did get some support from Perot/ Reform types. George Wallace is almost as bad, he is kind of fun to play, but again struggles to get his IOTL level of support and can't deviate from the right-wing, segregationist message, and there is no reason for him to campaign outside of the South. He basically has to run as Strom Thrumond.

    Speaking of Thurmond, there is no Wallace '48, Johnson '16 (or '12), Benson '16, or Birney '1848 options even those these candidates wound up doing as well or better than Nader. No Breckinridge or Bell options in 1860 either, though Breckinridge may have had a better chance of reaching the White House than Douglas. The side is inconsistent.

    I think they should let the computer play the minor party candidates and just have a few questions where the player-candidates have to respond to them or address them. When they do this in the scenarios, it seems to work well. And I would treat Perot in '92 as well, no sane player is going to follow the OTL Perot strategy between June and September 1992. For 1912, I would treat Roosevelt as the major party candidate and Taft as the minor irritant, Roosevelt in fact had the support of much of the Republican Party apparatus and had a small chance of winning, whereas Taft had none. Taft really should have not run for re-election.
     
    DJ756 likes this.
  16. Galba Otho Vitelius Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Playing as Kennedy in 1960 on normal, got a 41 state Nixon landslide:

    https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/371989

    Two points. First this shows how random the game really is. I answered all the questions the same way I've answered them when I've won as Kennedy. Kennedy won the debates decisively too. He did start way behind the polls, which I think is determined randomly. And I did pick Symington for Veep, which is the worst option if you are going to win, but I know from other games that its possible to win as Symington.

    Second, Nixon's popular vote margin was only 4.7%. At this time in electoral history, there was very little deviation by the states from the national result.
     
  17. Galba Otho Vitelius Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Ran against Nixon again, this time as Humphrey in 1968. Got something of the mirror result from the other game:

    https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/campaign-trail/game/372007

    Humphrey won the popular vote by 5.1%.

    I picked Teddy Kennedy as Humphrey's running mate, called for a bombing halt and negotiations in Vietnam, and ran somewhat center-right on law and order issues, while sticking to the Great Society on economics.

    However, what did it were the random events. Humphrey got a debate with Nixon and trounced him, and the peace negotiations sabotage issue broke in his favor.

    I did get one question meant for Wallace and two meant for Nixon, so the scenario is somewhat broken. I also got a question as to who was responsible for the Chicago convention mayhem that I haven't seen before, which I used to blame the protestors (the game advisors criticized me for this).
     
  18. DTanza Jerry Brown 2020 Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Location:
    California Republic
    Help Bush Win Simulator 2000.
     
  19. Emperor Julian Apostata

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta, Georgia
    William Jennings Bryan, Civil Rights Hero:

    Screen Shot 2016-12-19 at 12.05.31 AM.png

    Gets me in bottom 0.8% of Bryan games on normal. Map actually looks like how a map of if the Gold Democrats kept control of the party and the Populists ran their own candidate would turn out.
     
    swingstate likes this.
  20. Col. Angus Mem8er

    Joined:
    May 15, 2012