|
Extra - A Quick Look At Campaign Mode So, remember how I talked a bit about the campaign mode the game added with the latest update? Well, I've since played through both the Republican and Democratic campaigns with my min-maxed custom candidate, so I guess I might as well talk about it and the create-a-candidate mode a bit. First, the candidate I made:  A revamped version of the candidate I posted in the thread earlier, now given the name of the character her appearance is based on, and with the stats crunched down a bit further. The way the create-a-candidate stats work is pretty simple. You start with flat 5s in every single stat and 10 additional points to spend. Furthermore, every stat point in Stamina, Money and Fund Raising Ability costs two points, since these stats are more important than the others. Also, you get 100 "issue points" that you can spend setting your candidate's stance on certain issues. In my case, I just put the maximum (50 points) into Supporting Fighting ISIS and Supporting Support For Israel, the most popular issues that everybody likes. Now, let's look at the theory behind these stat points. First, the dump stats - the ones I put 0 points into: - Appearance / Intelligence: These stats only matter in interviews, and you can easily go an entire campaign just ignoring them. The bonuses you can get from them can be nice, but I'd rather have 10 extra points to spend. - Minority Appeal / Religious: These two only matter for campaign HQs built in states with a large minority/religious population. So 1) it's only going to affect a few states, 2) it's very situational, and 3) the game doesn't even tell you what those states are, from what I can tell. Pass. - Media Bias: This is a new dump stat for me - originally, I figured that I should have some of it because winning over undecideds is key, and that's what Media Bias does. However, since there is a political operative that gives you +10 to Media Bias for 5 measly political capital points, it turned out that I could use those points elsewhere. As for the important stats: - Stamina: Stamina is important, but since it costs 2 points per 1 stat point, you don't want to go particularly overboard. 7 is a good number. - Money: The money you start with is very important, because having money early means building a lot of HQs early, which gives you a vast array of advantages. - Fund Raising Ability: Being able to get a lot of money out of wealthy states is also important, but not as much as the stuff you start out with. Once you get that 100% awareness in California money, the difference doesn't matter as much as the difference between 8 and 10 Money would. - Charisma / Credibility / Experience: All three of these stats funnel into the same thing - manipulating issue scores. Charisma makes ads and speeches more effectively manipulate issue scores, Credibility allows you to more effectively manipulate your opponent's issue scores, and Experience lets you get more endorsements, which give you nationwide issue score boosts. Combine the three and you have an effective campaigning machine. So that's why Monaca here is the way she is, and from what I can tell, the results work out pretty well. I had her go up against Michelle Obama in an AI simulation, and it was a landslide victory for the Republicans. Anyway, on to the campaign mode opponents. First, the Republican campaign. We go through these in order, with the difficulty of the game starting on Simple for the first opponent and going up one step with every next opponent. So our Cruz/Obama campaign is currently on the difficulty level of the second campaign opponent. Also note that every opponent here was only added to the game in this latest update, with the exception of Bill Clinton.  Jimmy Carter: Stamina: 7 Money: 6 Fund Raising Ability: 5 Charisma: 6 Appearance: 8 Credibility: 3 Experience: 2 Intelligence: 5 Media Bias: 5 Minority Appeal: 5 Religious: 7  This one is pretty drat easy, and sets the tone for the missions to come - the one issue that is the most important one is the one you hammer on for the entire campaign, and then you win.  Bill Clinton: Stamina: 5 Money: 6 Fund Raising Ability: 8 Charisma: 7 Appearance: 7 Credibility: 3 Experience: 8 Intelligence: 6 Media Bias: 5 Minority Appeal: 6 Religious: 2  This one is similar - you're given one issue to bang on about constantly, and you're also given a Hollywood Friend too, which gives you more awareness in the state you put him in. The Scandal Monger says that he "halves the opponent's integrity in the target state". One problem: I have no idea what "integrity" is - meaning that there is no stat in the game with that name. I have no idea what this guy changes. Oh well, still a simple victory.  Lyndon B. Johnson: Stamina: 7 Money: 7 Fund Raising Ability: 9 Charisma: 5 Appearance: 5 Credibility: 5 Experience: 10 Intelligence: 7 Media Bias: 7 Minority Appeal: 8 Religious: 5  From here on out, things get a bit more tricky. The main important issues in this election are Big Government and Higher Minimum Wage, issues that Republicans oppose by default, so you've got a hole to work yourself out of. However, since my candidate is a master at manipulating issue scores, I get out of the hole with ease and score a good victory.  Woodrow Wilson: Stamina: 8 Money: 6 Fund Raising Ability: 9 Charisma: 5 Appearance: 5 Credibility: 7 Experience: 7 Intelligence: 7 Media Bias: 6 Minority Appeal: 1 Religious: 7  This one is where things start to get rough. While you have a good issue to work with, since Republicans are big on A Strong Military, Wilson is even more strong on that issue, and he has a flat 10% awareness bonus on every single state, which can cause some problems. The AI has also been continually getting stronger. Still, I manage to beat this one on the first try.  Thomas Jefferson: Stamina: 8 Money: 8 Fund Raising Ability: 6 Charisma: 7 Appearance: 8 Credibility: 6 Experience: 9 Intelligence: 9 Media Bias: 8 Minority Appeal: 3 Religious: 2  This... is weird. The inherent Democratic dislike towards Traditional Values and Religious Freedom makes it so that at the beginning of this campaign, there isn't a single state that leans Democratic, and a whole ton that leans Republican. With this head start, even the improved AI can't make this a more difficult campaign than the one against Wilson. Very strange.  John F. Kennedy: Stamina: 7 Money: 6 Fund Raising Ability: 8 Charisma: 9 Appearance: 9 Credibility: 7 Experience: 7 Intelligence: 8 Media Bias: 8 Minority Appeal: 6 Religious: 5  This is the big one. And yes, I know that it's a crime that FDR wasn't in there anywhere. Anyway, we've now gotten up to where the difficulty level is called "Painful", with only two levels above that ("Crippling" and "Masochistic"), and the AI is using a lot of actions that a lower level AI wouldn't (in our campaign, you will note that the AI will not move their VP around the map, so it's very much possible it can pick a useless VP [like Donald Trump for a Republican - he'll just sit in New York and boost awareness in all those states that will go Democrat regardless - though there's one thing that I can not yet confirm: I believe that a VP with a high Money stat will give you more money when you pick them - well, it's why the tickets I ran in these campaign modes were Towa/Trump and Towa/Bloomberg, anyway]). JFK gave me a real run for my money, and I actually had to "cheat" a bit to beat him - when he beat me the first time around, I went and edited the issues my candidate supported from Fighting ISIS and Support For Israel to Curbing Russian Might (the issue names aren't quite consistent) and Funding NASA. That allowed me to sneak away with a close victory. So, that was the Republican campaign, now, let's take a look at the Democrat one. For this campaign, I actually took screenshots of my victory maps, so we can take a look at those too. You will notice that the Republican campaign is a bit more difficult than the Democrat one.  Ulysses S. Grant Stamina: 6 Money: 4 Fund Raising Ability: 5 Charisma: 6 Appearance: 6 Credibility: 8 Experience: 2 Intelligence: 7 Media Bias: 3 Minority Appeal: 6 Religious: 5  Note that it says "economic issues" - in reality, that only means that Deficit Reduction is the top issue and that's it. How did I do?  The full god drat sweep. I honestly didn't expect this going into it - I figured a flyover state holdout would turn it into a McGovern-Mondale, but no, I actually managed to flip every single state. You'll notice a fuckton of TV ads in California - this is the basic strategy I developed for the campaign missions: - Almost every campaign mission revolves heavily around one issue, or maybe two or three. - TV ads allow you to hit issue scores for every single state while boosting your awareness in every state as well. - I min-maxed my candidate to maximize the power ads have as well as give me a lot of money to make those ads with. - So with that in mind, I would build up my base HQs (three Campaign HQs at levels 3, 2 and 2, one Outreach Center at level 3, and one Consulting Office at level 3), raise my awareness in California to 100%, then go to town with fundraisers, then go to town with TV ads. - And while doing that, I would get endorsements and place operatives as needed. This base strategy got me through every Democrat campaign mission just fine. In the later ones, it would need some more hands-on campaigning in specific states, but the general gist stayed the same. Note that this probably wouldn't work for our campaign - we don't have the money to play with and our ads won't be as effective that we can rely on only them.  Richard Nixon: Stamina: 6 Money: 9 Fund Raising Ability: 6 Charisma: 5 Appearance: 3 Credibility: 1 Experience: 9 Intelligence: 9 Media Bias: 2 Minority Appeal: 0 (wow) Religious: 4  This campaign is basically just a regular one. Both candidates having no Credibility basically means that I can't use attack ads as effectively, so I just blanketed the airwaves with positive ads about me.  And the result was another resounding victory.  Theodore Roosevelt: Stamina: 7 Money: 8 Fund Raising Ability: 9 Charisma: 9 Appearance: 5 Credibility: 7 Experience: 7 Intelligence: Media Bias: 2 Minority Appeal: 5 Religious: 6  Wall Street Regulation isn't as important as A Strong Military, so Roosevelt has a head start on us, but he can't compete with the ad blitz either.  Again, not a lot of competition here.  Ronald Reagan: Stamina: 7 Money: 8 Fund Raising Ability: 8 Charisma: 9 Appearance: 7 Credibility: 7 Experience: 9 Intelligence: 7 Media Bias: 5 Minority Appeal: 4 Religious: 5  This is a kind of interesting one - the extra money and starting with a Money Man means that we can milk California even faster and even harder, which only helps us. Also, during the endgame of this campaign, I was crowing from the rooftops about how I, the Democrat candidate for presidency, love tax cuts, in order to win over independents.  Essentially, Reagan got out-Reagonomics'd.  Abraham Lincoln: Stamina: 7 Money: 4 Fund Raising Ability: 8 Charisma: 8 Appearance: 3 Credibility: 9 Experience: 9 Intelligence: 8 Media Bias: 5 Minority Appeal: 9 Religious: 7  Lincoln is where I start running into some speedbumps. #BlackLivesMatter being important is good for us, but the Confederate Flag Display being important isn't. However, since the former is the more important important issue, we have an advantage out of the gate. Furthermore, having three Intimidators (reduce opponent's awareness in target state by 4%) means we can target particular states and deal a heavy blow to Lincoln's awareness. However, the AI is strong enough at this point that holding certain states is no longer tenable.  So during this campaign, I fought like a motherfucker over Texas, but in the end, it just wasn't possible to hold it, and it went hard Republican in the end. And because of that, I ended up losing a fair share of Southern states, but still, a fairly solid win. And of course, I ended up screaming about how much I love displaying the Confederate Flag since my standing amongst Democrats was solid as hell and it was the easiest way to get to Independents.  George Washington: Stamina: 8 Money: 8 Fund Raising Ability: 8 Charisma: 9 Appearance: 4 Credibility: 6 Experience: 8 Intelligence: 6 Media Bias: 8 Minority Appeal: 4 Religious: 8  Big Government being the top issue is bad for us, and the AI is on top of its game against us, so this isn't a good start. However, note the map being covered in political opportunities to start with.  They weren't loving kidding. This campaign was basically won by me in the first few weeks, because I beelined for all those opportunities and found a loving goldmine. Two Money Men (meaning that payouts from California were increased by 50%), two Movie Directors (meaning creation costs of my beloved TV ads in California would be cut by 75%), some Cheerleaders (double awareness gains in a state), some Media Darlings (improve all ratings in a state), some Rich Donors (straight up get one million dollars), and not a single negative one amongst all of them.  So while I found it even less possible to win flyover states, I could spam the everloving gently caress out of TV ads and straight up get 100% awareness in every single state while pushing a lot of Democrat issues, which secured victory in a lot of important Democrat states. I lost some particularly painful states - Ohio and Virginia were states where I put a lot of effort into and I lost them by a hair - but in the end, victory was achieved, and it was achieved securely. So that was the campaign mode in short. Nothing all that special, but it's nice to have a particular challenge put before you with little things that make the challenge special. Also, to close things out, here's this guy that was also added with the latest update:  Mike Pence: Stamina: 5 Money: 5 Fund Raising Ability: 5 Charisma: 5 Appearance: 6 Credibility: 5 Experience: 7 Intelligence: 5 Media Bias: 4 Minority Appeal: 4 Religious: 8 Wow. So exciting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
It's kind of lazy that they didn't bother changing the maps to historical ones or switching around the voter numbers. Like I get the idea that it's the game with a different ruleset but, like, come on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
It's weird seeing Washington as a republican when he hated parties irl and as such never ran with one, but I guess they didn't have a founding father that fit due to the Republicans not existing until the antebellum period.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:38
|
|
Week 3 We've made it to week 3 for the first time now! Only 23 more to go! Also, just to note, Michelle went to Florida from Pennsylvania at the end of her turn. Apparently I saved before she did this last time. Not that it's that big a difference. code: First off, since the main thing you wanted was to build in California, that's what we're going to do.  And then we fly to Missouri - note our Political Operative in California giving us a +1% to awareness every week now. But now, we have a problem, in that the next thing for me to do should be to build a new HQ in Missouri, but there's a bit of a problem - we're pretty much broke. Right now, we have 115K in the bank, which is quite a bit short of the 250K we need to build a new HQ. We can basically do one of three things: 1) Fly around a bit at 25K a pop. 2) Make one or two ground game ads at 50K a pop. 3) Make speeches. To note, we're only making 20K a week from campaign HQs - we splurged big on that California HQ, and while it will bring us a lot of money down the line, right now, we're broke because of it. In the case of what we're going to do in Missouri, there's really only one thing:  A speech. Now, you wanted Securing The Borders, but there's one problem - as you can see, it's not available because it's not a top five issue. So instead, I'll go for Fighting ISIS, which is also an issue you wanted, and as you wished, I'm going to attack Obama over opposing it.  Now, that gives us a great swing in Missouri, but that's pretty much entirely only because that was the first bit of attention anybody has given to Missouri. Early speeches always give a good boost, but in the long term, you're not going to win a state with just one speech.  In this week's "What Is This I Don't Even Polls" update, we lose a slight bit in the popular vote, surge in the electoral vote, and pretty much nothing changed with the issues. Yup. Time to move on to the next turn.  Michelle's still really spreading out her HQs. This time, she builds Outreach Centers in Oklahoma and Washington. We're still making more PR Clout points than her because instead of many little ones (that only give 4 points total per week), we have one big one (which gives 7 points per week plus 1 from another one we have).  And it's because of those PR Clout points that we could get our first endorsements! I went over them in the first week 1 update, but to recap, endorsements give us nation-wide issue score boosts on two issues. Endorsements that align with your party are cheaper than the ones that don't. The question here is: Do we pick one now or save points to steal a Democrat one? Now, I believe that sniping an opponent's endorsement will mean that they'll probably snipe one of yours as well. However, the AI will always go for theirs first before going for the opponent's, if possible, and that means that if we pick one of hers, we get full choice, but she'll only get the scraps at the end, which might mean that it's worth it. I don't know - you decide! To remind you, here are the possible Republican endorsements: - Christian Confederation: 5 points to Opposing Abortion Rights, 10 to Supporting Religious Freedom - National Foreign Policy Committee: 10 to Supporting Fighting ISIS, 5 to Opposing Iranian Nuclear Deal - The National Gun Owner's Association: 5 to Opposing Big Government, 10 to Supporting Gun Rights - Tea Party Movement: 5 to Opposing Big Government, 10 to Supporting Tax Cuts - US Chamber Of Business: 5 to Opposing Big Government, 10 to Supporting Reducing Unemployment And the Democrat ones are: - National Civil Liberties Union: 5 points to Supporting #BlackLivesMatter, 10 to Supporting Gay Marriage - National Association For Women: 10 to Supporting Abortion Rights, 5 to Supporting Gay Marriage - National Organization For The Support Of Colored People: 5 to Supporting #BlackLivesMatter, 10 to Opposing Repealing Obamacare - National Union Action Network: 5 to Opposing Outsourcing Jobs, 10 to Supporting State Unions - The Environmentalist Club: 10 to Supporting The Environment, 5 to Supporting Supporting Green Jobs VOTING So, this time around, you should vote on four things: State, Action, Issue, and Should We Get A Republican Endorsement Or Save For A Democrat One? And just as a reminder, we're about broke. No building until we get more money, and ads would be a somewhat dangerous prospect. Do we try and spread the love with some speeches in swing states? Do we go for broke and try like hell to raise awareness in California? Time to find out. Spreadsheet
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
California, raise awareness, Border, get Foreign Policy endorsement then snipe Democratic ones.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Tex/Cali (whichever has more awareness), raise money, Obama against fighting ISIS
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
CirclMastr posted:California, raise awareness, Border, get Foreign Policy endorsement then snipe Democratic ones. This as well. Also, I love how we're beating Michelle on Gay Marriage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
CirclMastr posted:California, raise awareness, Border, get Foreign Policy endorsement then snipe Democratic ones. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
CirclMastr posted:California, raise awareness, Border, get Foreign Policy endorsement then snipe Democratic ones. emptyquote
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Slaan posted:Tex/Cali (whichever has more awareness), raise money, Obama against fighting ISIS And snipe a democratic endorsement!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Snipe the environmentalist club when you get around to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
CirclMastr posted:California, raise awareness, Border, get Foreign Policy endorsement then snipe Democratic ones.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
NGDBSS posted:Sounds like a plan, though I'll agree with Montegoraon for designating the environmentalists as the first sniping target. VOTING THIS AND/OR National Union Action Network
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
California, raise money (assuming our awareness is large enough to be worthwhile), snipe Democratic endorsements.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 09:11
|
|
Week 4 Alright, we've reached the first big milestone - week 4! Not necessarily because of anything special that happens, but I'll be giving you a full sheet of up-to-date information every four weeks, starting now, so be sure to check the spreadsheet for that - but not now, now we have an update to get through. I'll also give you some more campaign strategizing at the end. code: First of all, we need to get ourselves an endorsement, and you wanted to get one Republican one before sniping a Democrat one, and in particular...  ...you wanted the foreign policy one. I'm pretty sure that is the objectively right choice in this situation. A Fighting ISIS bonus is always welcome, and there seems to be an awareness bonus that goes along with an endorsement in the states where one of the two relevant issues is in the top five. Fighting ISIS is in the top five in every single state.  Next, we move to California and "raise awareness", which given our brokeness means "give a speech". In particular, give a speech on Securing The Borders, as I lied earlier. Fighting ISIS is not in the top five issues in California, and only California. loving hippies. Now, we have a problem. All top five issues in California are issues where we don't win with the Independents. Addressing Climate Change they like, we dislike. Legalization of Marijuana they're neutral on, we dislike. Securing The Borders they dislike, we like. Supporting Gay Marriage they like, we dislike. Abortion Rights they like, we dislike. This is basically a complete and utter showstopper, because since we built an Outreach Center in California, we're locked into these five as the only issues we can use in this state unless we find a way to change that - and getting an issue you can't use in a state into the top five is basically impossible. It requires one of two things: 1) Spamming TV ads - and we don't have money to do that. 2) A random event occurring. I've mentioned these before, I think - they're like the events that happen at the beginning of a campaign mode campaign, they give a massive boost to a particular issue. If we got that to happen, we'd at least have one issue available that we could win on. Essentially, what this means is that winning California has become less likely than Gary Johnson winning the presidency. Not winning a state. Winning the loving presidency. Any and all resources we put into this state that are not related directly to getting our awareness up to 100% are completely wasted. I genuinely did not consider what I'm going to coin "issue deadlock" to be a problem for us. If I had, I would have heavily advocated against building an Outreach Center in California for that very reason. And now we've spent way too much money on that building to replace it. Welp. Anyway, back to the speech. What kind of speech can I give when Independents side with Michelle on every issue?  Well, we could do this. Just loving imagine this speech happening. The internet would be in flames, the GOP would be in flames, the loving world would be in flames. Ted God drat Cruz attacking Michelle loving Obama over wanting more border control.  And as if reality itself has rejected this as a possibility, it had gently caress-all of an effect. It only raised awareness by 1%.  This is not a winning battle, my friends. Next up, I was supposed to either go to California or Texas, depending on which one had more awareness.  Well, thanks to that bomb of a speech, it's still Texas.  So, due to our funds problems, we're going to have to fundraise a lot earlier than I normally would. What are we going to get out of this?  ...that's acceptable, I suppose. I'm just way too used to pulling in 300K+. Well, that's it for this turn, let's see what week 5 has in store.  Political opportunity!  Another good one! Like it says, the Media Darling boosts all our ratings by 10%, but she cannot be moved after being placed. Because of that, I like to keep her around until late in the game, then place her in one of the battleground states that have developed. Also, this is a good time to mention what I'm going to do with political operatives. I'm going to not put anything relating to them up to a vote. Instead, for simplicity's sake, I'll take over this part of the campaign, and run it in such a way that it aids the goals that you have for the campaign. You can micro a lot with operatives, and that doesn't lend itself to voting at all. So for now, the Media Darling sits alongside the Money Man at the ready when I need them.  Michelle's turn is once again focused on building. This time, it's a Campaign HQ in Ohio and an Outreach Center in New Mexico (not pictured). This is getting out of hand, she's going all over the place with these. I'm genuinely not sure how effective this is compared to building up a few HQs, so no advice from me there.  We once again have enough PR Clout to get an endorsement, but like you voted earlier, we're not getting one this turn and instead saving up for a Democrat one.  Finally, here's the stupid polls again. We're going to work out how this poo poo works eventually. Fighting ISIS got a big boost, which makes sense, and we gained in the popular vote and total issue score, but we lost ground in the electoral vote. Again, makes no sense. Now, before we get to the voting... THEMCD'S HOT CAMPAIGN STRATEGIES, TIPS AND TRICKS code:Alright, so where do we go from here on out? Well, first, let's look at the spreadsheet for that. Now, in general, not a lot has changed in the race. As of now, we're still building up. However, we have some problems. One, we have no money. Two, without money, our chances of raising awareness in California without political operatives are slim. Three, without money, we can't build the HQs that get us Political Capital points we need for operatives. We're in a pretty tough situation. What would I do for the next four turns? That's a tough one. Maybe focus on Texas? We need money, that much is clear, and we aren't getting money out of California right now because we can't raise awareness there. Later in the campaign, we'll be able to put operatives there and poo poo, but right now, it's not happening. In Texas, we can just throw out the standard red meat to the base and get big boosts. Do some poo poo on Gun Rights, Securing The Borders and Abortion Rights and we should be well on our way to a good amount of awareness to fundraise with. Once we get the money, we get some options, but right now we don't have it. If we do adapt this plan, I'm going to need to make a decision on how to use the Money Man, because we're going to see two big fundraising sprees in that case - one early in Texas and one late in California. The one in California will pay more money for sure, so putting the Money Man there will increase net payout. But maybe having more money early is more important, even if the "more money" ends up being less money overall, because spending early is more effective than spending late? Tough call, honestly. Finally, take a look at the new column I added - "Lead vs. Undec[ided]". This should be a pretty good stat for you to look at - essentially, it shows you how volatile a lead in a state is by subtracting the amount of undecided voters (which are a lot easier to swing to your side than the voters from the opposing side) from the percentage lead the current leader has, then dividing by two. So for instance, look at Wyoming. We're currently getting 60% of the vote, Michelle is getting 25%, and 15% are undecided. Our lead is 20 percent points over the amount of undecided voters, meaning that even if Michelle managed to get all of the undecided voters on her side, she would still need to flip 10 percent points off of our voters to get a tie, which is essentially impossible unless we completely ignore the state and she focuses everything on it. So the greater the "Lead vs. Uncec[ided]" number is, the more secure the lead is. The lower it is, the more unsecure the lead is. Wasting time trying to fight in a secure state can be what turns your campaign from a win to a loss, and vice versa is the case for finding and fighting the unsecure states. So I hope you can make good use of that number. VOTING So as usual, I'm going to need a State, an Action and an Issue. Advisory on which endorsement to take will also be taken into account.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
I thought the whole point of raising awareness in Cali was so that we could fundraise there and get more money rather than rely on second-best Texas, not to actually try and win the state?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
raise money raise money raise money By any means necessary. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
The Zodiac Killer should play to his strengths. Murder some people around the country, then campaign as tough on crime.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
Slaan posted:I thought the whole point of raising awareness in Cali was so that we could fundraise there and get more money rather than rely on second-best Texas, not to actually try and win the state? We must secure the existence of our ciphers and a future for serial killers, because the beauty of a Cali murder scene must not perish from the Earth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 04:10
|
|
Slaan posted:I thought the whole point of raising awareness in Cali was so that we could fundraise there and get more money rather than rely on second-best Texas, not to actually try and win the state? I'm not entirely sure. Seems to me that some people here definitely had designs on winning California. I mean, it seems that we still have an option to actually effectively raise awareness in California - it just requires us to run on supporting all those issues we don't actually support. As an experiment, I focused four weeks of campaigning on raising awareness in Cali, and this is the result I came up with: - Week 5: Fly to Cali, give speech supporting Addressing Climate Change, run ground game ad supporting Addressing Climate Change - Week 6: Get endorsement of The Environmentalist Club, give speech supporting Legalization of Marijuana, give speech supporting Supporting Gay Marriage, use Political Capital gained from speeches to hire a Speech Writer (Charisma +10, better speeches) - Week 7: Give speech supporting Abortion Rights, give another speech supporting Addressing Climate Change - Week 8: Get endorsement of US Chamber of Business. Awareness in California is now at 100%. Put Money Man in California and fundraise as much as possible. Money goes from 238.000 to 1.528.000 after three fundraisers. So it's entirely possible. Is it wise? That's another question.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Or we could build an HQ to increase the number of topics we can yammer on about, and raise the importance of an minor issue like  ISIS through an aggressive ad campaign to ensure that we don't just raise awareness but also have a chance of winning the state.  The caveat being, of course, TheMcD posted:So it's entirely possible. Is it wise? That's another question. my dad fucked around with this message at 12:24 on Aug 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 12:19
|
|
my dad posted:Or we could build an HQ to increase the number of topics we can yammer on about, and raise the importance of an minor issue like :byo:ISIS:byo: through an aggressive ad campaign to ensure that we don't just raise awareness but also have a chance of winning the state. Well, yeah, that's an option, but tearing down our level 3 Outreach Center just so we can plop down a level 1 Campaign HQ in order to be able to fundraise sometime down the line is probably an even worse idea, since we're basically throwing away all the money we spent on that drat building in the first place.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 12:20
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:Well, yeah, that's an option, but tearing down our level 3 Outreach Center just so we can plop down a level 1 Campaign HQ in order to be able to fundraise sometime down the line is probably an even worse idea, since we're basically throwing away all the money we spent on that drat building in the first place. Wait, the outreach center doesn't provide any extra topics? drat, I'm mixing up 2008 and 2016 mechanics again. Could making a TV ad elsewhere work to raise ISIS importance in Cali, perhaps?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 12:25
|
|
my dad posted:Wait, the outreach center doesn't provide any extra topics? drat, I'm mixing up 2008 and 2016 mechanics again. Yeah, only the campaign HQ gives more topics, which is why we're in this pickle to begin with. A TV ad might maybe potentially work, but I don't think just one will do it. We'd need to blanket the airwaves, and we're 1) too broke for that and 2) don't have the weekly income to support even a single TV ad.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:I'm not entirely sure. Seems to me that some people here definitely had designs on winning California. When you did this, did the rest of the country give a gently caress about Bizarro Ted Cruz's month in California?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 13:49
|
|
Friend Commuter posted:When you did this, did the rest of the country give a gently caress about Bizarro Ted Cruz's month in California? Not at all. The internet doesn't exist in this world, so every state is like Las Vegas - what happens there, stays there. The only thing they know is things we do in their own state, TV ads, endorsements, and interviews.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:Not at all. The internet doesn't exist in this world, so every state is like Las Vegas - what happens there, stays there. The only thing they know is things we do in their own state, TV ads, endorsements, and interviews. Well, it's really tempting to goof around and set it up so every state has a different Ted Cruz to vote for, but let's be a little more serious. A little. California, Speech, Climate Change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Maine, speech, secure borders
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
So can we just.... y'know, lie to the locals wherever we are and say we support whatever BS they do because apparently nobody communicates across state lines in this game?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 20:01
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:So can we just.... y'know, lie to the locals wherever we are and say we support whatever BS they do because apparently nobody communicates across state lines in this game? Yeah, it's just really inefficient to try and tailor your image to every state. It's more practical to just use what has already been given you with your party-based views, though it can work in extreme cases like California. I never really tried to make it work.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
FUNDRAISE then Kansas and attack Obama on Farm subsides. my dad posted:Wait, the outreach center doesn't provide any extra topics? drat, I'm mixing up 2008 and 2016 mechanics again. because of you and people like you we are undone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
Herr Tog posted:because of you and people like you we are undone. No, governor, it's because people like you failed to adequately influence local laws. You still haven't found a way cancel the bus lines on the list you were provided with, and you know that black voters use these to make it to the polling stations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
California, raise awareness, any topic Don't forget that this is all attack-Obama, all the time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
my dad posted:No, governor, it's because people like you failed to adequately influence local laws. You still haven't found a way cancel the bus lines on the list you were provided with, and you know that black voters use these to make it to the polling stations. I have decided to stop and watch it all bern
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
Herr Tog posted:I have decided to stop and watch it all bern I voted for Nader I hate you all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 16:54
|
|
Week 5 Alright, let's keep on trucking on the campaign trail. code: First, we of course head to California...  ...and attack Obama over opposing Addressing Climate Change. Strangely, this seems about as viable an avenue of attack as attacking her over Securing The Borders, but...  ...we got the full 10% awareness boost from the speech and swung the vote 3% in our favor! It won't be a major thing in the long run, but every bit helps, even if it just means Obama will need to put more effort in to win California than normally expected.  Next, we head to Kansas, which I picked over Maine for the sake of having more electoral votes and being more red territory. But of course, we're not going to fundraise there, that would be a total waste of time.  Instead, following the general mood of the thread, it's attack ad time, so our first ad is a ground game ad attacking Obama over Farm Subsidies. Hey, in Kansas, that's a home run issue to run on!  And that's it for week 5. On to the beginning of week 6!  Michelle's turn is pretty simple - she flew around a bit and built another Outreach Center, in Nevada this time. She's really spreading herself out with these buildings. Also, she now gains 5 PR Clout per turn, getting fairly close to our 8. She's going to be pretty competitive with endorsements, and we can probably only afford to snipe a single one.  So in order to make it count, I went for the National Organization for Women. Abortion Rights is usually only a larger issue in liberal states, as is Supporting Gay Marriage, and in deep red states where it is also an issue, we have other issues (like Fighting ISIS) to cushion the loss it would mean in those. This would also be the endorsement that gives the most benefit to Obama, in my opinion.  Also, I had to snipe this one fast, because at the end of her turn, she would have taken that endorsement as well. Instead, she has to settle for The Environmentalist Club, which sounds like a good endorsement - after all, Addressing Climate Change is a big issue in a lot of states, but surprise, the endorsement doesn't help with that issue at all! Instead it's The Environment and Green Jobs, which are minor issues in liberal states and that's about it. Not actually all that great.  Here's another look at California to see the slight changes in issue ratings from last time - note that our lead is largely only due to our advantage in awareness. Sustaining it is the hard part.  And finally, the loving wack-rear end polls again. I assume our temporary lead in California is causing them to go even more crazy than before. VOTING Alright, as usual, give me a State, Action and Issue to work with. Also, we either need to commit to California or get out. Halfway ain't gonna cut it. Spreadsheet
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
California, Speech,  . I really hope we somehow manage to win California, but it's probably not gonna happen, so we'll have to make do with mad cash. What a shame.Out of curiosity, how does a Hillary vs Donald campaign turn out with the AI running both sides?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 21:15
|
|
Friend Commuter posted:Out of curiosity, how does a Hillary vs Donald campaign turn out with the AI running both sides? I'm not sure. I ran two campaigns, one where I selected Hillary first, and one where I selected Trump first, and in either case, it was a landslide for the one I didn't select first. I think this simulation thing might be broken. However, the Hillary landslide was a bigger landslide than the Trump one, so I think on average Hillary wins, which makes sense, given the Democrat advantage that is having New York and California.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Give up on winning California but get awareness to make money
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
Herr Tog posted:Give up on winning California but get awareness to make money Seriously, start fundraising 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 23:13
|
|