[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: VGH.jpg (128 KB, 1205x673)
128 KB
128 KB JPG
What elections would you most like to see added to the game?
For me its 1912 or a 1924 Wallace style game as La Follette.
>>
Do you have the link for the previous thread? Also what did you do?
>>
>>576320
You can find it on your own, how new are you?
>>576310
I want all elections
>>
>>576321
I wonder how they'll handle a 2020 or 1876 scenario.
>>
>>576328
>2020 scenario
>actual election day is only halfway through
>>
>>576331
Would be funny if you had to keep campaigning for a recount.
>>
>>576328
>2020 scenario: Biden always wins, because of fraud
>>
>>576310
2016 is pretty easy, got even New Hampshire red with 1,5%. Still missing the 2008 and of course 2020.
>>
>>576321
Being this fucking lazy nonthing but lefty.
Also previous thread>>485023
>>
>>576355
2016 is surprisingly easy as Trump, I think they always give him an artificial boost in the polls to try and replicate what it was like going into 2016. Especially in Ohio and Florida where its neck and neck but I always win by 5+%.
>>
>>576372
I've never tried the version they made before the actual election; I assume it's way harder as Trump in that one?
>>
File: Green America.png (147 KB, 990x566)
147 KB
147 KB PNG
Why can't you win as a third party?
>>
>>576421
Americans are retards who always vote for their purple oligarchy
>>
>>576417
On impossible it essentially is impossible to win as Trump by doing what he did IRL. It was made way too early in the race (it doesn't even have Mike Pence as a VP pick) to understand the issues that would be important. It has the Midwest being "liberal" and thus pro-Clinton on foreign policy and the economy, but when the election came the Midwest rejected the economy and trade deals the Democrats wanted.
I would just avoid it all together, its not very realistic, fun, or fleshed out.
>>
>>576421
First past the post voting systems, a lack of coverage, and a small pool of candidates.
>>
>>576447
are there any notable countries with first past the post that have viable third parties that consistently win elections?
>>
>>576465
The UK, but on the local level its mostly one party vs another.
>>
>>576474
Hung parliaments in the UK are rare though. And the system still produces messed up results like UKIP getting only one seat with the third highest vote share in 2015.
>>
>>576500
That's because all the viable 3rd parties are ethic ones, look at that map and you realize the only minor parties winning seats based on ideology are the Liberals and Greens.
FPTP is definitely a broken system and produces the "two party system" seen in basically all of them. India likes to brag that it has over a thousand parties running, but only 2-4 ever get any seats.
I do think a third party is viable on the state level however, and from there it could implement and popularize a proportional system.
>>
>>576511
>over a thousand parties running, but only 2-4 ever get any seats
lol how did they even get to that point, is there some kind of grift involved where setting up a party gets you some state funds or something?
>>
>>576531
If I had to guess there are a lot of minor regional parties that are too small to gain seats, India is a rather large country after all and with a massive ammount of population.
>>
>>576531
Its just so huge its really easy to get the necessary signatures. Also political parties are not taxed, so many are basically set up as a way to commit tax fraud.
>>
I've thought of some ideas to make a Campaign Trail game more in depth and would like to know what people think.
>Fundraising, visiting each state means you have to spend money. The more you spend the bigger the impact on the polls.
>House, Senate, and gubernatorial elections, you have to campaign in state level to gain endorsements and thus more fundraising.
>More dynamic questions and events.
>>
>>576565
Check out 'The Political Process'
Pretty rough but basically what you're talking about
>>
>>576465
Most of Europe I think, also Israel has about a gorillion little parties than win seats because they have a direct proportional system
>>
>>576690
The only countries in Europe that use FPTP are Belarus and the UK.
>>
>>576565
There's a game called Presidential Infinity that has what you're looking for
>funds and fundraising, which you can spend on ads and outreach
>Endorsements, both from other politicians, pressure groups and newspapers
>Party primaries
>dynamic events like gaffes, tv and newspaper interviews
>also has a ton of mods, meaning you can play pretty much any election, national or local, that you want
>>
>>576371
Not your personal army munchkin
>>
>>576710
Looks interesting, but is there anyway to get it without paypal?
>>
Is there a game that focus on the democratic/republican convention?
>>
>>576716
Fuck off chipmunk.
>>
>>576511
Historically 3rd party has been viable on the state level. They've taken enough state seats to essentially force dems/reps to court them for the swing votes in the past. Its also possible to see them crop up in local politics and take seats. They've had senators too, iirc as recently as the mid to late 2000s and early 10s. Most of the time those senators choose to caucus with one party though, so they end up essentially being in that party but without access to their national funds and lower priority on the totem pole, eventually that tends to drive them out or force them to just become part of the party.
>>
>>576310
1936 But it's the Kaiserreich election
>>
>>576465
It's called being a "multi-party system"
Like Brazil or Europe
>>
>>578039
see
>>576696
>>
Is Wallace the hardest campaign to actually win the election?
>>
>>578300
Its impossible so yeah it is.
The hardest non-meme candidate would be Hughes and Gore on impossible.
>>
>>577205
you will never be a woman
>>
>>576748
here my G
https://www.mediafire.com/file/7dxv2zis7fa01tq/President_Infinity.rar/file
>>
>>578037
Realistically, would that scenario even be winnable? It seems destined for a electoral college deadlock, which would just put the democrat or republican in charge.
>>
>>578617
Republicans are doomed to fail, 8 years of Hoover after an election that went to the house of representatives is just too much, even if the candidate was someone sttonger than the moderate Landon. Garner has a good shot at winning, but he may be a bit too conservative on the economy. Still, the democrats are a well establishrd party, with strong political machines everywhere in the country and support from unions to business. Long could also win easily if he ran as a democrat and got the nomination, but despite what the devs think he would be wouldn't be that strong in the South if he ran on a third party, the democrats reign supreme and wouldn't allow his clique to go far. If he does well in the Midwest, West and parts of the North however, he can steal the election. For the SPA, Reed is way too radical. Most unions outside the IWW and workers wouldn't want syndicalism imported from France and Britain, but strong reforms like the New Deal+. Norman Thomas running as a democratic socialist could do well, as could some of the Minnesota/Winconsin socialists/farmer-labor types like Olson if he doesn't croak and doesn't side with Long like he might have in OTL.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.