Modifying how Ground Ops work

Right now, Ground strength is modeled by Org. Strength and Footsoldiers. The levels for each of these is multiplied to generate a Power rating, which is then a Power activity each turn on an issue in that player’s theme.

This is going to change. Instead, if more than 3 months before an election, the Power is multiplied by 0 (so, it’s 0 regardless of Org. Strength and Footsoldiers). If 3 months before, it’s multiplied by 1/3. If 2 months before, it’s 2/3. If 1 month before, it’s full power.

After a primary election, the Ground Ops go dormant. Their costs are cut significantly, but (per above) they don’t have any Power affect.

This a) makes it more realistic – ground strength doesn’t do much when the election is really far away, and b) solves a problem with runaway Ground Ops causing states to swing far from a realistic outcome.

Feedback welcome!

11 thoughts on “Modifying how Ground Ops work”

  1. @Dylan,

    Yes. More than 3 months out from a primary, Ground Ops have no effect. 3 months out, 1/3, 2 months out, 2/3, one month out full effect.

  2. Will this fix the problem where if you do any org strength or anything in the primaries it goes away for the generally and you can’t do any of that in the general if you do it in the primary?

  3. Can you also do something like this with momentum? It might solve the problem of the general election being a runaway for Republicans in March. Especially since so many events give all Republicans momentum. It should have an effect (witness Hillary’s miserable general election numbers as compared to Sanders), but maybe reduced to a factor of 1/(number of months before general election).

  4. @Eric,

    There seems to be a ‘leak’ somewhere in general election voter transfers that shouldn’t be transferring. Having said that, this should reduce the problem you are talking about because much of the momentum is from Ground Ops.

  5. Though the feature I’m looking forward to more than any other is favorability, this is already a nice change on the way to making sure Cruz can’t win MA or NY and Clinton can’t win Utah (both of which I’ve seen in past games) due to ground strength.

    Has it been implemented in version 2.2.6?

    The next step I would favor is implementing a mechanic that keeps endorsements reasonable. Right now, any endorser will warm to a candidate sooner or later. IRL, we know quite well that Elizabeth Warren wouldn’t endorse Ted Cruz, and vice versa. Maybe include a favorability element for endorsers?

  6. @John Doe,

    It will be included in 2.2.7.

    Yes, changing the way endorsers work is on the to-do list.

  7. How about having events that make a bunch of decideds go undecided in July and August with a floor of 25% or something like that.

Leave a Comment