Many people have written here about how, as the game goes on, it gets easier and easier to win election.
The real-life phenomena that I think is missing is this: Opposition consolidates. Whatever you are for, the rest of the opposition melds around.
Here are some real life examples. Consider how McCain and Romney supported a health care plan much like what Obama implemented. But the GOP, opposing Obama, rejected it. In game terms, this would mean that factions like Seniors, Patriots and Religious became sympathetic to Capitalists, too. In reverse, the more dovish Democratic Party was angered by Trump’s reaching out to North Korea, even if it would have clearly defended Obama in that case. Here, again in game terms, Liberals (who in the game oppose courting oppressive leaders) are backed by socialists and youth in rejecting these actions.
I am not sure if the game mechanics can support the fix I’d suggest, which is the following:
- The more one faction is disapproving, the higher membership it gains.
- The more disapproving factions there are, the more they compound each other’s growth
- Cynicism (and/or disapproval) amongst all voters (either factions or simply “everyone”) grows in proportion to the first two factors.
The third one is perhaps the most feasible. It reflects the idea that even if a minority (say, religious" action is very upset and represent the opposition, they get more airplay and sympathy. It would reflect how the overall public mood is influenced by whoever is in opposition.
cliffski, I’ve been thinking about this for a while and I’d love to hear your thoughts!