Election 1895: Polls Leaked!

Fallen London
1

[color=#cc0099]Polls leaked! Feducci gallops ahead, but will his arrogance be his undoing? The Detective trails behind. Will purging her ranks of the corrupt and brutal give room for new support? And though the Dauntless Temperance Campaigner holds her course, her chances seem slim; but now that the pariahs of London society have found self-belief and speak of her old kindnesses, might there be an unexpected swell of support before the end of Election?[/color]

[color=#cc0099]Today marks the halfway point of the 1895 Election. You may find that the final week of Election has a few surprises up its sleeve. [/color]

[color=#cc0099]Starting today, our newest electoral social activity, Debates, will begin. This new mode of competitive play will allow players another way of further empowering their vote from 10 up to 15. Challenge those who support a different candidate to your own via the [/color][color=rgb(204, 0, 153)]Organising a Political Debate[/color][color=#cc0099] card, available throughout London.[/color]

[color=#cc0099]Also, this Wednesday 5th July, poses to be a day full of excitement. One of the goals of the Fallen London Reworks project is to experiment and improve social actions within Fallen London. Debates, for example, is one of the experiments. The 5th of July will be another:[/color]

[color=#cc0099]On this day, for a 24 hour period (from 12:00pm-12:00pm BST), Agitators will be able to target anyone who has the quality Notorious. Starting from today, Persons of Some Importance have a chance of gaining this quality any time they complete either a Election Flash Lay or a Case. If a player becomes marked, they can then become a target of an Agitator during this period. [/color]

[color=#cc0099]However, players can only be denoted as Notorious once. If you complete multiple Election Flash Lays or Cases, you will not gain any more Notoriety. After you are targeted by a Mob, you will lose your Notoriety, meaning you cannot be targeted again. If you complete another Election Flash Lay or Case during this 24 hour period, however, you will be eligible for another attack.[/color]

[color=#cc0099]The data from this experiment will allow us to adjust and improve social activities for the next Election.[/color]

[color=#cc0099]With only a week left in the Election, our three daring candidates will need all your support![/color]

[color=#cc0099]Posters are also still [/color]available on Gametee until 31st of July!
edited by Absintheuse on 7/3/2017
edited by Absintheuse on 7/3/2017

2

Good to hear that Feducci is in advantage! Only a week to go now! If anyone wants to debate me, feel free to send a request!

3

A horrifying turn of events! Your Aunt must have words with Mr Huffman about the clear advantages of pro-Temperance ballot stuffing.

4

But she’s losing?

5

I always found it odd that Agitators could not send mobs against players who were not Agitators.

While I do not look forward to incoming mobs, I do look forward to this additional mechanic.

6

Is someone else having trouble with accepting the requests? It keeps taking me back to the “Accept the invitation” prompt whenever I want to respond, while request remains in my Messages tab.

7

I wonder if Failbetter keeps track of how many people actually change their vote.

I’d imagine not many.

Even without a penalty to your level, most people have already committed themselves, mentally, to a candidate, and they’ll vote for that person pretty much regardless of whatever evidence or events come up during the campiagn.

This is why I said initial presentation is so important - Feducci’s introductory two line blurb is the only one that mentioned the poor; the campaigner came off as fussy and the detective as frightening. So most people aligned themselves with Fedduci and that’s that.

8

Feducci had (and still has) a significant advantage just based on name recognition:

  • He’s the only candidate identified by his name, and not a descriptive title[/li][li]He’s the most well known to players, given his significant past interactions with the player character.

A known candidate has a distinct advantage over an unknown one, before even bringing policy and character into it.

9

as an aside, a way to incorporate actual debate into the game in an unavoidable manner (say, put in another fluff box to the side where players can submit short lines or paragraphs trying to “win” other players over, after those are reviewed by a FBG staffer) might be the best way to actually sway votes

10

Interesting in theory, but I highly doubt FBG have the staff to spare for reviewing this all messages and approving them.

11

the old &quotmysteries&quot tab might be a good precedent how not to do it, but they certainly have shown that it can be done, and in much larger volumes over a longer period of time
edited by IHNIWTR on 7/3/2017

12

Interesting in theory, but I highly doubt FBG have the staff to spare for reviewing this all messages and approving them.[/quote]

They do have a Twitter account that retweet players election comments, so a frame might work?

13

It would appear that you don’t need to be a POSI to become notorious…

Is this a bug or a feature?

14

[color=#cc0099]It is most certainly a bug - we’re looking into it now, thanks![/color]

15

About debates would it be possible to know if it is your turn on the story tab instead of everything playing out in the message tab after that first invitation to debate.

16

Why bother ballot stuffing for a candidate who is already winning?

17

This new interests me more than I thought it would. I am also more active in this election than last year’s. With that said, if anyone would like to debate me, send a request. I will gladly accept. But be warned, I am a Feducci supporter.

18

[quote=dov]Feducci had (and still has) a significant advantage just based on name recognition:

  • He’s the only candidate identified by his name, and not a descriptive title[/li][li]He’s the most well known to players, given his significant past interactions with the player character.

A known candidate has a distinct advantage over an unknown one, before even bringing policy and character into it.[/quote]

Yeah. As with last year, as soon as the the candidates were announced it was clear who the winner would be.

Basically most popular NPC will win regardless of manifesto.

19

I’m not going to lie, I don’t understand the point of the Notoriety feature. Having a PVP system that provides menaces is great when it’s opt in. Having it so that &quotHey, you’re working on the festival we’ve given you. Great, you’re now a target, have fun.&quot isn’t quite so much. People who’re playing the election and are avoiding the PVP side of things are still going to get hit unless they avoid doing the major parts of the election for three days. Making the opt-in for a PVP system half of an event just seems to me like you’re punishing the rest of the playerbase for not picking Agitator, as for a day they’re getting the downsides without being able to fire back.

20

To some extent I think Agaitators have been at a disadvantage so far. As far as I can tell there are fewer agitators overall, they can only have one mob after them at a time and quite often there is nobody available to mob. Then they need to play Flash Lays to get election resources and cannot do so if they have a mob after them. This opportunity balances things by allowing, for a very short time, Agitators to target anybody with a quality that is removed once they have been mobbed.

Campaigners have been able to ask anybody else supporting the same candidate for resources; Fixers have been able to help anybody on their side who needed Scandal or Suspicion dealt with. I think it only fair to allow Agitators a chance and maybe they need this to be able to get Influencing the Election up to 10.

Edit - Failbetter have the numbers and I am sure they wouldn’t do this without a good reason.
edited by reveurciel on 7/3/2017