Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-2 Poor

About LumineVonReuental

  • Rank
    Political Geek

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Somewhere in my mind...
  • Interests
    Politics, History, Videogames, Literature
  1. Well, this scenario beta also works well, there are lesser problems due to the July start (even if I would recommend September) and most of the primaries are playable. The issues I have found so far are two: 1. The lack of "favourite son" effect: While candidates like Giuliani and Gingrich can carry their homestates without any problems, there are candidates like Bob Graham who have the same strength in all 50 states. I know it must be hell to set individual strength to all candidates in all of the states, but this is something that could be improved in the future. 2.- Ron Paul. Somehow, and in every game in which he was present, he had 50% leads in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina by October, and despite minor problems while fighting Dubya, Romney and Giuliani, he always prevailed with a supermajority of delegates. Still, I think these are just minor details, these scenarios are simply awesome... Please, keep up the good work!
  2. This looks great! I tried playing it and I had a very interesting race with Dan Quayle v. Joe Biden ("A battle of the Gaffes"). It's quite great for a beta, and I have some suggestions: 1.-Al Gore should be stronger, I had him run against Bill Bradley and/or some minor democrats and he always lost the primaries in landslides. 2.- I think the scenario should start in October/November, otherwise it's just too early and the primaries seem to go out of control (like John McCain winning Iowa with 70% against Jack Kemp or Dubya). 3.- Colors. I know it's hard to assign colors due to the limited numbers, I found that red appears too often with democrats (I tried playing the RL field of 1992 and everybody but Clinton was in the same shade of red). Finally, keep up the good work, I'd love to see a full version!
  3. I just sent the 1972 Scenario to all of you, full credit goes to NVGonzalez!
  4. Actually, an user in the Atlas Forum did one for 1972, and it's quite accurate (as long as you don't play as George Wallace), it has Nixon's challengers McCloskey and Ashbrook, Schmitz and the American Independent Party and the whole democratic field of that year.
  5. Magnificent! I think this scenario will be quite interesting (the 1964/1968 scenarios I played never really showed the full potential of Democrats and Republicans in the 1960' - early 1970'). I would like to know what happens with the American Independent Party, who will lead them this time? Smathers and McCarthy challenging Humphrey is a very interesting idea (I assume Smathers will try to be the next Kennedy), but I think a more powerful southern democrat is missing (like George Wallace or John Connally), and the GOP should be a massacre with Reagan and Agnew trying to finish the liberals. However, I have my doubts about Gerald Ford running for president, I think he wasn't interested on the job before Nixon and Agnew both resigned in real life. And, as a last request, any chance for George McGovern, Charles Percy or Margaret Chase-Smith running in the primaries?
  6. This could never happen in real life, and yet it was a great game... I turned Perry and Romney off, Palin, Christie and Huckabee on, and the primaries would have been a Palin landslide after her victories in Iowa and New Hampshire if Gingrich hadn't stopped her in Florida, Christie in Nevada and myself in Minnesota and Colorado. After winning the primaries right after Illinois, I decided to focus on Pennsylvania and the Pacific Coast instead of launching everything into Ohio, Virginia and Iowa (Florida and North Carolina went republican pretty quickly). Choosing Mitt Romney as the VP, sending Obama bankrupt and winning the last two debates still left the whole election night in a cliffhanger, and I only won because of Pennsylvania and California, which I won by just two points. Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode almost costed me the election considering that they took enough votes in Ohio, Virginia, Iowa and New Hampshire to cost me these states... And still, a tea party favourite winning by a hundred electoral votes, three million votes and 4.5% votes for the third party candidates seems a little bit... odd.
  7. Great, I took a time to play this scenario, and while I liked the democratic race (In the GOP I think Perry would have a better chance in the south and Paul could be stronger in one or two states), the general election was the best part... In the end I played it three times and the Dubai Peace Summit always succedeed, but I think Romney was just lucky... Excelente job!
  8. Sure, for now I will delete the link, it's better to wait until the new version arrives. (Great work, by the way!)
  9. Oh, sorry! I didn't realise you were here... Should I delete this now o when the new version is out?
  10. Hello, I decided to upload the GSS scenario to Mediafire in the case anybody wants to download it (I suppose it's easier that way), all credit goes to the author, Tayya, a member of the Alternate History Discussion Board forum. This scenario follows the premise of Ross Perot winning the 1992 election and going for reelection in 1996. The timeline that inspired the scenario is going through the 2000 primaries by now, and it can be read here: http://alternatehistory.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=208277&page=52. A little extra info on the scenario: Candidates: Democratic Party: (Bill Clinton not a candidate because of certain issues of the timeline) Gov. Ann Richards Sen. Paul Wellstone Sen. Al Gore Sen. Sam Nunn Sen. John Kerry Frm. Gov. Douglas Wilder Sen. Joe Biden Sen. Evan Bayh Sen. Bill Bradley Sen. Jay Rockefeller Gov. Bob Casey (OFF) Jesse Jackson (OFF) Sen. Bob Kerrey (OFF) Rep. Dick Gephardt (OFF) Freedomite/Freedom Party: Pres. Henry Ross Perot Vice Pres. Jerry Brown (OFF) Republican Party: General Norman Schwarzkopf Fmr. Gov. Carroll Campbell Gov. Pete Wilson Sen. Phil Gramm Fmr. Gov. Lamar Alexander Rep. Bob Dornan Sen. Richard Lugar Fmr. Sec. of Education William Bennett Steve Forbes Fmr. Gov. John McKernan (OFF) Pat Buchanan (OFF) Sen. Bob Dole (OFF) Enjoy the scenario! (I hope that a sequel is made based on how the 2000 election goes)
  11. Sorry to interrupt, Elliot, I think those ideas about the Ryan Plan seem to be actually correct, but considering that there are certain parts of the goverment that are still going Democratic (like the Senate), and that the Supreme Court will not necessarily favor the Republicans, wouldn't that mean that the plan will not be implemented? (But I still know little about the functioning of the american goverment, so I think my argument might be wrong)Besides, I thought that the President (and especially the Vice President) has very little to say on the economy as far as thing work out... (Am I right on that one?)
  12. Excellent! I have a doubt though, now that Paul Ryan is the 2012 VP nominee, will that reduce the VEEP options for the Republicans?
  13. Same here, scenarios from the beginning of the 1900' (specially if they have Theodore Roosevelt on in) should be awesome to play.
  14. Well, after trying some combinations in the GSS scenario I decided to try the 1972 scenario, where I had one of the most curious results I have ever seen... I decided to fight the General Election with George Wallace (assuming he doesn't get shot) vs Richard Nixon, and since the GE is set to be the real-life Nixon landslide, I was weak in the South (somewhat ironic) and my fighting chances were in the northern states and Nixon's homestate of Califonia. After getting most of the endorsements, I sent my troops to finish the President, which leaded me to victory at election night. The results, however, would be kind of ridiculous in real life... Strange results (taking real life results into account): -Nobody won his home state: Nixon lost California, Agnew lost Maryland, Wallace lost Alabama and Muskie lost Maine... -Schmitz and the American Independent Party managed to take 7% in Utah and 8% in Idaho. -All of the main candidates were right, centre right or far right. -Alabama was Nixon's best state. -With 700.000 votes (less than the actual difference of 2.4 millions), in Texas and California, Nixon would have won the electoral college but not the popular vote. The next time I'll try it from the primaries, hoping to see a different result...
  • Create New...