Jump to content
270soft Forum

thr33

Members
  • Content Count

    176
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

3 Followers

About thr33

  • Rank
    Political Guru

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    NY
  • Interests
    Politics (left-wing economically ; centrist socially ; right-wing on immigration ; non-interventionist), Math & Statistics, Economics, Basketball, Golf

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. thr33

    Favorability

    Ah okay, makes sense. Regarding the primaries, I had an interesting discussion a couple weeks ago. Maybe it's related to this. So, in primaries that are not true 'open' contests, candidates can receive non-ideological support: (1) The frontrunner receives an institutional bonus, and receives votes from blocs that prefer a safe choice. (2) The primary underdog (mostly in two-way races) receives an opposition bonus, and receives protest votes. Votes in both of these classes generally diminish when you get to three or more legitimate candidates (perhaps because more people will have a first choice). I was just wondering how this phenomenon (not sure if it has a name, but it plays out, with 92 GOP, 00 Dem, 16 Dem being some examples) would be handled in a system where each simulated voter has issue positions? Or maybe support for the front-runner could be a variable or issue position? Or maybe this is unnecessary just based on how primaries play out (a lot of this is based on early endorsements according to "The Party Decides")? (As an aside, in the general election phase this really isn't an issue, because even with defectors, both major parties have very high floors.)
  2. thr33

    Favorability

    I actually quite like that option. Particularly since it makes it easy to deal with data. When looking at other states, there's no way of determining total turnout unless a county/state indicates it. A lot of places don't report undervotes (which are key data IMO).
  3. thr33

    Favorability

    Very cool, sorry for the redundant question. I usually play on a Mac, will probably install and mess around on my PC today. Seems like this is a real gamechanger. So if someone plays well, negative campaigning (planting scandals, and negative ads) can lower favorability and turnout it seems. As you said above, this will play naturally into voting blocs, where there are certain groups who may not vote for the other major party, but may stay home (or vote third/minor).
  4. thr33

    Favorability

    Anthony, quick question on the bolded: Is 'not voting' in the rankings for eligible voters? I'm not sure what would trigger that behavior. Maybe having every candidate remaining below a certain threshold (say 2/10)? Or maybe you could have a hidden 'nobody' favorability. Could make the turnout game more variable/interesting.
  5. @Patine This BBC article lists some potential 2048 issues. It includes descriptions, but here are the 10 they laid out: • GENETIC MODIFICATION OF HUMANS • A MORE AGED POPULATION THAN EVER BEFORE • LOST CITIES • THE EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL MEDIA • NEW GEOPOLITICAL TENSIONS • SAFE CAR TRAVEL • DWINDLING RESOURCES • SETTLING OTHER WORLDS • BOOSTED BRAINPOWER • AI’S DOMINANCE IN OUR LIVES
  6. thr33

    Why is this happening?

    @admin_270 Just wondering, did you ever figure out what was causing this to happen? Will the fix be ready for inclusion in the October 15 update?
  7. thr33

    Moving Forward

    I agree. I'm not a high volume poster, but I've tried to avoid the main board as it has been increasingly full of heated political debates - far too much anger and vitriol for me. I've been busy though so it's worked out. I'm really looking forward to the 10/15 favorability update, I think I'll be back to my normal posting once it's released. Pretty excited about the possibilities for the gameplay engine.
  8. thr33

    Why is this happening?

    Makes sense. Would you move it to a larger scale (I think org. strength currently maxes at 5 points, so maybe 10)? I ask this because you'd probably want some separation between the majority party, the minority party, and third parties. Though maybe it's unnecessary, and with a quick tweak of org strength value the solid/leaning/undecided tier system would work fine.
  9. thr33

    Why is this happening?

    Would it be possible to add a setting for state party infrastructure attribute (maybe an irl representation of how strong parties are at the state level) alongside campaign infrastructure? Third party candidates who choose to specialize could lower a state's party infrastructure in their pet state(s) (i.e. McMullin, or a regional candidate like Thurmond or Wallace). Either visible or hidden. Not sure if this exists already under the hood, or if it doesn't, how hard it would be to implement (especially given how org. strength and foot soldiers interact with momentum; in reality a candidate could have a high floor performance but low momentum in a state).
  10. thr33

    Why is this happening?

    That's partly what I figured. The AI has gotten really good in primaries, and reacts very well to user state infrastructure and foot soldiers, makes playing as an underdog really difficult. I know that voter blocs/demographics are possibly planned for way down the line, but I wonder how much that could help? I guess maybe not all that much, since it still boils down to each state having definite and persuadable voters. Since a lot of the AI models real life I'd say, I guess the question is, what happens if a candidate puts a ton of money into a state that can't be won? I mean you don't want to go *too far* (recall several of the states Trump targeted were considered out of reach, but in reality the Midwest was ripe to flip). On the other hand, you have examples like Bush putting $10+ million or so into California in 2000, and he only got 41.7% of the vote there. I mean in real life even if you campaign in an out-of-reach state is there an absolute ceiling on momentum? What would be the response (maybe the Super PACs would target it hard)? Just thinking aloud, but I wonder what makes sense here.
  11. thr33

    Why is this happening?

    Oof. I haven't designed scenarios before and I know Anthony said it might be an AI behavior thing that could be fixed, but a few questions: (1) Do you get the same unrealistic results if you turn third parties off (other than the simulation party)? Might be an issue with how they're implemented or the goals or something. (2) Did you have primaries on? Maybe there's an issue with candidates building up infrastructure and foot soldiers in the primaries in certain states in one party, while in the other party those states don't matter. (3) Was there any indication this would happen from the state polling (also does the observer have the max polling attribute) leading up to election day? (4) Is the unrealistic state voting thing just something from the latest version? Or had you been seeing it for a while?
  12. thr33

    Getting new CPU

    I haven't been in the market for a laptop for a few years (though I probably will be soon) so I don't have a particular laptop rec, but here are a couple good sites for deals: https://slickdeals.net/computer-deals/?src=catnav_computers https://www.overclock.net/forum/327-online-deals/ Best of luck
  13. Ah gotcha. I have a pastebin document that I've been adding/deleting from for about a year now (~4000 words), it's all over the place though. Would be nice to organize it a bit (and do research on some topics where I have major holes in my knowledge, like tax policy, our nuclear arsenal in general, Central/South American geopolitics, specific green infrastructure proposals, intricacies of the abortion debate, etc).
  14. lol I'm not quite sure. My foreign policy broadly is probably as follows: • Eliminate engagement absent a direct (military) attack on the US territory • Complete immediate withdrawal of all troops from Afghanistan/Syria • Withdraw from international organizations with mutual defense pacts • Meet without preconditions with all nuclear powers to cool tensions/de-proliferate • Reduce military spending to the lowest theshold possible where we can maintain hegemony • Eliminate foreign aid and cease funding of foreign rebels/militias • Have the inspector general conduct a comprehensive analysis/audit of the CIA • End the practice of hot wars, replace with financial sanctions and trade in negotiations • Renegotiate existing trade agreements RE:labor standards and point of origin requirements
  15. That's awesome. How long did it take? I don't want to decide on a length and reverse engineer, but I imagine a proper document would be around 15 pages, give or take (of course I could see it running much longer if someone went country-by-country for foreign policy, or suggested specific legislation to introduce).
×