Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral


About thr33

  • Rank
    Political Guru

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Politics (left-wing economically ; centrist socially ; right-wing on immigration ; non-interventionist), Math & Statistics, Economics, Basketball, Golf
  1. Political Party Card Game

    This seems like a really fun concept. I'm more of a collector in card games than a player generally, but if there's cohesive gameplay it could fill a niche that definitely exists. I haven't played Twilight Struggle, so I'll check it out. I need to re-read the thread more closely, but would there be different kinds of cards? i.e. personality cards, legislative agenda cards, event cards (could range from wars, to scandal), maybe some sort of measure of polling and the economy/gdp growth (movement for both from previous quarter could be dice-based). Could have each turn be a quarter (players take turns either blind/simultaneously, or one player could initiate while moves cascade sequentially until both pass to the next turn). Personality cards for presidents (or other leaders) could have different attributes, and special effects (say if wars end by rolling 8 or higher on two 10-sided dice, one president could lower the requirement to 7s; or another president could automatically add to polling). If you want to make it more of a tabletop RPG thing, you could have a dungeon master, and allow players to engage in dirty politics. Low level stuff like pork, mid-level stuff like quid pro quo, arms running or even election rigging (depending on the degree of the scandal, maybe you roll a 20-sided die for N turns to see if it comes out, and if you get caught, the opposition party gets X bonus in the next election). I think foreign entities could be handled via event cards. So no need to track foreign governments. Say each turn, 3 cards are drawn, and those events dominate the quarter. It sounds like it's open-ended. Some ideas for victory conditions: (1) Passing N pieces of major, landmark legislation (2) The opposing party ceases to exist (not sure how a third party faction would work) (3) Or maybe, when you run out of personality cards, you lose? So both players could draw 10, you spend one when you lose an election or are termed out, or you can alternatively use them in your cabinet to improve diplomacy/economy, or to elect to the House/Senate (and maybe SCOTUS?) to achieve landmark legislation conditions. Just spitballing, but this is a really cool idea. Tons of possibilities.
  2. 2020 Election update

    Have been busy lately so haven't been on, but another piece about a potential Bannon 2020 run: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/bannon-for-president-trump-kushner-ivanka
  3. RIP John Anderson

    Source. He's probably one of the candidates that'll add excitement to scenarios with Anthony's upcoming favorability update. In real life, even if he did draw more from Carter, the margin was too large for it to make a difference. With a skilled player however (or if a weaker candidate makes it out of the GOP primaries), I imagine Anderson could be a factor in a close election.
  4. Sorry, I should have gotten back to you. The last week was hell for me. Apologies for not getting these to you earlier, I'm a bit embarrassed. It looks like you did the endorsers on your own, but in case these are of any use, I'll attach my copy. Sorry again, and thanks for all you do. endorsers files.zip
  5. Sorry it's taken so long so far. I was manually doing all of these changes in the editor, which was taking forever. I realized a bit late, that I can directly edit the endorsers.xml file. So I'm doing that now - I set up a spreadsheet with the info to insert, and I'm just copying and pasting. I want to say I'll have them both to you by the end of the weekend, but frankly, it probably shouldn't have taken this long.
  6. In case it helps though, I can set the stances to a default that makes sense. It looks like in the 1992 scenario for instance (which has endorsers from a decade or so later), the defaults are: Center-Left for Dems ; Center-Right for GOP Should those be the defaults? Or should the defaults be: Left for Dems ; Right for GOP I'll do whichever is easier (meaning, whichever requires fewer changes afterwards).
  7. Sounds good, I'll give it a shot. Regarding stances/abilities, I probably don't have the requisite knowledge to know who the more moderate/extreme Senators/Governors were in the 90s, though after the Endorsers are set up, I could take a look (I actually have a bunch of old Almanacs of American Politics, I think they have voting records). One other question - Should these be the Governors/Senators at the beginning of the scenario, or at the beginning of the general election? I know some states have gubernatorial races that are in off-years (which may coincide with the early primaries), and there are occasional special elections. Though, these are few and far between, so I guess I could go with the beginning of the scenario and it would be easy to make changes if need be.
  8. Ah okay, gotcha. What would I need to set? The "Name" and "Description" fields seem obvious. I guess setting "Issues" to either Right or Left based on party (I assume some are Center- or Far- left or right, but I'm guessing you'll set those), the Effects panel (presumably 1 Momentum and 100 Footsoldier chance for their home state) and in the Surrogate panel, the Home/Barnstorming Bonuses fields to match their home states? And zero everything else out? I could give it a shot, if @TheLiberalKitten doesn't mind. Which one should I start with?
  9. I haven't really worked on editing scenarios before (still trying to figure out how to win elections in the game), but if there's anything I can do to help (in terms of busy work or tedious stuff) I'd be happy to give it a shot. I'm on a mac if that matters (though I don't know that it makes a difference in the editor).
  10. 1992-2016 What-if candidates

    I think Trump makes the most sense for 1988. Not sure if he's in your current scenario (haven't gotten to that year yet; if he is, please disregard). He had a major speech in NH in the fall of 1987, and there was a Draft Trump movement. Relevant articles: NYT (1987): New Hampshire Speech Earns Praise for Trump LA Times (1987): Non-Candidate Trump Talks Tough on Political Issues Boston.com (2014): The man responsible for Donald Trump’s never-ending presidential campaign Politico (2016): The True Story of Donald Trump’s First Campaign Speech—in 1987 Time (2016): Meet the Man Who Encouraged Donald Trump to Run for President in 1987
  11. What if Poll for historical scenarios

    The way I figure, if I'm going to play as a candidate who is ineligible for another term, it means that I'm supposing that he didn't already serve one or two terms, or maybe didn't serve at all. Like jvikings said, if Obama is running in 2016, that means in the history the scenario takes place in, he wasn't already a two-term president.
  12. Well, maybe an endorsement is unlikely. But I could see Breitbart *unofficially* supporting her in her run (particularly throughout the primaries), or at least taking a hands-off approach. They've written/linked a bunch of positive stuff on her in the last year, and Bannon was one of the people pushing for her to receive consideration for Secretary of State.
  13. Bannon would be fun (note: I'm not unbiased). I'm not sure what attributes would make sense for him. Probably high spin (Breitbart) and knowledge (intelligent guy, Harvard Business School and Goldman alum, and is very well read - the new bio on him just came out, here's an article listing his favorite books). I think he's a pretty solid speaker (between CPAC, state parties, etc), and think he has decent charisma (would be a solid 3 I think). Maybe a 5 for ideologue (or a 4 at least, since I know you've said before that the distribution is tight)? I think it's more likely he gets behind someone else though. Tulsi seems likely, it's been reported how much he likes her. It's also possible he gets behind Cuban, running as a Democrat (there were a bunch of articles a week or so ago). Bannon or Breitbart probably makes sense for an endorser for elections from 2014 on. I think the mega-donor Mercer family (either separately as Robert and his daughter Rebekah, or together) might make sense too, from 2010 on.
  14. I don't (didn't think he was going to anyway, less likely now), but I could be wrong.
  15. Thanks, good to know. Seems like a good distribution (pretty close to a bell curve).