Jump to content
270soft Forum

Nulla Lex Ink.

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Nulla Lex Ink.

  • Rank
    Political Monster

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Awesome news! I love to run the presidential elections with the popular vote, and then take the top two finishers and run another game. That's great, but being able to do runoff primaries and a two round general in one game would be a nice, complete experience and I love to hear that it's in the cards Keep up the good work man!
  2. For President Infinity: Have you considered making a primary season based around popular vote possible, and for there to be an option for a runoff? And on the topic of two rounds, if I remember right awhile back you were working on it but ended up having to postpone it due to technical difficulties. Has there been anymore progress on that? Assuming I'm remembering correctly of course and not mixing it up with something else or just straight up imagining it, apologies if either of those is the case. I have to say those two things (popular vote primaries and runoffs/two rounds) are my most wanted features for this game. I believe it would make campaigns like French presidential elections, senate and gubernatorial races much closer to real life. The game is already near perfect but that stuff would just be icing on the cake for my personal experience, and for some campaigns I'm tinkering with. Great work on the game by the way. This is easily the best election simulator out there right now and I admire the hard work put into it. Always look forward to hearing how you've improved it!
  3. Sometimes I browse through on here just for fun, or trying to find campaigns not on the main site. This forum isn't quite as active or big as some other places I visit (which is a shame, because this is an awesome game and community) so it's easy for me to forget that something on the second or third page, or even low on the first page, is a bit old. I didn't realize how long it had been since the last posting until after I had posted my message.
  4. It's the unconventional ideas that made me refer to him as a nut, but I didn't actually mean it in a bad way. It's more a playful term that I use when referring to someone with unorthodox views, and I don't usually say it outside of conversations with people close to me who know it's not meant to be offensive, but I slipped up a little tonight due to my sleepiness. While I don't see some of his ideas as being realistic (and disagreeing with a few), I've enjoyed hearing him discuss them because he at least manages to not speak like your typical fringe candidate. That is, he actually sounds professional and like he knows what he's talking about. I'm actually really looking forward to seeing him in the debate (assuming the party doesn't block him somehow) and think that he could probably win if he ran for some other office like a seat in the House. Part of me thinks he's hoping to spring board from this to such a race, actually.
  5. Did you ever get to do this one? I'd love to play a Clinton vs. Giuliani game I actually came into this thread to suggest adding that nut Andrew Yang so I could play out a Democratic primary of him vs. Caroline Kennedy. Because that's the kind of stuff I think of when I'm bored, haha.
  6. It's early but it seems like this one is going to play out as it did in real life.
  7. That's perfectly understandable. Today I was updating the numbers for the 1860 election (I had earlier adjusted them to be more in line with the actual population of then, but that was largely just a guess; today I was using an actual bit of mathematics and I'm proud to say this is probably much more accurate) and I realized it's a very tedious process. I was going to do 1960, and I prolly will later on, but after that I was just kinda "Meh" about it. I've also been working on a Vermont 1998 Senate election and have found myself more than once getting very frustrated about it - For some reason, when I first started this, Tuttle always won the election by an overwhelming amount (We're talking 99% usually), and now after some number adjustments he's always losing it. Plus the GE ends up being more competitive than I'd like. As for fixing the 1908 election, all I did was I went in under "Regions" and adjusted the state numbers to be closer to reality. The Southern numbers were all spot on, but oddly the rest of the country was also very favorable to Bryan. The map looked more like 1912, with Taft only ahead in Utah and Vermont. Unfortunately, it still isn't quite where I'd like for it to be, seems like the test games earlier today were just a fluke. Sometimes I'll run a simulation game and for whatever reason, Taft still loses in a very lopsided election; a similar issue to my Vermont scenario, actually. I thought I got it working earlier today but the game I just ran had Taft losing every state. But I'll keep trying to work on it.
  8. I got 1908 straightened out. Initially it seemed to be very lopsided in Bryan's favor, but I adjusted the numbers and it's now in Taft's. Is there anywhere I should send this or put it?
  9. I'm giving my third vote to Willkie. FDR himself said "I'm happy I've won, but sorry Wendell lost," so let's make sure the president goes to his grave without any regrets and elect Mr. Willkie!
  10. Has there been any progress on two round voting? Because I would love to see that, especially in primaries so proper versions of races with runoffs could be done. On the primary note, the other feature I'd love to see is primaries being conducted via popular vote. I've been working on a Vermont 1998 scenario just for giggles and noticed that the primaries require delegates even though the general is popular vote.
  11. 1904 seems to be tied between Roosevelt and Debs at the moment, after I've cast my vote for the former. So far it looks like President Bryan was unseated by Debs, and President Debs may very well be unseated by Roosevelt. Any chance we can do this again some time, but with a runoff? And with different elections, maybe some senatorial, gubernatorial, and even other countries? Even if they don't use them for primaries or the GE. I think it'd be pretty fun to do
  12. I think Sanders will run, and honestly, with the crop of candidates available right now? He's probably the best chance the Democrats have. Even then, I feel like the election will be a very close one.
  13. @vcczar Hey man, turns out I had 1860 done the whole time. 1960 is the one I still have to redo. So just let me know whenever you're on that election so I can send you the corrected numbers
  14. @vcczar Hey man, how close to you are 1860? Still not rushing, once again doing the opposite. Been very sick for about a month now and I'm just beginning to recover from it, so I didn't have time to finish the 1860 population counts. I should in about a week or two though, just wanted to let you know I haven't forgotten that I said I'd do that for ya. Also, I got another suggestion for a future edit to a campaign. I'll put it on the page, I just wanted to run it by you first - Ross Perot as a Republican candidate in 1992. There were a few states in the primaries where he got a pretty significant percentage, despite not even being on the ballot.
  • Create New...