Jump to content
270soft Forum

texasyojimbo

Members
  • Content Count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About texasyojimbo

  • Rank
    Political Monster

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. texasyojimbo

    1968 (with Primaries)

    I'd like a copy jim.dallas@gmail.com
  2. texasyojimbo

    I've always wondered...

    I had thought it was a glowing eye. But I have to say this thread is very amusing.
  3. texasyojimbo

    Bug

    List Index Out of Bounds (-1) on Turn Done. This occurs in both the standard/pre-packaged 2008 scenario and others. Seems to occur about midway through the primaries most of the time. This really has the effect of crippling this game, and seems to occur regularly. P4E should really have an autosave to at least allow recovery from the bug (trying to save after the (-1) bug results in another list index out of bounds (16) bug). OS is Win XP SP2, hardware is Acer Travelmate 2420. Version is 1.00.5.1
  4. texasyojimbo

    Major Update to 2008 election

    I would like a copy. jim.dallas@gmail.com Thank you very much!
  5. texasyojimbo

    Suggestion: Regions inside states

    This might require some heavy lifting on the programming side (it would require some fundamental changes to a lot of the functions - I don't have any idea what the source code for P4E looks like but I can guess). Anyway, I think it would be a major advance if campaign regions and voting regions were disentanged. What do I mean by that? As it now stands, you campaign in states ("campaign regions"). You barnstorm a state. You run ads in a state. Etc. And at the end of the campaign, the states ("voting regions") tally up the votes. In real life, candidates run ads in media markets, not states. Candidates campaign in cities or counties, not states. The "campaign region" is not the same as the "voting region" in real life. In most cases, campaign regions are sub-units of voting region (e.g. the Houston media market (lets call it the Houston campaign region) is, geographically a sub-unit of the state of Texas (the Texas voting region)). But in some cases, campaign regions stretch across state lines. For example, the Philadelphia media market (the Philadelphia campaign region) stretches across state lines and affects the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware voting regions. A number of games in the past - Power Politics '92 being the grandaddy of them all - have partially or fully disentangled campaign and voting regions. In Power Politics (which the designer has made freeware - google it and download it if you don't know what I am talking about) you can campaign in Houston on the environmental issue, and it will affect your popularity in Houston which in turn affects the outcome of the Texas vote. To the best of my knowledge, Power Politics '92 didn't have cross-voting region affects (e.g. Philadelphia). Because it simulated campaign regions only as sub-units of voting regions, I call that partial disentanglement. In partial disentanglement the voting region's vote tally is simply the sum of the vote tallies in all of the campaign regions. Having full disentanglement (e.g. Philadelphia is campaign region, campaigning in Philadelphia would affect outcome in multiple voting regions) would be much harder to program, I think, because you'd have to apportion parts of the campaign region tallies to the voting regions (e.g. 33 percent of the Philadelphia campaign region vote tally goes into the sum for the New Jersey voting region). I think we probably could be spared that. At any rate, I think disentanglement - either partial or full - would make for a much more realistic game. Moreover, it would make it much easier to design scenarios at the state level (e.g. Texas Governor scenario - the vote tally is state wide but the campaigning goes on across the state). In terms of implementing disentanglement in the GUI, I think Power Politics '92 had a good implementation. It used good old fashioned drop-down boxes. I'm sure there would be prettier ways to implement in P4E though. At any rate, I really hope this suggestion is considered seriously, since I consider the conflation of voting and campaign regions to be the single biggest inaccuracy in P4E.
  6. texasyojimbo

    Feature You'd Most Like to See

    The atomic unit of politics in President Forever is the state. That is not exactly how things actually work, however. Consider the following outcome. Playing as Dean, I won West Virginia, Virginia and Tennessee by healthy margins; and yet lost North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio, and Arkansas by pretty substantial margins. Tennessee is a perfect example of why the state is not the best atomic unit. Tennesseeans have traditionally viewed their state as being three separate communities bound together - East Tennessee, Middle Tennessee, and West Tennessee. East Tennessee has more in common with West Virginia than western Tennessee; Western Tennessee has more in common with eastern Arkansas than with east Tennessee. There are several different ways for a Democrat to win Tennessee - traditionally, this has involved running up the score in west Tennessee and cutting losses in East Tennessee (which is traditionally Republican). But a presidential candidate that can run up the score in west Tennessee would probably also succeed in carrying Arkansas and Missouri - or at the very least making those contests very close. Alternatively, any candidate who did well enough in Appalachian East Tennessee would probably do fairly well in West Virginia and Kentucky. These regional correlations often seem rather hit-or-miss in P4E, which doesn't surprise me because there seem not to be modeled. What I think I'm getting at is, there needs to be three levels of simulation and not one: * Level One: sub-state level (e.g. "East Tennessee") * Level Two: state level (e.g. "Tennessee") * Level Three: regional level (e.g. "Appalachia") Issue and candidate appeal would be simulated at the regional level, with each sub-state being tied to the region it lies within. For example, if Bush won 60 percent of the vote in Appalachia, and Republicans traditionally do 2 points better in East Tennessee than in the Appalachian region as a whole, then Bush would carry East Tennessee with 62 percent of the vote. The sub-states would then be aggregated to give the state total. If Bush carried East Tennessee (for simplicities sake, let's say all three regions are a third of Tennessee's population) with 62 percent of the vote, Middle Tennessee with 50 percent of the vote, and and lost West Tennessee with 48 percent of the vote, then Bush would win 53 percent of the vote in Tennessee. For a better sense of what I am trying to get at, see this web site: http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/6/29/123833/493
  7. texasyojimbo

    Some things

    Oops, wrong forum!
  8. texasyojimbo

    Some things

    The atomic unit of politics in President Forever is the state. That is not exactly how things actually work, however. Consider the following outcome. Playing as Dean, I won West Virginia, Virginia and Tennessee by healthy margins; and yet lost North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio, and Arkansas by pretty substantial margins. Tennessee is a perfect example of why the state is not the best atomic unit. Tennesseeans have traditionally viewed their state as being three separate communities bound together - East Tennessee, Middle Tennessee, and West Tennessee. East Tennessee has more in common with West Virginia than western Tennessee; Western Tennessee has more in common with eastern Arkansas than with east Tennessee. There are several different ways for a Democrat to win Tennessee - traditionally, this has involved running up the score in west Tennessee and cutting losses in East Tennessee (which is traditionally Republican). But a presidential candidate that can run up the score in west Tennessee would probably also succeed in carrying Arkansas and Missouri - or at the very least making those contests very close. Alternatively, any candidate who did well enough in Appalachian East Tennessee would probably do fairly well in West Virginia and Kentucky. These regional correlations often seem rather hit-or-miss in P4E, which doesn't surprise me because there seem not to be modeled. What I think I'm getting at is, there needs to be three levels of simulation and not one: * Level One: sub-state level (e.g. "East Tennessee") * Level Two: state level (e.g. "Tennessee") * Level Three: regional level (e.g. "Appalachia") Issue and candidate appeal would be simulated at the regional level, with each sub-state being tied to the region it lies within. For example, if Bush won 60 percent of the vote in Appalachia, and Republicans traditionally do 2 points better in East Tennessee than in the Appalachian region as a whole, then Bush would carry East Tennessee with 62 percent of the vote. The sub-states would then be aggregated to give the state total. If Bush carried East Tennessee (for simplicities sake, let's say all three regions are a third of Tennessee's population) with 62 percent of the vote, Middle Tennessee with 50 percent of the vote, and and lost West Tennessee with 48 percent of the vote, then Bush would win 53 percent of the vote in Tennessee. For a better sense of what I am trying to get at, see this web site: http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/6/29/123833/493
  9. You know, it may be easier to make a Star Trek scenario http://groups.msn.com/StarTrekAngelsDawn/galacticmap.msnw http://www.netmoon.com/startrek/maps/geo.htm http://www.netmoon.com/startrek/maps/pol.htm http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsis...e-christian.jpg
  10. texasyojimbo

    WHAT THE?

    This can happen for a number of reasons, usually because one of your scenario files has a bug in them, probably one which fouls up an array. Check to make sure you have the correct number of items in each part of your files. You will probably find an answer on this board as to specific instances of this.
  11. texasyojimbo

    Other Election Sims

    I actually coded my own Tennesee governor sim in QBASIC about 10 years ago (imagine the Nebraska governor sim in text mode). It sucked, but it didn't crash like Election Day does.
  12. texasyojimbo

    Other Election Sims

    I guess the real challenge in the Nebraska game is winning all three sectors of Nebraska. My best so far is +137923 votes, carrying districts 1 and 2, and losing by about 7000 votes (69715 to 76487) in the 3rd.
  13. texasyojimbo

    80soft for america

    Here's my info Jim Dallas Governor Texas Democrat Abortion: Centrist Aff. Action: Centrist BB: CR BT: CL CFR: CL Eco: CL Ed: Centrist FT: Centrist Gun-Control: CR Same-Sex: CL Immigration: Centrist Mil. Fundign: Centrist Mil. Int: C-L PT: Centrist PHC: CL Ren. En: Left Social Security: CL Terrorism: Centrist Overall I'm centrist-libertarian on social policy, center-left on foreign and economic policy. Anyhoo, I normally rate my character attributes "straight-threes" because it makes it harder to sim. However, I will of course defer to whatever you think is appropriate. Or maybe George W. Bush's 2000 attributes (last Texas governor to be a national candidate).
  14. texasyojimbo

    "Other Issues" Platform

    Stem-Cell Research ................. L (Support overturning Bush EO, modest funding increase) Kyoto Protocal ................. C (Support adoption of some kind of climate treaty, but not necessarily Kyoto) Gay Adoption ................. L (Support without any special enthusiasm) Congressional Term Limits ................. LL (I suppose the far-left position is complete opposition?) Canadian Drug Importation ................. L (Support generally, look to fix other problems with health care) The VA ................. L (Support)
  15. texasyojimbo

    Of pies

    Does the news event "Candidate hit with pie" actually do anything? It comes up a lot. It's kind of silly.
×