Jump to content
270soft Forum
admin_270

Prime Minister Forever - Australia 2010 Beta Feedback Thread

Recommended Posts

There were actually alot more than 12 independents running in the Australian Election and as I expected the 4 that were elected did not all end up voting the same way because they are independents and not a party.

That wouldn't work, because there are other independent candidates (12 total to be exact). I guess you could do split them into Independent-Right and Independent-Left, but you can't do 1 IND per party.

Well, for that to work, they would need to implement Coalitions, so it can accurately count the seats. (I agree that they need to add that, along with 2PP)

A few more items:

1. The first recap screen say (for example) P.M. Julia Gillard, Chair of the Gillard, welcome to the election. Could "Chair of the Gillard" be changed to "Leader of the Labor Party"?

2. The Strategy screen header says (for example) "Gillard Strategy". Could that be changed to "Labor Strategy" or "LAB Strategy"?

3. Also, I noticed a bug where the game creates "phantom" crusaders (their name is a long number), and If you cancel their creation, the game freaks out and gives you (in one case) 450,000,000 CPs for one turn. This also happens in Congress Forever 2010.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you really want a leader of the Independents if you are going to keep them all as one party then I would suggest Rob Oakeshott he seems to have been calling more of the shots in negotiations.

All noted. Yes, I'm thinking of putting Katter as leader of the Independents, simply because he was getting disproportionate media time after the election. Feedback welcome on this,

Anthony Burgoyne

Lead Game Designer

http://www.TheorySpark.com

Games that spark the political imagination!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were actually alot more than 12 independents running in the Australian Election and as I expected the 4 that were elected did not all end up voting the same way because they are independents and not a party.

In the game, there are 12. In real life, there were more. The way the game is currently setup, each seat can only have 1 independent. I do agree that there should be more in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, these will all be fixed in the next version.

Anthony Burgoyne

Lead Game Designer

http://www.TheorySpark.com

Games that spark the political imagination!

A few more things:

1. When the game loads, the following message appears: Your committee, the Gillard, has $35,000,000 to begin with. Should that be changed to: The Labor Party has $35,000,000 to begin with.?

2. On the Party information screen (pre-game load), the leader's name says "Julia Gillard (Gillard)". Could the "(Gillard)" be dropped?

3. Is there a way to switch leaders (ie. Switch Gillard with Rudd)?

4. Dawson, QLD candidate George Christenson is going to sit as a National MP.

5. The Electorates of Barton, Indi, and Batman are spelled barton, indi, and batman in the game (they need to be capitalized).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep forgetting to mention but it bugs me, on election night the states report left to right, by that I mean west to east. In Australia the states would report right to left, "East to West" often with the first results coming in from Tasmania because of it lower population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - noted.

Anthony Burgoyne

Lead Game Designer

http://www.TheorySpark.com

Games that spark the political imagination!

I keep forgetting to mention but it bugs me, on election night the states report left to right, by that I mean west to east. In Australia the states would report right to left, "East to West" often with the first results coming in from Tasmania because of it lower population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A semi-major thing:

Here is a snippet of the political_units.xml file for the 2010 scenario:

<political_unit id="reid">
				<population>149500</population>
				<eligible_voters>95873</eligible_voters>
				<type>fundamental</type>
				<layer>district</layer>
				<name>Lowe</name>
				<abbreviation>Lowe</abbreviation>
				<cities>
				</cities>
				<election_events>
				   <event>
					  <type>General</type>
					  <ballot>
						 <party id="liberal" candidate="Peter Cooper" strength="2" fundraising="3" initial_funds="0"></party>
						 <party id="labor" candidate="John Murphy" strength="3" fundraising="3" initial_funds="0" incumbent_party="true" highscore_bonus="0.5" description="Sitting MP from Lowe"></party>
						 <party id="green" candidate="Adam Butler" strength="2" fundraising="3" initial_funds="0"></party>
					</ballot>
					  <seat>
						 <type>FPP</type>
						 <number>1</number>
					  </seat>
				   </event>
				</election_events>
			  </political_unit>

That political unit is named Lowe, but the id (see line 1) is Reid (which happens to be the correct name for the political unit).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How far away is preferential voting? The starting numbers seem to be accurate but without preference flows the results are skewed in the Coalition's favour (which is a pain as I want to have to work hard to get an Abott majority).

I do wonder why the Libs and the Nats are completely separate parties, as Abott is the public face of the coalition and they run an essentially joint campaign. I am sure it would be simpler to have "The Coalition" as a party as that is how the results are reported in the media and also how campaigning works on the ground in a GE.

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Liberals and Nationals run against each other in several seats this time around and one of the controversial results of the election was that Wilson Tuckey the sitting Liberal member for O'Connor in Western Australia lost his seat to the Nationals Candidate.

The two parties have a very strong Coalition but they are separate parties with slightly different philosophies.

How far away is preferential voting? The starting numbers seem to be accurate but without preference flows the results are skewed in the Coalition's favour (which is a pain as I want to have to work hard to get an Abott majority).

I do wonder why the Libs and the Nats are completely separate parties, as Abott is the public face of the coalition and they run an essentially joint campaign. I am sure it would be simpler to have "The Coalition" as a party as that is how the results are reported in the media and also how campaigning works on the ground in a GE.

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect we'll probably be going to the polls again within a year!

How lucky you guys down-under are that your politicians can throw in the towel so soon, here in the UK they hold on for as long as possible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Scott Buchholz (MP for Wright) is actually sitting as a Liberal (I originally thought he was sitting as a National, but this says Liberal)

2. Neil Zabel, Candidate from Blair, QLD: should he be listed as a Liberal as opposed to National (in 2007 the MP who lost was of the Liberal Party)?

3. I still think that Flynn, QLD should be in the regional political unit of Queensland (instead of S.E. Queensland) as it's boundaries are clearly outside of S.E. Queensland (see this map)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, noted.

Anthony Burgoyne

Lead Game Designer

http://www.TheorySpark.com

Games that spark the political imagination!

1. Scott Buchholz (MP for Wright) is actually sitting as a Liberal (I originally thought he was sitting as a National, but this says Liberal)

2. Neil Zabel, Candidate from Blair, QLD: should he be listed as a Liberal as opposed to National (in 2007 the MP who lost was of the Liberal Party)?

3. I still think that Flynn, QLD should be in the regional political unit of Queensland (instead of S.E. Queensland) as it's boundaries are clearly outside of S.E. Queensland (see this map)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering if with the coalition parties if perhaps they should all be running their separate campaigns...

I know there was only one National leader and one Liberal Leader

But the Nationals and Liberals ran against each other in several seats.

It was actually the Liberal National Party running in all the seats in Queensland and

It was the Country Liberal Party running in seats in the Northern Territory.

Though they all work together they are all separate parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sjbloor,

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you suggesting an additional party (Country Liberal), or saying party affiliation should be changed for some of the candidates, or something else?

Anthony Burgoyne

Lead Game Designer

http://www.TheorySpark.com

Games that spark the political imagination!

I was wondering if with the coalition parties if perhaps they should all be running their separate campaigns...

I know there was only one National leader and one Liberal Leader

But the Nationals and Liberals ran against each other in several seats.

It was actually the Liberal National Party running in all the seats in Queensland and

It was the Country Liberal Party running in seats in the Northern Territory.

Though they all work together they are all separate parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Liberal Party and the National Party merged in Queensland to become the Liberal National Party (LNP). Traditionally the National Party had always performed better than the Liberal Party. The National Party was in power for 32 years (1957-1989) thanks to a gerrymander. The Liberals have had 2 Premiers in the 20th century. Since 1989 Queensland has been a ALP State. To be a more effective opposition and to improve their chances of winning office the two conservative parties merged.

The National Party runs in all states except Queensland.

The Country Liberal Party in the Northern Territory has basically the same platform as the Federal and State Liberal Parties.

Combined the Liberal Party, National Party, Liberal National Party and Country Liberal Party form the Coalition. They have one thing in common. They are anti-ALP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Liberal Party and the National Party merged in Queensland to become the Liberal National Party (LNP). Traditionally the National Party had always performed better than the Liberal Party. The National Party was in power for 32 years (1957-1989) thanks to a gerrymander. The Liberals have had 2 Premiers in the 20th century. Since 1989 Queensland has been a ALP State. To be a more effective opposition and to improve their chances of winning office the two conservative parties merged.

The National Party runs in all states except Queensland.

The Country Liberal Party in the Northern Territory has basically the same platform as the Federal and State Liberal Parties.

Combined the Liberal Party, National Party, Liberal National Party and Country Liberal Party form the Coalition. They have one thing in common. They are anti-ALP.

Thanks Bob for explaining what I was trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...