Jump to content
270soft Forum
MattyN

Feature You'd Most Like to See

Recommended Posts

Name the new game feature idea you've had or seen that you'd most like to see adopted into the game here.

Or, name your top 5.

More electoral systems. So far there is FPTP and the Australian STV.

PR for example would be quite simple to do and you could have an option of deciding the % elected by PR.. with the rest elected by FPTP. That would open up literally hundreds of countries to scenario making as well as Presidential allow sims with PM4E. Also give the option for a threshold to be represented in PR... eg. 10% like in Germany and Turkey.

Another idea would be two-round FPTP. Like the Australian STV but with a single second preference/ vote transfer.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like a "Test" setting, where you could run a scenario with only the computer playing every role. It'd be neat to use to test out to see how a scenario runs and with ALL the players are at the same expertise level.

Yeah, that would be cool!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree....PR would be an excellent addition as Dr_Abc said....Germany would be quite facinating as the last election in Sep 2003 proved...

Cheers,

Desmond.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will repeat what I said b4 - "external events" should influnece issue momentum regionally - headline in say 2000 - "Body fluids linked to President found on Dress" or "Kickback money deposited in GOP contractor's Swiss Bank" should kick momentum on whichevrer issuue it is

had, say in 1968, Humphrey had the benefit of headlines like "Peace is at hand," "North Vietnamese agree to Partition of country" - etc - he might have won

same thing last go: for Kerry headline "Abu Grahib Officer in Charge says White House Memo said 'do whatever is necessary'"

for Dubya: "Senior Iraqi Intel Officer says WMD 'secretly' transported to Syria"

such like, then your canidadtes issue position and issue mo' would be effected

I don't know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recounts don't seem to be that important to me (while yes they are becoming important in real life, most of the time it has to do with idiotic moves by people than the candidates themselves).

Networking would be cool

Election and Re-Election would be cool as well.

Specific Areas(cities) would be great as well.

A Democract would go to NYC for fundraising/campaigning, but maybe not Kansas City. Dems and Reps would go to the I-4 corridor in Florida 25 timeseach, but Dems might might not go to the panhandle.

I like the idea of specific people, but isn't that what the issues are for? Perhaps an easy way for developers to do this is have more issues, but also have more endorsers that would only affect that issue momentum.

Having different levels of support in each state in how well the party is established would be great. Some external events in the states as well that would be great as well.

Hurricanes in Florida, a scandal of a republican governor in some state, a depressed economy someplace but a soaring economy some place else

The ability to debate a bit better (while I don't want to bring in other games The Political Machine, had a portion when you interviewed you answer some basic multiple choice questions, something like that could be good) also could be applied to the interviews.

Being able to incorporate the future Congress Forever and President Forever would be great as well together would be great as well.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mikerey,

Thanks for the suggestions. Can you expand on what you meant by "I like the idea of specific people, but isn't that what the issues are for? Perhaps an easy way for developers to do this is have more issues, but also have more endorsers that would only affect that issue momentum."?

Sincerely,

Anthony Burgoyne

80soft.com

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but:

Close states should be called later in the game. Say, the polls close in Ohio at 8:00, but Ohio is within 1-2%, then it should not be called until 4-5 hours after the polls close. Then, let's say PA is within 3-4%, then it should not be called until 3-4 hours after the polls close. All other states are called within an hour after the polls close, except blowout states, like Utah in the present day or the southern states until the 1970's. On the side, you can have a box that keeps track of the vote totals under the heading "Too Close to Call". We acctually get to see the tallies counted up in those states.

It would make it more realistic and add some suspense.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I think would be cool is to be able to commit more fraud as an option. Right now we can plant spies in the opposing headquarters which is fun but not terribly useful. Allowing us to do things like rig vote-counts and circulate false stories or scandals in the media would be sweet. Probably a good idea to include a toggle for it though like with regionalism or dynamism...call it "dirty politics."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

said b4, say again

External Events should have Issue Momentum impact

a headline that comes up, during say 1968 - "Viet Cong take Saigon" should bolster the canidate who is anti-war

whereas, say, 2004 - "Saddam Captured, Admits WMD" should bolster the pro-war canidate

etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
said b4, say again

External Events should have Issue Momentum impact

a headline that comes up, during say 1968 - "Viet Cong take Saigon" should bolster the canidate who is anti-war

whereas, say, 2004 - "Saddam Captured, Admits WMD" should bolster the pro-war canidate

etc

yeah plus it would better in local sceneros like "mayor matthews cheats on wife, more to come" or stuff like that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
said b4, say again

External Events should have Issue Momentum impact

a headline that comes up, during say 1968 - "Viet Cong take Saigon" should bolster the canidate who is anti-war

An event like that would not have the same effect on everyone, though. I think that it should depend on the Regional Centers. An event like that might acctually motivate a more seriously pro-war state.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder the same thing we have been waiting 1 year and half. How much more do can they expect us to wait.  :o  :angry:

You're still around, so obviously a bit longer.

I'll post this here:

Would it be possible to work in a "popular vote" option? For example: in Russia, the president is elected by popular vote, not by an electoral vote system. So, in the new P4E2008, could we have a button to switch from an "electoral vote" system to a "popular vote" system? It'd probably work something like this:

Moscow:

Candidate X - 41 votes (41%)

Candidate Y - 38 votes (38%)

Candidate Z - 21 votes (21%)

Candidate X would win because they received the highest percentage of popular votes for the district/state/province/ect.

How does that sound?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're still around, so obviously a bit longer.

I'll post this here:

Would it be possible to work in a "popular vote" option? For example: in Russia, the president is elected by popular vote, not by an electoral vote system. So, in the new P4E2008, could we have a button to switch from an "electoral vote" system to a "popular vote" system? It'd probably work something like this:

Moscow:

Candidate X - 41 votes (41%)

Candidate Y - 38 votes (38%)

Candidate Z - 21 votes (21%)

Candidate X would win because they received the highest percentage of popular votes for the district/state/province/ect.

How does that sound?

Well they had that feature in P2000, so who knows...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

Thanks for the suggestions.

One particular:

The fraud and false stories ideas are interesting. To an extent, the PAC ads would cover false stories. We'll think about this.

Sincerely,

Anthony Burgoyne

80soft.com

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've thought for a long time that an amzing way to do ads would be Markets, not States.

for example. I live in New Jersey, but New Jersey has two main markets. New York City and Philly. If you were a politican you would come to NJ, but your ads would be put on those two markets.

The change would be that the New York City market would affect NY, NJ, and CT to a point and you could be much more precise in advertizing.

Also, this becomes more effective since different parts of a state have different politics and concerns.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah! That's a great idea! When you click ads, the map should change to a market map instead of a state map (like the one on the episode "Debate Camp" for West Wing fans out there)... I'd love to see that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make north vs. south a factor. 3 different options:

1. You could give a bonus to southern candidates in southern states and the opposite for the north. This would encourage players to 'balance the ticket'. From a gaming point of view it would be a little difficult though as some states are neither north nor south.

2. One way of doing it would be to give each state a file in which was determind it's relationship with other sates.

e.g. Ohio-Indiana 5

-Michigan 5

-Arizona 1

-Minnesota 3

and so on...

So a candidate from Ohio would recieve a bonus of 7 from Ohio because its his home state, 5 from some fairly similar neighbouring states (e.g. indiana) and 1 for a state that's on the other side of the country(Arizona). This would be applied to both presidential candidates and their running mates thus making north/south, rich/poor, urban/rural count.

3. Alternatively give each state ratings for the following from -2 to +2:

Urban/rural

Rich/poor

Multicultral/Allwhite

Religious/secular

Then give each candidate a rating.

Bush:

Urban/rural +2 (cowboy image)

Rich/poor +1 (percieved as fairly ordinary southerner)

Multicultral/all white -1 (speaks spanish, helps with ethnic minorities)

Religious/secular -1 (Seen as christian right)

So, in a state that has ratings that correspond with his, he gets a bonus, or vice versa.

E.g. a fictional state which we will call 'Lincoln state' has ratings of -1 (urban), -2 ( very rich), 0 (not massively diverse nor all white), +1 (secular). This would then work in a similar way to the regional issue centres.

I think this final option would work really well. It wouldn't be too dificult to implement and it could always be made optional. It's a change that would really make things more realistic as we wouldn't be looking just at a candidate's charisma but their style as well. This would allow the game to accomodate the way Bush looks normal in a rural, religious state but a bit foolish in a more affluent northern state. In short not just the ability but the personnality of each candidate would show, making them more '3 dimensional'.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to second the praise for that idea of yours, LiberalUK, and add that you could perhaps have a 'meter' to adjust the significance of such background personality variables. Ie. in some elections these may be more significant than in others (in particular applicable to those who make historical scenarios).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to second the praise for that idea of yours, LiberalUK, and add that you could perhaps have a 'meter' to adjust the significance of such background personality variables. Ie. in some elections these may be more significant than in others (in particular applicable to those who make historical scenarios).

Another great idea.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×