Jump to content
270soft Forum

Feature You'd Most Like to See


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That's a pretty cool idea! It would be fun connecting with other campaigners for a game.

Certainly, but it is important to make sure the candidates all have reasonable shot at the money... at least some shot... Romney should have the edge...but it shouldn't be impossible for other candida

Good idea! Maybe you could also throw in Vice Presidential Interviews... you how much damage those did to Sarah Palin in 2008... I'd also like to see some ads on the Veeps. I know the McCain campaig

Posted Images

Besides the recount option, I thought of a few more ideas.

1) Allow a player to offer the VP slot if their combined delegate totals are a majority. Offering a VP slot AFTER winning the nomination offers little strategic value. Of course, if it isn't possible, running with a VP candidate in the primaries could be done. After all, Ronald Reagan chose Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania as his designated VP pick in the 1976 primary race.

2) Have the DNC superdelegates/RNC automatic delegates remain uncommitted or fluid during the race. Allow a candidate to sway and poach uncommitted delegates and allow a player to sway delegates in the event of a brokered convention.

3) In the event of an electoral college tie, allow the player to sway House delegations and senators in the balloting for choosing the president and vice president.

If the above have already been mentioned, I apologise. I did not read all 31 pages yet...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Allow a player to offer the VP slot if their combined delegate totals are a majority. Offering a VP slot AFTER winning the nomination offers little strategic value. Of course, if it isn't possible, running with a VP candidate in the primaries could be done. After all, Ronald Reagan chose Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania as his designated VP pick in the 1976 primary race.

This.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Allow a player to offer the VP slot if their combined delegate totals are a majority. Offering a VP slot AFTER winning the nomination offers little strategic value. Of course, if it isn't possible, running with a VP candidate in the primaries could be done. After all, Ronald Reagan chose Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania as his designated VP pick in the 1976 primary race.

2) Have the DNC superdelegates/RNC automatic delegates remain uncommitted or fluid during the race. Allow a candidate to sway and poach uncommitted delegates and allow a player to sway delegates in the event of a brokered convention.

Both of those. The convention as it stands is too blah. Just eliminating everyone but the top two doesn't make much sense when you ocnsider the idea of a brokered convention.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Maybe when the primaries and caucuses roll around, you can actually enter an election night format similar to that of the General Election. Maybe you can pause the game and watch the returns come in from each state. I mean, it was awesome watching the Iowa and Ohio returns this year, close as all getout.

Also, could the P4E2012 actually include the number of votes each candidate recieved in the primary campaign? All it tells me is the percentage of the vote.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe when the primaries and caucuses roll around, you can actually enter an election night format similar to that of the General Election. Maybe you can pause the game and watch the returns come in from each state. I mean, it was awesome watching the Iowa and Ohio returns this year, close as all getout.

Also, could the P4E2012 actually include the number of votes each candidate recieved in the primary campaign? All it tells me is the percentage of the vote.

Fantastic idea, though it seems like it would be a bit of work.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially since watching results come in on a state-by-state level, the fun is mostly in looking at different counties, and that's a whole extra layer of data that the game doesn't have and doesn't need to have. If it's just, oh, with thirty percent of votes counted it's an eight-point lead, but then it's a ten-point lead when all the votes are in, that doesn't add a whole lot.

I agree that it would be cool, conceptually, but I think you'd need to do a staggering amount of work to get the properly cool part.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the thing. You could just have a timer, and as time passes, votes come in and the totals change, perhaps where you start with a random amount in one player's direction, and then it gets closer and closer to the final result.

Yet on a primaries election night, the suspense usually comes from variations in county voting patterns. To model this would involve adding in county data ...

Especially since watching results come in on a state-by-state level, the fun is mostly in looking at different counties, and that's a whole extra layer of data that the game doesn't have and doesn't need to have. If it's just, oh, with thirty percent of votes counted it's an eight-point lead, but then it's a ten-point lead when all the votes are in, that doesn't add a whole lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could just have a timer, and as time passes, votes come in and the totals change, perhaps where you start with a random amount in one player's direction, and then it gets closer and closer to the final result.

Wouldn't that be in itself, a voting pattern? Urban and surburban areas (which are more liberal) usually are the first to report and the rural areas (more conservative) are usually the last to report. So if a code could be met to do that, it wouldn't have to be so complicated as to involve county stats.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
1) Allow a player to offer the VP slot if their combined delegate totals are a majority. Offering a VP slot AFTER winning the nomination offers little strategic value. Of course, if it isn't possible, running with a VP candidate in the primaries could be done. After all, Ronald Reagan chose Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania as his designated VP pick in the 1976 primary race.

Yes, this.

Also, allow Congress Forever to play as a one-year campaign instead of a two-month campaign. Allow the party committees to get involved in primary races, if they see fit, and special election races.

One of the major downsides to Congress Forever is the unrealistic competitiveness of some exceptionally weak candidates, especially in the Senate scenario. Connecticut and Delaware should NOT be anywhere close to competitive with McMahon and O'Donnell as the nominees. But allow for players to play the 2012 election starting one year from Election Day and suddenly the whole game is way more interesting. Just look at the Senate side one year out --

1) MA-Sen special election - Can the DSCC overcome major voter discontent to prevail in the election to fill the late Sen. Ted Kennedy's seat? Republicans should be favored to win here (to reflect the real world scenario) and a Republican win here should provide major momentum to Republican candidates across the country. This would force the DSCC spend major money -- or, at least, consider spending major money -- early in the cycle to hold a single seat and, with it, a filibuster-proof majority through the election.

2) Republican primaries (AK, CO, CT, DE, NV, etc.) - Republicans have the opportunity to ride voter discontent to a Senate majority in November, but grassroots conservative candidates running primaries stand in their way. Establishment conservative candidates like Lisa Murkowski (AK), Jane Norton (CO), Rob Simmons (CT), Mike Castle (DE), and Sue Lowden (NV) are strong general election candidates who are deeply unpopular with the Republican base. Will the NRSC decide to spend major resources in the primaries to ensure stronger candidate face Democrats in the general or will they sit out the primaries and hope to prevail using their full resources to back weaker candidates?

3) Democratic primaries (AR, CO, NC, etc.) - Democrats had a much less exciting primary season than did Republicans, but still had their fair share of contested races. Democrats don't have to worry about exceptionally weak candidates upsetting their chances at a majority, but pushing stronger candidates through primaries (AR) or fending off slightly weaker ones (Andrew Romanoff in CO, Can Cunningham in NC) may increase their chances are retaining a large or ever super-majority.

This is just what comes to mind on the Senate scenario. There were many special and primary elections on the House side that would also fit into a year-long campaign, such as Charles Djou's victory in Hawaii.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, allowing primaries in Congress4E would add depth and a major aspect of gameplay. Feedback noted.

Yes, this.

Also, allow Congress Forever to play as a one-year campaign instead of a two-month campaign. Allow the party committees to get involved in primary races, if they see fit, and special election races.

One of the major downsides to Congress Forever is the unrealistic competitiveness of some exceptionally weak candidates, especially in the Senate scenario. Connecticut and Delaware should NOT be anywhere close to competitive with McMahon and O'Donnell as the nominees. But allow for players to play the 2012 election starting one year from Election Day and suddenly the whole game is way more interesting. Just look at the Senate side one year out --

1) MA-Sen special election - Can the DSCC overcome major voter discontent to prevail in the election to fill the late Sen. Ted Kennedy's seat? Republicans should be favored to win here (to reflect the real world scenario) and a Republican win here should provide major momentum to Republican candidates across the country. This would force the DSCC spend major money -- or, at least, consider spending major money -- early in the cycle to hold a single seat and, with it, a filibuster-proof majority through the election.

2) Republican primaries (AK, CO, CT, DE, NV, etc.) - Republicans have the opportunity to ride voter discontent to a Senate majority in November, but grassroots conservative candidates running primaries stand in their way. Establishment conservative candidates like Lisa Murkowski (AK), Jane Norton (CO), Rob Simmons (CT), Mike Castle (DE), and Sue Lowden (NV) are strong general election candidates who are deeply unpopular with the Republican base. Will the NRSC decide to spend major resources in the primaries to ensure stronger candidate face Democrats in the general or will they sit out the primaries and hope to prevail using their full resources to back weaker candidates?

3) Democratic primaries (AR, CO, NC, etc.) - Democrats had a much less exciting primary season than did Republicans, but still had their fair share of contested races. Democrats don't have to worry about exceptionally weak candidates upsetting their chances at a majority, but pushing stronger candidates through primaries (AR) or fending off slightly weaker ones (Andrew Romanoff in CO, Can Cunningham in NC) may increase their chances are retaining a large or ever super-majority.

This is just what comes to mind on the Senate scenario. There were many special and primary elections on the House side that would also fit into a year-long campaign, such as Charles Djou's victory in Hawaii.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Wouldn't that be in itself, a voting pattern? Urban and surburban areas (which are more liberal) usually are the first to report and the rural areas (more conservative) are usually the last to report. So if a code could be met to do that, it wouldn't have to be so complicated as to involve county stats.

+1 on this.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see ads attacking more than one candidate (attacking everybody else).

I'd also like to see internet advertising as an option, with it perhaps being much cheaper and with a smaller impact.

Also, I think better error fixing and tech support would make the game more accessable. The known errors page tells you how to fix most things yourself, but a lot of people are wary of tinkering with software in any way for fear of breaking it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few ideas for the 2012 game, some big some small:

- Putting states in your strategy should make it easier to gain traction there (Santorum in the midwest, Paul in caucus states).

- "Add caucus states to strategy" "Add proportional states to strategy" and "Add winner take all" states to strategy buttons for convenience.

- A fourth slot in theme, most candidates run on their experience, leadership, and integrity, but they also have a cause or issue. Conservatism, Liberty, Change, Patriotism, or even specific issues such as Outsourcing and Campaign Finance.

- Make it so candidates who are last in their party can try to pick VPs from other parties, and if two candidates delgates combined make a majority, one can offer the other the VP slot and in return receive the majority of delegates, this is a HUGE problem for me in the 2008 version, where I get the most delegates and then it's a fight to get the two/three others who are left in to endorse me.

- Amount of money your campaign has effects effectiveness of barnstorming, endorsements, etc. This way campaigns running out of money (Like Santorum and Gingrich did) can't keep riding on.

- Have third parties work as they do in real life if possible, with ballots at the convention. Libertarian, Constitution, Green, Reform, and Justice parties should all be included, and (off) independent challenges by Micheal Bloomberg and Bernie Sanders.

-Come up with actual stock headlines for scandals. Minor experience scandal could be "Romney took three week long vacation during troubling times as Governor" while a major integrity scandal could be about an affair. It'd be purely aesthetic, but it would add a lot.

-I know it would take A LOT of work, but the ability to say, take a finished game from 2008 and play 2012 based on that would be awesome, so if Barr breaks 5% in 2008 Johnson has $90 million in 2012. And some candidates would poll better than others depending on how they did last time. I know it would be something very very hard to do, but it would add a ton more replay value to the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've occasionally discussed adding the Liebreman/Teddy Roosevelt option, where after losing your party's nomination you run as an independent. The discussion of the Lugar/Mourdock race in Indiana has included the fact that a lot of states have so-called "sore loser laws" that explicitly (or implicitly, through filing deadlines) forbid this. So if this option does get included in the game, which I think it should be 'cause it makes things interesting, it should be at the discretion of the scenario creator.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback! All noted. A couple in specific:

1. "Putting states in your strategy"

Right now in P4E12, targeting a state makes it easier to gain traction. 'Targeting' is the 2012 equivalent to putting a state in one's strategy in 2008. Does this cover what you're thinking of?

2. Re: themes, ya, 4 might be a more natural number. We'll see.

A few ideas for the 2012 game, some big some small:

- Putting states in your strategy should make it easier to gain traction there (Santorum in the midwest, Paul in caucus states).

- "Add caucus states to strategy" "Add proportional states to strategy" and "Add winner take all" states to strategy buttons for convenience.

- A fourth slot in theme, most candidates run on their experience, leadership, and integrity, but they also have a cause or issue. Conservatism, Liberty, Change, Patriotism, or even specific issues such as Outsourcing and Campaign Finance.

- Make it so candidates who are last in their party can try to pick VPs from other parties, and if two candidates delgates combined make a majority, one can offer the other the VP slot and in return receive the majority of delegates, this is a HUGE problem for me in the 2008 version, where I get the most delegates and then it's a fight to get the two/three others who are left in to endorse me.

- Amount of money your campaign has effects effectiveness of barnstorming, endorsements, etc. This way campaigns running out of money (Like Santorum and Gingrich did) can't keep riding on.

- Have third parties work as they do in real life if possible, with ballots at the convention. Libertarian, Constitution, Green, Reform, and Justice parties should all be included, and (off) independent challenges by Micheal Bloomberg and Bernie Sanders.

-Come up with actual stock headlines for scandals. Minor experience scandal could be "Romney took three week long vacation during troubling times as Governor" while a major integrity scandal could be about an affair. It'd be purely aesthetic, but it would add a lot.

-I know it would take A LOT of work, but the ability to say, take a finished game from 2008 and play 2012 based on that would be awesome, so if Barr breaks 5% in 2008 Johnson has $90 million in 2012. And some candidates would poll better than others depending on how they did last time. I know it would be something very very hard to do, but it would add a ton more replay value to the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick idea regarding themes. Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign was framed almost entirely around the issue of the Economy. Maybe you could change the themes button so you could...

1.) Prioritize what issues matter most. For example, even though healthcare is a big issue in this election, most candidates have Economy higher on their to-do list than Healthcare. While they will still make this a key issue of their campaign, most of the chips lie on Economy.

2.) Decide how much you are going to focus on each of your issue themes. Let's say each campaign recieves a certain number of "Focus Points" (depending on how developed the campaign is). I could either spread my focus points out all across the board, or I could invest them in a few select targets. For example, Romney is focusing most of his attention on the economy. Santorum on the other hand focused more of his points on Social Issues.

By creating "Focus Points", it would allow campaigns to develop their messages faster. The number of "Focus Points" each campaign has could be largely contingent upon how developed the campaigns are.

3.) Provide extra speeches for the issues that are prioritized highest on the "Issue Theme" list. The issue that you have defined as the most important should have more than 1 speech.

In the end, it would make the campaigns more realistic because the candidate's would have the "Theme" of their campaign settled. They could decide what "big issue" their campaign would most effectively communicate and execute it.

Thanks for the feedback! All noted. A couple in specific:

1. "Putting states in your strategy"

Right now in P4E12, targeting a state makes it easier to gain traction. 'Targeting' is the 2012 equivalent to putting a state in one's strategy in 2008. Does this cover what you're thinking of?

2. Re: themes, ya, 4 might be a more natural number. We'll see.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pollwonk,

Thanks for this. That sort of system would be more flexible, and perhaps more realistic. I think for it to work, there would have to be clearcut tradeoffs between focusing on just one (or a few) and focusing on many. Something like extra speeches, or issue bonuses (as it is now). .. Feedback noted.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Zeralonde,

1. Yes, primary vote totals are on the list.

2. Feedback noted - we'll see.

3. Yes, these are on the list as well.

Thanks again!

New to the game but, from what I've seen:

  • Add primary popular vote totals. In version 1.1.1, I lost Louisiana to Gingrich by 0.0%. I'm still curious as to how many popular votes (and total votes) were cast in the primary.
  • Make the state conventions matter. In real life, Ron Paul is winning delegates in states where he came in third or even fourth in the popular vote. Maybe something similar could be added into the final version?
  • I would assume that, in the final release, you could convince opponents to drop out and endorse you/give you their delegates? I haven't played '08 (except the demo), but I assume that was in the older versions. If not, that would be a great addition. I also assume that many more candidates will be available in the final; i.e., Perry, Bachmann, Cain, etc.

Unfortunately I haven't played the earlier versions and don't know what's going to be included, but those are a few ideas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

In regards to P4E2012 Beta, may I suggest tweaking the Campaign Surrogates option to fit more of a state by state basis? It seems that it would make the game a little more realistic that way. I believe you should add campaign surrogates for each individual state that can campaign for your candidate. For example, when Mitt Romney's campaign focused on the Wisconsin Primary, Paul Ryan came out to campaign with Romney in the state. Otherwise, he really didn't campaign anywhere else. The same thing happened with Kelly Ayotte and Judd Greg who campaigned only for Romney within their own state. I'm not suggesting we remove national campaign surrogates. Some supporters like Clinton and Christie have campaigned all over the country for their party's nominee. I just think adding more diversity to the campaign surrogate option would be neat. :)

I also think you should add "Internet Ad" to the advertising column since it has been a major tool for fundraising this election year. That would make the game a lot more realistic. Internet ads generally are cheap and are great fundraising weapons.

Otherwise, it looks really awesome! :D

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Any chance of including a PBEM mode? All it would mean is picking more than one human player and instead of going immediately to the next candidate after clicking end turn you would see a blank screen with a prompt for the next player to continue. A password prompt would also be nice.

  • Upvote 1
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...