Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Oil Baron

My scenario

Recommended Posts

I created a P.F. scenario long ago. I think it was the first 2008 scenario available. It is called 2008nb. Unlike many of the user-created scenarios that are now available, I did my best to keep my personal political prefrences out of it . Perhaps you have played it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed your 2008 scenario alot oil baron. I found it quite realistic and unbiased. The 1984 election is one of my all-time favorites so naturally I felt that the scenario was a blast to play. I have posted "A nation divisible- 2000" and "who vs. whom?- 2008" In these two scenarios I have included a wide range of candidates to increase playability and offer more options. Anyone have any thoughts on these?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I created the 1984 scenario a couple of months ago, anybody like it?

Beating Mondale 535 to 3 was very fun. Thanks for the scenario! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I created the 1984 scenario a couple of months ago, anybody like it?

Has anyone actually won when playing as Mondale on that scenario? Not that I really want him too. It seems as hard as trying to beat 2004 with Nader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked a lot of these scenarios and picked bits and pieces, (modifying them later on), for the scenario I created "Democratic Split - 2012." I've liked most of the scenarios I've seen so far, especially the Alternate History 1866 Confederate Election...I thought that was an interesting idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, the election of the confederacy was brilliant. :)

Still, my favorite scenario has always been 2004, because it's the most up-to-date one with issues that matter today. Ofcourse beating the democrats over slavery with Lincoln is fun, but it just doesn't feel thesame. The game is based on how elections are run today, so that's why I prefer to fight Bush with my favorite liberal-ticket Dean-Hillary :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, the election of the confederacy was brilliant. :)

Still, my favorite scenario has always been 2004, because it's the most up-to-date one with issues that matter today. Ofcourse beating the democrats over slavery with Lincoln is fun, but it just doesn't feel thesame. The game is based on how elections are run today, so that's why I prefer to fight Bush with my favorite liberal-ticket Dean-Hillary :D

Yeah, I think that if Dean got the nomination(sabotage?), this election would be ALOT more fun and interesting to watch. I like the "2184" scenario too because it is SO different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy all! I've made the 2008cl, 2012cl, a new CSA 1861 election scenarios. Also for the minor candidates if you need picture files I've got all of them (that I'm aware of) if y'all need them.

The CSA 1866 scenario would've been slated for 1867 (The president-elect would take office in 1868) because Davis took office under the Permanent Constitution in 1862. ART. II, SECT. 1.1, prevented Davis' reelection but a simple amendment could've solved that problem.

Also the blatant SLAVERY this SLAVERY that is mindless drivel and liberal propaganda of a victorious Union. Remember folks, winners write history the way they see fit.

The Republican party secured a strangle-hold over the South in 1860 which meant a higher tarriff (1 of the first things the US Congress did in 1861 without Southern congressmen there to fight it was to pass the Morrill Tarriff which raised rates to 46% the highest in US history up to that time).

To preserve the Constitution and Economic viability were primary causes of secession.

The actual war started under the ancient guise of he who causes agression is the aggressor. Lincoln wasn't sending food to a 'starving garrison in Charleston, SC he was sending war materiel! Thus the CS forces called repeatedly for Ft. Sumter's surrender to no avail. Lincoln forced the South into firing the 1st shots in defense.

With the surrender of CS Armed Forces the CS Govt. went into exile and the nation collasped under attrition and war-weariness. The CS was in no condition to continue the fight so many chose the pen and began preserving True Southron history not the Righteous Union verses Evil Southron Slave holders.

Now that I've posted your history lesson for today anyone who'd like to know more about the Early political struggle and history of political parties versus that of the South let me know: cllovelace@blueridge.net

My research shows that after the invention of the cotton gin slavery in the south increased 31% while in the NORTH IT INCREASED 1,303.8% God Bless. I remain,

In Christ,

Rev. Creighton Lovelace

- Pastor, Danieltown Baptist Church

-Commander, Rutherford Rifles, Sons of Confederate Veterans Camp #2044

-Chairman, Constitution Party of North-Carolina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be kind of nice if it where possible to create Fair elections just so two people can play multiplayer and the result would show who is better at the game without a doubt. To me it seems at least in the 2004 scenario the democratic challenger faces a slightly uphill battle. While that is probably realistic for the time it leaves one of the two people playing in Multiplayer at a decided disadvantage. I created a "Fair" game where everyone starts off undecided. Unfortunutly that leads to a boring scenario in the end so there really isn't a perfect way to deal with this.

Perhaps making military experience a factor would be a good suggestion. This would however require a possible score of Zero. For example Howard Dean would have a zero military experience score. Bush would have like a one or a two for being in the national guard. Kerry would have a 3 or a 4 for being in both a full time service and serving in a war. (Plus medals and disticitions.) Colin Powell and Wes Clark would probably have 5's because they where both in the military for a long time and reached the highest ranks. The question is how much is military experence an issue to swing voters. Each party likes to talk about Military experience when its candidate has some and has more then the oppoising candidate but shuts up about it once its at a disadvantage. How much of an advantage does that actually give a candidate in an election.

I can't wait for the Primary expansion to come out which will make this game even more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow this is getting off topic. Actually I do agree that the Civil War was fought primarily over state's rights, not slavery. However I do not feel that secession was justified. Lincoln was more than willing to protect slavery in the places in which it already existed. He was even willing to amend the constitution to appease the south! But by then it was too late. It's a shame the war happened at all for if Buchanaan had acted quickly the rebellion could have been nipped in the bud and much bloodshed could have been avoided. I think we can all agree, however, that slavery is immoral and although the political oppression of blacks didn't end until the 1960s, the Emancipation Act was at the very least a step in the right direction.

Oh and in response to kirkus, I think the military experience might be an interesting addition. I also tried to create a "fair start" political map for me and my friends but I had 4 people playing. It's very hard to have a winner in a four person game thanks to the 50% requirement. I wish the game had a way to turn that on and off. I think that, even more than the primaries (although that will be a really interesting addition) would be a valuable update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also the blatant SLAVERY this SLAVERY that is mindless drivel and liberal propaganda of a victorious Union. Remember folks, winners write history the way they see fit.

Uh, the point of my comment was only to express that I think it's more interesting to play current day elections instead of 150 year old ones about a for us dated society with dates issues. I had no intention of starting a discussion on why the civil war started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While i did enjoy the CSA Election version i noticed that it had Missouri and Kentucky as Confederate States and Virgina as it was, while in History West Virgina broke from Virgina. And while Missouri and Kentucky were border states Niether one actually and offically Joined the Confederacy. That was my only problem with it. I have enjoyed many gaming hours of the other created elections too keep up the good work Guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Confederate Scenario, Davis cannot run for re election since the CSA constitution only allows one six year term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy all,

Yes Slavery was evil and wrong but I believe it to be a nice 'high moral ground' cover to hide Lincoln's white-supremacist views, deportation of all african-americans, despotic actions taken during his administration, etc.

I realize when I get on this topic I tend to preach but as the Scripture says the Truth shall set you free and the Truth is NOT what our kiddos in the Public school system are getting.

Hillary/Sharton '12 now wait a minute - in re: the "threatened REBEL army, etc" comment - Under the Articles of Confederation (that's before the US Constitution) the States were bound under a PERPETUAL UNION. One and Indivisible. BUT under the reorganization of the Articles in the late 1780s the new document the OLD US Constitution would NOT be ratified by Rhode Island, New York & Virginia unless THEY COULD WITHDRAW (secede) from the United States of America. North Carolina was loathe to join the new Union as well becoming the 12th State to join (before Rhode Island finally did). So when the South saw the Financial Interests of the North (they were using the South as a CA$H COW) and the rapid rise of a regional party the Republican Party the South realized it was time to leave. The Deep South States left 1st over the interest of Slave Property. The Crittenden Compromise was proposed by a Kentucky Border State politican which would appease the Cotton States and require that Slavery last forever. The Upper South States decided to watch and wait to see what the Lincoln Administration would do.

The 1st diplomatic action of the CS Congress & Davis Administration was to send a Peace Delegation to the North to arrange for the Peaceful transfer of US Forts. Lincoln did not recieve them for the obvious reason: automatic recognition.

After sly maneuvering and open hostility declared in his Ignaugural: to hold, occupy, and possess the 4 Forts FOR TAXES & Duties (it was about Money). The North lost its Cash Cow and needed it back! So with the intentional movement of the Northern "Trojan Horse" Ship the board for War was set.

Lincoln threatened to jail the US Supreme Court Justic Roger Taney after he declared Lincoln was violating the US Constitution. Lincoln Unconstitutionally closed down Pro-CSA presses and jailed many without the right to a speedy trial. He also declared war on an internationally recognized belligerent nation at War via his call for 75,000 and 100,000 volunteers and also via the blockade.

So your terminology about Rebel and Rebellion is erroneously applied to the wrong side. The US Government in the 1920s declared that the war was Not the War of the Rebellion but the War between the Confederate States of America and the United States of America. (The War for Confederate Independence is more like it!)The CSA sought to preserve the OLD US Constitution as the founding Fathers had intended as a Republic. Whereas the US implemented a NEW Constitution that converted our Republic to a Democracy that would herald Social Engineering. While the African-Americans were held underfoot by many Southerners the action that precipitated the Backlash against the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s was the fear of miscenigation and more Federal Usurpation of State Power (which occurred) the SOuth again, without Arms was attempting to honour their CS Forefathers' Oaths of Allegiance after the CS Armed forces surrendered by November of 1865 (CSS Shenedoah) to no avail. The US Govt. was by then all powerful.

Also the horrific photograph of the Union POW from Andersonvile indeed is sad, but it WAS NOT torture! If you pause to consider what occurred... 1.) US Gen. Sherman was destroying the logisitical means of transporting supplies along with any supplies he could gather; 2.) US Gen. Grant & Admiral Farragut cut the CSA in half in Mid 1863; 3.) US Gen. Grant shut down the Prisioner Exchange in 1864; 4.) those on the CS Homefront were feeding: Civilians, CS Troops & US Invaders, Slaves, Freedmen, POWs and Animals and 5.) the Blockade was becoming more effective by 1864.

The people all across the South were starving. The CS Commandant at Andersonville Henry Wirtz was executed in Nov. 1865 for war crimes. But it was discovered that by checking the POW Camp log & the main witness' story that it did not hold water and that the primary witness was lying under oath paid by the Federal Government. Remember that all that occurred under Military Law not Common Law. When you see a US Flag with Gold Fringe it is NOT a US Flag it is the Flag of the US Army. Under that flag Admiralty Law is upheld not Common Law.

Also the Offical total of Prisoner of War Deaths made by US Secretary of War Stanton is as follows:

CS POW Deaths (Confederate Troops held by the North): 26,436 deaths

US POW Deaths (Union Troops held by the South): 22,576 deaths

If any side is to be charged with cruelty or torture to POWs it is the North as they had food, shelter, clothing and medicial supplies in abundance and yet CS soldiers were malnourished (a sign of lack of food) and many froze to death (a sign of lack of shelter & proper clothing)!

I appreciate your communications and hope that you will see both sides and honour all those who fought for their beliefs and principles. I had 8 including Gen. Lee who fought for the Confederate States, all for Independence not the evil of Slavery. Also whenever we view history WE must view it from THEIR time period not our own. Society was much different then than now. To interject 21st century idealism into 19th century culture and ideology is stupifying and wrong. I would suggest that when you read about any period read (if possible) their own words I highly recommend The SOuthern Historical Society Papers and COnfederate Military History. Also for more info on Lincoln get Dilorenzo's: The Real Lincoln and Charles Adam's: When In the Course of Human Events.

We should all pause and recognize that because men (and many of late, women) have fought for our country and those ideals preserved in those twin documents: The Constitution of the United (or Confederate) States and the Bill of Rights is the reason we are here free and able to discuss our unique and common heritage as Americans. God Bless.

- Rev. Creighton Lovelace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edwards 2008, The State of West Virginia is Illegal and Unconstitutional. By all rights it was (and Constitutionally still is) part of Virginia. I refer you to US Constitiution ART. 4, SECT. 3. (The admission of West Virginia as a State without the Consent of the Government of the State of Virginia was Unconstitutional. Also see this in the CS Constitution ART. 4, SECT. 3. So you see that if you break the Law once, and then again, and again, and so on and so on without any reprimanding then you have tyranny and anarchy. So vanquished our Republic and OLD de-centralized government.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×