Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
danieldlmn

Major Update to 2008 election

Recommended Posts

Rod blagojevich is probably not a real person (newspaper campaigner for Obama)

5 seconds to google would have told you he's governor of Illinois.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 seconds to google would have told you he's governor of Illinois.

I tried the game using the updated scenario as Newt. I was quickly stopped as it seemed that 7 CP wasn't enough to do anything other than the standard barnstorming, issue study, debate practice, etc. If I wanted to do "Research", Create campainers, etc... It took up WAY too many CPs. I don't remember the game being this difficult... or am I hallucinating?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep the 7 CP kills you. What you have to do is work as much as possible on Campaign Development. 20 times and you get to 14 CP. Once or twice a turn and you should have 14 CP for the primaries. Before that you have to make a lot of speeches and the odd barnstorm and accept you will be using 10-12 CPs a lot of turns so leave a lot of rest days.

I'm running into the same problem with Dodd on the Democrat side since he has lots of money but only 7 CP, but the third try (all on hard, of course :) was the charm and I finally edged out the primary[1] and once I took Texas away from Brownback the election was mine—though I remained unsure about Texas all the way to Election Night.

[1] Clinton is usually a beast if you're playing Dodd. The easiest way seems to go for the big states (California, New York, Texas, Ohio, Penn., Florida) and endorsers there and nationally until you have 14 CP and some momentum. You can then contest elsewhere and by getting the third or fourth place guy to endorse you (SAVE your PIP) win. Sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Monk. I had no idea this was the case. I had only ever played regular scenarios and I guess this is setup differently there. I actually had never had to "develop campaign" EVER for any game I had played up to now... and really I forgot about it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I got V9 and tried it out. I ran as Kubby, a Libertarian, with Phillies and Stanhope both active. I made all the Dems and Reps active, but left Peroutka and Bloomberg out.

I was doing well, leading 900+ delegates out the 1450 and pulling away, when all of a sudden the whole country turned on me! In one turn Stanhope jumped 25 points in the popular vote while I dropped 19. He went from leading 230ish delegates to over 1000 while I dropped to less than 200.

I saw no reason for this sudden turnaround. Stanhope was showing -0.7 momentum while I had +1.2. Neither of us had a news event. It happened with 34 weeks left until the election.

Any ideas on why this happened?

I had the exact same thing happen to me. The entire country turns pink. I've since played a couple of times as a Dem and a Repub with all the Libertarians turned on and I haven't been able to replicate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

am going to be sending a short update tomorrow after noon with the fellowing changes

Added chelsea clinton as Crusader for Hillary Clinton.

Made some changes to the polls in on the Republican side

New Democratic primary calender:

January 14, 2008 - Iowa

January 19, 2008 - Nevada

January 22, 2008 - New Hampshire

January 29, 2008 - South Carolina

February 5, 2008 - Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Idaho, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah.

February 9, 2008 - Nebraska, Louisiana, Michigan

February 10, 2008 - Maine

February 12, 2008 - District of Columbia, Tennessee, Virginia

February 19, 2008 - Wisconsin

February 26, 2008 - Hawaii

March 4th, 2008 - American Samoa, Democrats Abroad, Guam, North Dakota, U.S. Virgin Islands, Wyoming, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota[13], Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont

March 8, 2008 - Kansas

March 11, 2008 - Mississippi

March 18, 2008 - Illinois

April 1, 2008 - Pennsylvania, Alaska, puerto rico

May 6, 2008 - Indiana

May 13, 2008 - West Virginia

May 20, 2008 - Kentucky, Oregon

May 27, 2008 - Washington

June 3, 2008 - Montana, South Dakota

New Republican primary calender:

January 21, 2008 - Iowa

January 29, 2008 - New Hampshire, Florida

February 2, 2008 - Alabama, South Carolina

February 5, 2008 - Arizona, Arkansas, California, New York, Missouri, New Mexico, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah, West Virginia, Delaware

February 7, 2008- Nevada

February 9, 2008 - Louisiana

February 10, 2008 - Maine

February 12, 2008 - Tennessee, Virginia, Washington D.C.

February 19, 2008 - Minnesota, Wisconsin

March 4, 2008 - Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts,Rhode Island, Ohio, Texas, Vermont, Pennsylvania

March 11, 2008 - Mississippi, Washington

March 18, 2008 - Illinois

April 15, 2008 - Colorado

April 26, 2008 - Kansas, Nevada

May 6, 2008 - Indiana, Alaska

May 10, 2008 - Wyoming

May 13, 2008 - Nebraska

May 20, 2008 - Kentucky, Oregon

May 27, 2008 - Idaho

June 3, 2008 - South Dakota

June 6, 2008 - Hawaii

June 9, 2008 - Montana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet, thanks.

But dear god the need to reform the primary calendar is huge. Huge!

I like Sabato's (forgive me for going off topic):

In 1968 the country had 14 state presidential primaries, scheduled rather sensibly and intermittently between March and June. In 2008 a minimum of 42 primaries will be held, possibly as many as 47, beginning in January, or even earlier, and stretching out for six long months.

Even worse, the '08 schedule will be the most "front-loaded" ever, with so many contests moved into January and early February that the party nominees might be determined in the blink of an eye, with no chance for "buyer's remorse." In 1980 only one state had a primary or caucus by the end of February. By 2000 nine states did so, and in 2004, nineteen. Next year, an incredible thirty states are on track to push into January or February.

It will be remarkable if at least one and possibly both parties do not have nominees by February 6th. The first four states--Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina--may create a "slingshot effect" for the quasi-national primary occurring on February 5th. If one candidate in each party has managed to win three of the four early contests, they will have dominated the headlines for the three weeks preceding the national primary. Normally, that would guarantee nearly unstoppable momentum for the first big-state round of primaries. If the frontrunners lock down most of the February 5th states, they starve their opponents of "money and mo," and it's over. However, we also acknowledge the possibility that the contenders in one or both parties will have split up the wins in the early contests, creating a muddle that might advance the contest until the next massive round of primaries on March 4th. The odds heavily favor a decision at that time. The remaining scenario seems fantastic--a tight fight all the way to the convention. Nonetheless, let's keep in mind that precisely this alternative played out for the Republicans in 1976 (Gerald Ford versus Ronald Reagan) and for the Democrats in 1984 (Walter Mondale versus Gary Hart). But if we had had the extremely frontloaded 2008 primary schedule in 1976, Gerald Ford--who won the Iowa caucus and each of the first 5 primaries--would have dispatched Reagan early. And Gary Hart, who defeated Mondale in New Hampshire, might well have been the Democratic presidential nominee in 1984.

I outlined a new arrangement of four regional primaries held one a month from April to July, with the nominating conventions in August. This shorter, focused campaign season would be preceded by a few contests in small states held in March. How would the regions and small states be selected? On January 1 of the election year, a lottery would be held to choose the order of the regions, and a second lottery would pick two to four states among the twenty that have four or fewer electoral votes. Finally, those ping-pong-ball lottery machines can be put to wiser use than bestowing great wealth on people who can't handle it.

Think of the salutary results. In one stroke, we would eliminate the permanent campaign in a handful of unrepresentative states that currently, insistently, start off the presidential selection process. We would concentrate the elections in a five-month window that leads immediately to the conventions and the general election. We would allow the incumbent President to govern for three and a half years of his four-year term without would-be successors underfoot and second-guessing him daily on the campaign trail for two or more years preceding the general election. We would give every region an equal chance to go first--and every region would get that opportunity over time. And we would preserve the advantages of having small states lead off the process, without those small states always having to be Iowa and New Hampshire (and Nevada and South Carolina, if the Democrats' plans for '08 actually work out). Iowa and New Hampshire are wonderful, but their first-in-the-nation role is not a Constitutional right, and other small states would undoubtedly take service as the early "screening committees" just as seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

killermccainmg9.png

This is one of my more interesting Campaigns I started 9 points down for some reason and he kept expanding it. It reminds me of the last Season of the West Wing. Where Santos is Nine Points down. Well anyways here my result call me very luck. There are two States McCain could have challenge if he wanted to. I won Wisconsin by 10,833 less than a %. I won Pennsylvania by 45,272 and once again less than a % I could challenge Louisianan & Iowa if I want to cause McCain won Louisianan by 19,398 and Iowa by 20,399 less than 1/2 %

killermccainlostml2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice win, c/b08!

Quick gripe/suggestion regarding the new update. Bill Richardson isn't exactly Barack Obama as far as charisma is concerned but to give him a "1" is a bit too harsh I think. The guy's as charismatic as General Clark or Senator Clinton and is certainly more than Governor Vilsack (who received a 2). Richardson couldn't have even won the election of president of his fraternity with a 1!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C/B '08, I mailed you last week; did you get a chance to send out the latest update? I'd like to be included. New primary dates are crucial! Thanks for all your time.

rlubell@yahoo.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody ran into problem like this Thompson is the republican Nominee for President but yet MA, VT, RI won't support him. I check the files he on the ballot but they won't support him there show 0% for him

untitledsi9.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How 'bout an explanation? I'm happy to try it out (when are you emailing them out, by the way?) but it would be nice to know what we're getting ourselves into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been playing v9 for a few weeks now (difficulty: medium) and have noticed a recurring trend in the nomination process on the Democratic side; Hillary will not withdraw when she's clearly beaten. Whether it be 6 weeks before the end of the primaries and is mathematically eliminated even if she were to win every remaining state's delegation or after the final vote has been counted and every delegate assigned, she never bows out to let the player/nominee gear up to face the presumptive Republican nominee. This opens the door to the computer player researching scandal on her fellow Democratic opponent which, in turn, has an effect on national momentum and late leadership endorsements. The Republican Party players always seem to withdraw and endorse the front runner when faced with certain defeat, I wonder why this would not be the case with the Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok am sending out 11 here are the detials these are the detail

11

Polls the Republican fields Change to show McCain Down Rudy up with an edge.

Cost: TV Ads Good 80,000 Average 60,000 Poor 50,000 . Cost Changes to run them in good format: In place like Cali it around 2,500,000 in place like VT it 40,000

Radio Ads Good 40,000 Average 30,000 Poor 25,000 Cost Changes to run them in good format: Cali 1,500,000 VT 25,500

Phone Banking. Good 15,000 Average 12,000 Poor 10,000

News Papers Ads Good 25,000 Average 20,000 Poor 15,000 Cost Changes to run them in good format: Cali 900,000 VT 17,000

Direct Mail Ads Good 10,000 Average 8,000 Poor 5,000 Cali 700,000 VT 12,000

To fundraise it 20,000 now but you do get more bang for buck here too. Candidate like Hillary going to bring around 1,500,000-3,000,000 or so A candidate like Kucinich is going bring around 64,000

I change everybody fundraising totals this formula I use: What the Candidate fundraise in 1st quarter x 4 Quarters = there gain total + any money they hand in the banks from previous campaign = there 2nd gain total. Other Candidates who have not enter I had to work around there place in a national poll.

Reach the General Block grants fund have been change to 130,000,000 for both major parties

Barnstorming now cost 16,000

Policy Speech now cost 20,000

15% cut now to win Delegates in democratic party like it is in the DNC Rules

Debate Prep now cost 6,000

Issues Knowledge now cost 1,000

Develop a Campaign now cost 16,000

Doing your own private poll cost 120,000

Spy now cost 10,000 pre Turn

Chelsea Clinton added as crusader

NJ Governor Jon S. Corzine Move to Decided Clinton but not endorse

New to the game will be headline which you will see in the game now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy! I'm new to PF'08 (though I bought PF'04 and played it a good bit, even worked a bit on a 1976 Reagan scenario but got so lost in details I abandoned it).

A few questions:

1) It seems that, at least until a new official 2008 scenario is released by 80soft, this is the only game in town for updated and improved 2008 gameplay. Am I right?

2) Just how profoundly has the 2008 scenario been changed by now? What gameplay decisions embedded in the latest version might one want to revisit first (being an inveterate tinkerer and all)?

3) Is this at all a collaborative effort (and if not, has that been considered)?

4) I take it that CLARK/BAYH2008 has been distributing new versions via mailing list. I would like to be added to that list (KevinTMC at yahoo dot com); but maybe it would be better to regularly upload these files somewhere? I've got web space with tons of available bandwidth that I could make available for that purpose.

Hope that's not too many questions.

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  

×