Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About ElectricMonk

  • Rank
    TheorySpark Scenario Consultant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. For all that, I can't do anything with the convention. Sigh. For game purposes I'm thinking of making California winner-take-all… if you can get 40-50% of the vote, otherwise it goes proportional. Wallace shot would be an Event of course, hammering his momentum down if he does get shot. And yet, at least as it applies to the opening stages, '72 did hang on N.H. If Muskie had won big that would have left McGovern a candidate with a solid organization… and no news coverage. If Muskie had won N.H., Humphrey would be a weaker threat. If Muskie had won N.H., Wallace would have been a weaker threa
  2. I've won with the Republicans in either the regular or the 2008 wonk scenario. It's not easy, but it's certainly possible against both the AI and an actual human player. If there is some specific issue to be raised I'd love to hear it, but I assure all and sundry Republicans can indeed win.
  3. Bump. Looks like 1972 is going to be one to get working on, come January. I'm actually kinda surprised '76 did so poorly. After all Nixon crushes McGovern in '72, and I'm not sure someone like Teddy Kennedy or a major primary challenge to Nixon would have changed the results. 1976 on the other hand offers Reagan challenging Ford and a wide open contest for the Democrats. That said, we still have the exciting '72 Democratic primaries, especially in-game where Muskie will surely try and recover and McGovern's expertise in gaming the system can't be quite as well modelled as I might like. Plus
  4. It would be nice to have something broadly similar along those lines.
  5. I like it, but the blog posts would be kinda boring since they'd either be super-short auto-generated ones… or require quite a lot of writing for all possibilities (though you could swap names in and out, to help). Also, how about a "remaining paths to victory" type screen for the projected on last poll of the election losing candidate? i.e. once McCain has lost PA, his options narrow. Conversely winning PA, sees his options expand. Have a little map flicking through the possibilities, magic holographic technology of CNN style.
  6. Japan's awesome early '90s elections. Otherwise it'd just be boring: oh, the Liberal Democratic Party had their majority reduced/increased… shucks. And why fictional?
  7. I had a spacebar party, and now I do not. Should spacebar parties be kept forever? I choose not to do so.
  8. For pure play-balancing reasons I'll likely keep his Charisma where it is, as you noted. However, the problem arises in that for groups open to Wallace he had massive appeal (even if, in states like Ohio they didn't end up voting that much for him) while other groups shut him out entirely. He had, for lack of a better phrase, "focused charisma". He had zero appeal to a huge swath of the public, and huge appeal to another large swath (albeit one that existed mostly in industrial/southern states). I don't believe in space-barring parties, or third parties unless conditions merit them (Perot
  9. As I recall they reflect turnout. So you have 5 FootSoliders and the opponent only has a couple—and Momentum is roughly even—you should win the undecided vote plus some % higher than expected vote in that state. But that's only what I think offhand, I could be wrong.
  10. I can take a look, but as always I note that the primaries influence the general election too much in-game. It works better to do the primaries, and then start up a new general election game with the winners.
  11. If you have them in the primaries, they have to be in the general election map. If they're in the general election map, there is no way to stop the AI from going to them. If the AI spends (an entirely outsized) amount of time fighting for territories with no electoral votes, they do much worse overall.
  12. It appears I was wrong about Indiana and have an outside chance about being wrong on Missouri and/or North Carolina (both of which remain too close to call for all networks, while Indiana is too close to call for some networks). Nevertheless, congratulations President-elect Obama.
  13. Sure, I agree with you and I'm not saying McCain can't win (although it's rather unlikely). But 1948 was a colossal screw-up by both the entire polling industry and Governor Dewey himself and it happened, let us not forget, 60 years ago when polling—comparatively—was is in its infancy. If the polls get this wrong… it will make what happened in the UK in 1992 in the polling outfits look like a mild case of indigestion (and they made huge, sweeping, changes because of that).
  14. Please. Also, while one can take issue with many separate polling organizations, as an aggregate they do pretty good. Unlike the exit polls, the final polling results for 2004 correctly predicted a narrow Bush victory. With the outstanding example of New Hampshire this year aside, they've done pretty well as a group for the 2008 primary campaign as well.
  • Create New...