Jump to content
270soft Forum

Tyking

Members
  • Posts

    78
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tyking

  1. I see lots of people talking about Ron Paul being in their 2008 scenario but I don't see him in the list of candidates (yet George Allen and Newt Gingrich are...) - did everyone just create him or something? I mean I knew this scenario was outdated when I saw Huckabee had next to no support, but surely Ron Paul was around when they made this...
  2. That's very helpful, thanks - I'll be sure to be more of a heartless player ;-) Though there's still a bit I don't get - why would, if as you say, positive campaigns "slowly converts decided voters for other parties into decided voters for your own party", having higher momentum than the other guy result in such massive swings against me? Surely there'd need to be some negative against my party, but there never is! The first + is momentum, yes, and is the total momentum the parties ended the week with.
  3. Here's another good one: Toronto East: Liberal +30, 171 footsoldiers, Tories +12, 132 footsoldiers. Result: Liberals -9%, Tories +2% NE Ontario: Liberal +22, 330 footsoldiers, Tories +8, 257 footsoldiers Result: Liberal -10%, Tories +6% NC Quebec: Liberal +16, Bloc +4 Result: Liberal -2%, Bloc +5% SE Quebec: Liberal +16, Bloc +- Result: Liberal -3, Bloc +4 Toronto West: Liberal +29 Result: Liberal -3%
  4. I'm noticing two major flaws in these games that have not ever gone away - firstly poll movements not going based on game performance, and secondly poll swings being ridiculously large. Here's an example in the last game I just did: NE Ontario: Liberals +20, 272 footsoldiers, Tories +4, 220 footsoldiers Result: Liberals -3%, Tories +9% Toronto West: Liberal +8, 105 footsoldiers, Tories +-, 100 footsoldiers Result: Liberal -6%, Tories +1% It just seems like the way you play in the game (and I've had games where I've had higher momentum AND more footsoldiers than the other parties throughout the ENTIRE game, and been destroyed) has nothing to do with the way you play. Especially considering the kingmakers in this game seem to be the scandals, which are completely out of your control, it seems that the game has very little to do with the players.
  5. Aha! That explains everything! I was wondering why I'd magically have a -88 or whatever on one of the character issues, and it must've been because of that! Woo-hoo!
  6. I'm not sure about the other regions, but I know for sure that I was leading in momentum in Quebec, and had been for the entire game (Duceppe had been gaffeing left and right). Then suddenly there was a 13 point swing from Liberal to BQ. It's really, really strange - even if the BQ had been leading in momentum, which they weren't, such a swing is extremely unrealistic. Maybe some sort of limit can be put on the amount that support can swing in a week? I think my biggest qualm is that no matter how much I'm leading, I know I could go down 20 points at any time for no real reason.
  7. Playing the Canadian scenario has showed me just how random this game is. I played the whole scenario rather well until a week before the election. Prior to that, I had been having great fun - Quebec was actually a pretty stagnant situation, which was nice because I put a lot of effort into it and we were looking at a pretty realistic 50 BQ 25 Liberal ish scenario. I was quite glad because it was the first time it didn't look like the typical 68 BQ election. Then on one poll, I went down seventeen points. SEVENTEEN POINTS. No scandal, no gaffes, no big events by other parties - in fact I was leading in momentum. So instead we end with one of those bloody stupid election results where no party breaks 30%, the tories magically win the atlantic, and the NDP wins 58 seats. This game just isn't fun anymore when the way you play has no impact on how well you do.
  8. I wasn't comparing him to Hitler or calling him a nazi. I'm talking about this strange idea that Jack Layton is somehow untouchable, a universally respected statesman about whom no ill can be spoken or else you're a "far-rightist" or something along that road. Sigh. How could he POSSIBLY be compared to a nazi? It's strange with these things - people jump on the slightest opportunity to say that someone is comparing a person to Hitler or calling them a Nazi - because it's an indefensible accusation that essentially eliminates someone's credibility. Oh, and don't forget anti-semitism - it's the same tool used by people and even easier to use - you don't even have to mention judaism to be an anti-semite now. It's insane.
  9. Sieg heil! No insulting der fuhrer Layton! He is our overlord and must be respected and worshipped by ALL!
  10. Tyking

    Canada Gov Sim

    Brian - could you please talk to me some time on MSN? Along with Mr. Kwan I'm trying to revitalize the NDP in our game and get some real dippers into the leadership. Could you please talk to me? I'd like you to be a part of this restructuring.
  11. Oooh oooh ooh I think I found the problem. I don't get it on the riding level (it defaults to zero, as I suppose it should), nor do I get it on the national level with PUBLIC polls (they hover around 1%). However - with PRIVATE polls the Ontario Greens always dip to -10%. Perhaps that's the problem!
  12. It happens all the time. For Ontario, usually right after the first poll the Greens dip to -10% For other scenarios, like my 1979 scenario, the NDP regularly polls at -1% in some Quebec ridings.
  13. I often have the most footsoldiers. Ah well.
  14. On the plus side - I recovered at the end and won the election with 114 seats. Tories got 95, NDP 34, Bloc 64. It still annoys me how impossible it is to beat the Bloc in this game.
  15. This game drives me insane sometimes - list your moments where you've wanted to go crazy. I just had one. I'll list my momentum and my opponent's, and then the result. Ontario: Me +10 Opponent -2 Result: I go down 10 points. Quebec: Me +8 Opponent -1 Result: I go down 12 points. Regardless of whether or not this was caused by things happening earlier in the week, all the news that week was positive for me except a small story when i went in the red for overspending. YOU DO NOT GO DOWN TWELVE POINTS ON POSITIVE NEWS.
  16. The Canada - 2004 scenario is so horribly unrealistic that I just can't play it. Ontario and most of the West is good and kudos to them on that, same with the Atlantic. However, Quebec and BC are INSANELY terrible and totally ruin the game for me nowadays. When you start the Liberals out with maybe 9-14 seats in Quebec, it's impossible for them to do anywhere near as well as they did in real life without a sustained focus on Quebec and thus ignoring Ontario, as Duceppe can stay in Quebec the entire game. And the problem with BC is obvious - THE LIBERALS ARE LEADING. THE LIBERLAS DO NOT LEAD IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. I've changed the electorate trends file but it does no good. I can't play this anymore.
  17. POPULAR VOTE ELECTIONS - elections where it's multiple regions but only the popular vote counts. This would do wonders for mayoral elections. That and proportional representation.
  18. It is with the Ontario - 2003 scenario, and I only saw it on the main screen (I didn't check the seats).
  19. Sorry, it's not fixed - I just had the Ontario green party fall to -10% at the first poll.
  20. Bah - fewer votes and more seats? Where's your whining for PR NOW?!?!?! ;-) And how on earth did Manning get THREE SEATS?
  21. Never mind, just saw the Ontario greens move to -10%. Still a problem.
  22. As for the negative percentages thing, while playing the Ontario scenario no longer leads to -12% for the Greens, I still see -1% in many ridings for the Greens and even the NDP.
×
×
  • Create New...