Jump to content
270soft Forum

Lahbas

Members
  • Content Count

    209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Lahbas

  1. Tried to add more but ran out of time, then got sidetracked by other things. Anyway, on those points I had tried to make: ​Wilder is surprisingly much weaker than I thought he had been. Now he did have the African American bloc largely behind him, but that was a tenuous alliance at best given it was sorely due to the fact that he was, well, black. Being a relative centrist he had more than a few positions that were alien to most African Americans (support for the death penalty for one), and the other candidates were making forays into the bloc whereas in '88 for example they had entirely
  2. Yes, that is the one that I looked at. I'm not sure if I will be able to respond by tonight (my router is set to shut off in about an hour and a half), but I can make some more general comments. Include Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder; being the one black candidate in the race he (arguably) had the black vote effectively behind him, though that it clearly was not nearly as united as it was when compared to say Jesse Jackson's coalition. His departure left African-Americans without a candidate to really rally around, and Clinton through his experience in reaching out to them became their "
  3. Alright. Got a boatload of comments but need a moment to jot them all down. Feel it may be better to tinker with the scenario itself and send it back your way, explaining the changes here will allowing you to essentially copy and paste some of them, or at least giving you a better blueprint to follow. I assume I can just send it through the one you delivered it through.
  4. I'm certainly interested; I may not have the time to properly work on my own scenarios, but I can certainly still give pointers and help others fine tune theirs. Proxy address is jamesrobertmclaughlin@yahoo.com
  5. I decided to split off from the original thread, so as to make a thread where the title makes it purpose clear. Unfortunately I do not have much to say at the moment beyond further critiquing of the '68 election scenario. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The first issue I should bring up is favorite-sons, which proved to be a rather intricate part of the "primaries" during that election. Essentially, there were a lot more of them then I had anticipated. Here is the rundown of who I have been able to identify or delegations that
  6. Yeah, not sure if Gallup would extend to Canada. : / I've found interviews and such with Frank Borman, but they never discuss politics, almost always being centered around his time with NASA and when he headed Eastern Airlines, in addition to some background bits. There are some articles that discuss Borman as a political candidate for an office (one Presidential, another I think as a Governor or Senator) but those are behind pay-walls. I'm trying to get access to those as well through my university library, but looking for backups just in case they prove to be rather bland regarding thei
  7. I've expanded the number of Issues to twenty-five, not counting the character ones and issue familiarity. I also have access to the original 1980 scenario and am pulling some from there, but obviously not all of them are present. I'd like to add events as well, but those aren't yet in the campaign editor, and I don't trust myself to add them in manually. Also I have to ask, a bit out of desperation unfortunately, does your local library or (if you are attending one) university has access to GallupBrain? I need access to the polls for this period in regards to the Republican candidates, and
  8. Its mentioned in one of the character bios, but I figure I should address this. Ronald Reagan ends up coming down with Pneumonia in the Fall of '78 while campaigning for congressional candidates with it eventually moving down to his lungs (something like this nearly happened in OTL but some months earlier). Sometime in December Reagan passes away, leaving the race for the Republican nomination wide open. Jack Kemp was originally supposed to be the undisputed "heir" to the movement, but I decided to have him run for the Senate instead which would set him up nicely for a run in '84 or '88. P
  9. Even though it is only a couple of levels down, I had entirely forgotten I ever worked on this. The files are on another computer, somewhere, and they might not even be present. Readily available I only have a single picture showing what it was like, and I am not certain how far along I actually was: (Never mind, it is not letting me post the darn image; apparently I don't have permission to post even one, let alone a link to one) Anyway, once I am done with the "A New Spirit - 1980" I'll try and pick this up again, if I am able to come across the files in one of the old mach
  10. Fixed the problem I was having, and so edited the post to reflect the scenario in full. All comments and suggestions are welcome. Hoping to get a testing version out by the first of March.
  11. This is the first in a series of scenarios I intend to release, going from 1980 to around 2008; I may or may not get there, depends on the time I have available. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The divergence for "A New Spirit" is that Jerry Brown enters the Democratic Primaries much earlier than he historically did, and so it is he rather than James Carter that ends up winning the Democratic Party nomination, and subsequently the general election against incumbent President Gerald Ford. Despite a new sense of optimis
  12. I've played at least forty games under the new engine (three as of the latest update) and never have I found it easy to gain percentages; again, all my gains were by tenths of a percent (this was with fog of war off; it might appear much differently with fog of war on, but when doing testing I look to see how the numbers actually move, and they move atomic fractions at a time usually). However I do agree that negative campaigning works too well, especially when done through themes, and works exponentially well even in areas where that specific politicians views should be popular (and even agai
  13. Haven't been here for a while, but I recently played the '68 scenario and so have some comments in regards to that. However at first I will concentrate on matters more general to the game rather than any scenario. I'm finding it far too easy to attack a candidate's positions, to the point where I can drive them into negative momentum in a state even if said position matches perfectly with that of the state (for example, hitting Wallace hard on Civil Rights in Alabama). There should probably be a much steeper curve in regards to the effectiveness of such ads or attacks, to the point where in
  14. It depends on how things develop, though I think and hope your right (as a Republican). On that note; I don't actually have much to say at the moment regarding the new 2008 scenario except that Idaho for whatever reason is a lean Republican state, with Democratic party set to 53% support there. I assume this is a simple mistake. The only other issue I have is with the events as they, at least as far as I can see, are very likely to happen and are fixed. Considering this is a simulation, with the campaigns being run differently each time from the start of the scenario whether by person or A
  15. Alright, so this is the list I compiled according to the latest polls; an asterisk (*) indicates a pickup from the other party: Governors AR - ® Asa Hutchinson * AZ - ® Ken Bennett CT - ® Thomas Foley * FL - (D) Charlie Crist * IL - ® Dan Rutherford * KS - (D) Paul Davis * KY - (D) Jack Conway LA - (D) Mitch Landrieu * MA - (D) Martha Coakley MD - (D) Anthony Brown ME - (D) Mike Michaud * NE - ® Pete Ricketts PA - (D) Allyson Schwartz * RI - (D) Angel Taveras TX - ® Greg Abbott VA - (D) Terry McAuliffe * D 23 (+3) - R 37 (-3) Senators AR - ® Tom
  16. I'll write up a list of potential changes to the endorsers, particularly those who are up in 2014 and 2015, in regards to the Senate and the Gubernatorial Seats. House members are a bit much but it might be wise to include the leadership within the House, such as the Speaker, Party Leaders and Party Whips.
  17. It's not so much of a problem in that he starts off to strong. If he were polling at the level he is now in real-life, around the one to two percent line, it would be perfectly reasonable as that would be the best way in which to launch him campaign, success in the debates. However now, now it makes him a major contender rather easily, which should not be the case.
  18. Like the new Debates screen, especially since it condenses all of the previous messages into one single message. Also noticed the attacks being weakened significantly, which needed doing; Clinton no longer experiences -10 Debate Scores. Warren seems to have been moved into the third slot, though the positions I suggested haven't been adopted, nor have her percentages changed to reflect this. It just seems an odd action on the whole if she is kept at her previous strength. Schweitzer is somewhere in the range of 17-22% in Montana at the moment in the few polls conducted there, a solid though
  19. Alright, that makes sense regarding George H. W. Bush. It makes Bush's endorsement a bit more competitive than it should be, but I suppose that can't be helped until such a time the system is given such options as that. As for the Greens and Libertarians, I went with those states they either did get on the ballot, or actively sought to get on the ballot and came close to succeeding. I had tried to keep note of it for Wikipedia as things proceeded during the 2012 election. Given we can't be sure what states the parties will be on in 2016, I think it might be best to carry over. If the Const
  20. Not sure why George H. W. Bush has been removed as an endorser for Jeb Bush; fairly certain he would endorse his own son. Place Libertarians on the Ballot in Michigan. Place Greens on the Ballot on the Ballot in Wyoming, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Kansas. Remove in North Carolina. Place Bloomberg on all State Ballots. Possibly add the Constitution Party, with Darrell Castle as the nominee (favored for the nomination) and Chuck Baldwin for VP (for lack of another choice at the moment). Add as endorsers: Americans for Prosperity, Democracy for America, Progressive Change Campaign C
  21. Ads appear to have been broken in the latest update, or at the very least Newspaper Ads. Any attempt to open the panel to choose where to run the ads causes an error, or in the case of local ads, the button to make them function. Edit: Made a mistake. This is limited to all ads that are given a local focus, or those ads you create for a specific state. It's not game-breaking but it is a major part of my personal strategies, and so slightly disappointing. Edit Edit: Alright, confused because now they seem to be working. It might be an issue that pops up on occasion, but not universally. I'd r
  22. Alright, so I looked at the new update. Most of what I am suggesting is cosmetic, but still important to the game mechanics: First and foremost, you need to set all of the endorsers to zero for the Third Party candidates, even Michael Bloomberg. I found it hilarious to see Jerry Brown endorsing Jill Stein for the Presidency. Now, for a candidate like Bloomberg, an argument could be made that some people like Angus King might be willing to support him, but this should be done on a case by case basis. Change the name noun for the "Bloomberg Party" from "Bloombergs" to "Bloomberg". Its a little
  23. Okay, another small batch of bugs to kill: I'm still not able to create new candidates, though this is only within the same party; I will make one, and it in the dropdown identifies it as "candidate 2", but the id remains "candidate" and it is not possible to do anything with it. Adding them thus appears to still require manual editing. When a candidate's id is changed it does not change the id in the percentages, at least in most cases; it actually worked with two candidates, but failed in the cases of another five. Also the percentages of removed candidates do not appear to be removed and r
  24. Never mind, I managed to constantly miss that the candidate bonuses were within the regions percentages section.
  25. Well, this was back in June, so I understand the system better now. However third party organization has to be taken into account too before finances are; currently the candidates run out of cash fast, and that is because they begin with an organization of one in each state, which is around, if I remember correctly, $150,000 a day. Without that they would be fine in their current state; bringing them to the levels I suggested, if the organization were to remain as is, would be catastrophic, leaving them without any funding whatsoever.
×
×
  • Create New...