Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Alfonzo last won the day on May 12 2012

Alfonzo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation


About Alfonzo

  • Rank
    Political Guru

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Essentially a uniform swing implementation? That would be pretty handy. It would be great if it could also be done by state.
  2. Yeah definitely. State governments (both Labor and the Libs) have been privatising things for years. The mining tax as an issue has died down a lot, but it should still be up there, albeit as a low issue that no one really cares about, and the carbon tax should be relatively high, though I think a lot of the hate for it has died down.
  3. WorkChoices should be replaced with "Industrial relations", and the stances edited to reflect "we need industrial relations reform" (on the right) to "things are fine the way they are" (around the centre) to something else for the left.
  4. Just a little nitpicking, it's actually 76 seats needed for a majority. Once the party appoints a speaker, who traditionally doesn't vote, they go down to 75 seats out of 149 - a 1 seat majority. I'm hopeful to see major updates to PM4E 2013 over the next few months. In particular, perfecting the distribution of preferences, and handling the independents (of which, there will be several, coming from a wide range of ideologies, definitely too many to be lumped into one party).
  5. They do, which is where this thread spawned from. It doesn't make sense to me that the centre-left Andrew Wilkie is lumped in the same party as the far-right Bob Katter. I suggested a couple of years ago to have three independent parties, one for the left, one for the centre, and one for the right. But I think this new suggestion works a lot better. It allows independents to be truly independent, and run more focused campaigns without being able to affect the campaigns at a national scale.
  6. That's the whole point of this suggestion. It makes it easier to implement independents on a large scale. Even in C4E it's still annoying that you have to create two additional federal parties just for a pair of independents, who somehow can spin national news, research national scandals, and run ads across the country.
  7. Namely: Run all ads in all targeted regions Run all ads in all regions Run all [tv, radio, newspaper, web] ads in all targeted regions Run all [tv, radio, etc.] ads in all regions Run all ads in selected regions Remove all ads run max times in targeted regions Remove all ads run max times in any region Remove all ads run max times in selected regions Remove all ads run max times in all regions Remove all ads Stop all ads The ones in bold are, in my opinion, absolutely essential. We also badly need a "create multiple ads" function. It could (should) include functions such as:
  8. Every time you ask the creators to add something to the game, particularly adding things to scenarios, think about it from a scenario creators perspective. Imagine you want to create a new scenario for an election 50 years ago. Now imagine your suggestion has been implemented. That means that you, the scenario creator, will have to provide detailed demographics for regions and parties, as well as percentages for all of them, and percentages for their political lining. Adding something like this would just make the game a nightmare for scenario creators.
  9. It bothers me that to include independent candidates in the game, you have to set up a full national party, just to campaign in basically one seat. The game needs mechanics for NPC independent candidates. They don't have a "leader", they don't participate in debates, or try to spin news. They operate entirely at the individual seat level. They research local scandals, spin local scandals, advertise in their one seat only, and fundraise in their one seat only. This, to me, makes more sense. We don't have a bunch of independents cluttering up the main screen, in cases like Australia with mult
  10. This is a little nitpick but I think it needs addressing. I don't like that Obama gets "Obama not on the campaign trail" as early as January. Surely no one expects the president to be campaigning for his re-election that early. I think for incumbents, "[name] not on the campaign trail" negative news stories shouldn't occur until after their parties convention. Moreover, it would be interesting to include "[name] campaigning too much" negative news stories for incumbents who spend too much time campaigning before the convention.
  11. It's a dramatic improvement. There are still a lot of bugs that need to be ironed out, but for the most part, the 2012/2016 game is significantly better than the 2008 game.
  12. I also don't see Herman Cain in the 2012 scenario. Or an 'off-by-default' Huckabee (before anyone officially nominated, Palin, Huckabee and Romney were the default assumed candidates). Presumably we'll see these candidates added, as well as some of the others from the 2012 scenario made for P4E 2008. Huckabee could probably be added to the 2016 scenario, and the number of Democrats could be expanded. Biden might be too old by then, but he is still a good likely Democrat candidate.
  13. http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2010/10/preference-flows-at-the-2010-election.html This should be perfect.
  14. Thanks for spurring this thread again. I'm disappointed to see the loss of the preference weights from the newest PM4E engine. Instead the has to manually input preference distributions to make things work, which is a tedius problem if you want to have more than a small handful of parties.
  15. I couldn't find an endorsers list for 2007. The newspapers would all be the same. I'm trying to think back if there are any other possible endorsers (politicians, lobby groups and the likes). Probably a few unions and business lobby groups.
  • Create New...