Jump to content
270soft Forum


Steering Council Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Taft

  1. I think I have a two-part fix on the web ads (and indeed on ads in general): (1) The cost is set at $1000/ad to run (and $1000/ad to produce a baseline ad). Simply bumping this up would reduce the appeal of this strategy, since spamming out $8-10k/turn for these ads (half to produce, half to run) is cheap for what it does. (2) Is there any way to vary the intensity of how much an ad is being run (i.e. to spend more or less on it)? This has always been a non-part of the game, I know, but I have to wonder all the same.
  2. Just a thought, but is there any way to sim PEBs? I remember that there was something like this in the German game.
  3. Mechanically, I see there as being a bug in the game in the form of web ads. As UKIP I was able to spam web ads (a winning strategy is to bang out 3-5/day early on, increasing once those ads allow you to tip a steady march of endorsers...leading to a steady positive momentum of 4-6 for most of the game), leading to an end-of-election result of: 433 UKIP (33.4%) 113 Labour (24.6%) 17 Conservative (21.6%) 10 LibDem (7.8%) 55 SNP (4.6%) 1 Green (4.1%) 2 PC (I believe; they weren't on the results sheet I got a screenshot for) 3 Independent (1.1%) Additionally, when playing I got a feeling that trying to target non-web ads was a bit too finitely controlled. With a mailer this would be one thing, but with TV/Radio/Newspaper ads, the idea of being able to run those in specific constituencies was a bit absurd (bear in mind that the size of a UK constituency is something like 1/6 that of a US House district). Moreover, trying to pick and choose a large number of seats (say, 75-100) is annoyingly time consuming. Going back to regional targeting thus makes sense for a whole host of reasons.
  4. Here's my thinking: (1) Irish politics would end up with three main cleavages: -Economic issues (pretty standard) -Social issues (also standard) -Devolution/independence (likely seeking some sort of change that would prevent the UK Parliament from being able to reverse devolution by act). Here, there's a continuum from pro-present situation (Unionists/UUP) to permanent devolutionist (Irish Party) to still agitating for independence (Sinn Fein). (2) In this vein, here are the parties I see: -Unionist/Conservative: Pro-present situation, socially conservative, economically moderate to conservative -Labour: Uncertain on devolution, socially mixed, fiscally liberal -Liberal: Pro-permanent devolution, socially liberal, fiscally liberal (but to the right of Labour) -Sinn Fein: Pro-independence, fiscally liberal-ish, socially liberal-ish -Irish Party: Pro-permanent devolution, socially conservative, fiscally mixed. -Possible would be a version of the SNP. It does seem possible that you'd get a more hard right party thrown in the mix; the main issue is that I get a feeling that there would be a bit more of a "big tent" effort in several of the parties. You'd basically have 3-4 separate instances of a two-and-a-half party system: One in England and Wales, a version in Scotland, another one in Northern Ireland and Dublin, and a fourth in rural Ireland.
  5. This does exist...in PM4E Australia.
  6. Just wanted to offer my profuse thanks again for letting me get the old game back.
  7. Just wanted to offer my profuse thanks again for letting me get the old game back.
  8. Taft


    Yeah, I got a crash on April 2, 1912 while playing as Underwood. Also, I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but ad costs in the scenario are negligible at the moment. A nationwide newspaper advert only runs $300 or so per day...which seems like an error.
  9. This is a very odd request, but would it be possible to buy a copy of the original P2000 (or, more properly, one of the later versions that used realistic state profiles rather than randomly generating them...I still remember the GOP winning DC, for example)? I know the game was very much an unrefined version of the latest game and had far different mechanics, but I would like to play it again. I've probably got a copy on an old computer somewhere, but...that would be about four computers ago and I may well not still have that computer around.
  10. Taft

    Great Britain 1910

    I don't know what to do to fix it? As near as I can tell, nobody knows what file is causing it.
  11. Taft

    Great Britain 1910

    Alright. I'm getting the Liberal error, and I've reset the graphics folder as indicated. Uh...
  12. Taft

    Great Britain 1910

    wcdunn[at]widomaker[dot]com Edit: Well, I misread the year this thread was started. Go me. Anyhow...I would like the scenario if at all possible.
  13. Tony, Thanks for the reassurances; for some reason, I thought it was out of Beta (that's a mea culpa). That said, I'm especially glad to see 1 for Australia, and 2/3 are good overall. Thanks for the response, and I do look forward to seeing the product advance.
  14. I will admit that I did not particularly enjoy the C4E engine when it first came out, but I must say that I have found its implementation in the Australia 2010 game to be utterly unenjoyable. There are a couple of problems, from what I can tell: 1) It does not adapt to preferential voting. Period, end of story. This is a problem given the Australian electoral system. Ditto the Coalition. 2) Undecideds rise rather than falling throughout the campaign. This results in the Greens picking up around 20% of the vote much of the time (they seem to get about half the undecideds), even on a couple of Green spacebar campaigns. With the computer set to "hard", I'd come in at about 18% on a spacebar-only campaign; on "easy", it was 21-22%. On easy, I once held the spacebar down to win an MP! 3) The engine itself is clumsy, and the costs of the ground operations feel rather outsized at times, while the detail level gets to be too much. The detail here is just a bit too much for my liking, I guess. Now, I'm not going to slam the engine outright, but at the rate things are going, I have found my interest in the game to be severely unenjoyable when compared to my previous experiences over the last decade. I don't know whether it is the undecideds flaw or if the detail has just hit a level that makes the game unenjoyable, but unless there are substantial improvements going forward, President Forever 2012 may indeed be the first game you've made in years that I do not buy. This engine has not gained my endearment in any way whatsoever.
  15. I think the ratings are meant, at least to some extent, to represent the party as well as the leader. While a "Mr. Clean" politician might be able to dodge the feeling of a sleazy party, there are enough issues with Labour (and the Tories, to be fair) getting wrapped up in the expenses mess and so forth that it's not even funny.
  16. I'm of a mixed opinion on this matter. The main thing is that I'm not sure how much capability there is to add at this stage. The other thing is that scenario packs could easily add a steady, low-effort side-stream of income to the company's balance sheet and be used to fund other improvements (such as those you suggest might be worked on).
  17. Alright, fliers/pamphlets are broken. The last day of any ad doesn't charge you in the game. Pamphlets are a one-day ad. Anyone see a problem relating to minor parties? (Hint: UKIP should NOT be able to get to 9% when you're playing it)
  18. Tony, Just so you know, under "Political Game News", the URL lists "/political_games" twice, resulting in an error. The other link on the main page works fine to get it, but you might want to fix this one as well. And yes, I know it's been hectic with both games coming out in such short order.
  19. I ran through election night. Clearly not finished...a number of seats swung wildly. Montana ended up in the Democrat column and Massachusetts ended up a swing state. Vermont, with no Republican candidate, went GOP, and a number of other states did odd things. The final vote total listed something like 230 million votes cast, CA had 532% voter turnout...etc. Still, the interface fundamentals seem fine.
  20. To offer an example, I got a +9.3% in Kansas on the map. However, when looking at the current polling graph in Kansas, it showed no notable shift in the state. Another error: Spending sometimes goes screwy. For example, I just had a day where I managed to spend nearly $6 million with only two ads in existence and one running (at $2 million a day). Edit: I reproduced it. Nebraska, three weeks in, showed an increase of 5.2% for the GOP. I went to check the numbers, and got a graph that was flat. When I went to pull up the state-level list of seats, the list came up just fine but I also got an error message ("List index out of bounds (4)").
  21. I'm not sure whether this is a bug or not, but the undecided vote share doesn't seem to decline as the game progresses. Also, indicated increases/decreases in your polling in a region vs. your opponents on the map don't always actually pan out when looking at the numbers in those areas.
  22. Went to try and localize an ad and got the following recurring error message: "Access violation at address 00415F4E in module 'congress43.exe'. Read of address 0000008C."
  23. Ok, I get the following message when I try to deploy a local scandal in FL-8: "Access violation at address 0045BE49 in module 'congress43.exe'. Read of address 00000018."
  24. The "reflective" look on the icons makes it a bit hard to tell what some of them represent because of the white shading involved. I know it looks sleek, but it mucks up the ability to clearly tell what each icon does/stands for.
  25. Tony, Quick feedback, but the reflective-looking icons are giving me a headache and can get a bit blurry. Could you at least slip in a set that are straight checks and X-es like are in P4E and PM4E? Edit: Another thing: Could you enable sorting House Seats by R+ and D+ separately? i.e. Positive to negative, not just absolute values? Edit 2: Got the same error message.
  • Create New...