Jump to content
270soft Forum

Recommended Posts

Who do people think would be strong general-election candidates, and who weak ones? The candidate lists, again: Socialists: Stalin, Mao, Attlee, Mandela, MLK, Gandhi, Nasser, Che, Trotsky, Lenin, Gorbachev, Golda Meir; Liberals: Franklin Roosevelt, Gladstone, Napoleon, Jefferson, Constantine, Akhenaten, Pericles, Sun Yat-Sen, Ashoka the Great, Pierre Trudeau; Conservatives: Churchill, Queen Victoria, Lincoln (currently), Reagan, Hammurabi, Suleiman the Great, Chiang Kai-shek, Ramses the Great, Charlemagne; Fascists: Hitler, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, Mussolini, Pinochet, Franco, Vlad the Impaler; Populists: Washington, Teddy Roosevelt, Caesar, Peter the Great, Alexander the Great, Cyrus the Great, Simon Bolivar, Hatshepsut, Cromwell. I think I can do the regional allocation part alright, but as for who's strong and who's weak I could use some help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Certainly as VPs. I don't want to just overload the field with Americans and Britons, though. I tried to limit myself strictly to five apiece for each of those countries, with MLK, FDR, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Washington for America and Attlee, Gladstone, Churchill, Victoria, and Cromwell for England. I've since added Teddy Roosevelt and Reagan, of whom I remain skeptical. Twelve Anglos is just too many, I say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly as VPs. I don't want to just overload the field with Americans and Britons, though. I tried to limit myself strictly to five apiece for each of those countries, with MLK, FDR, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Washington for America and Attlee, Gladstone, Churchill, Victoria, and Cromwell for England. I've since added Teddy Roosevelt and Reagan, of whom I remain skeptical. Twelve Anglos is just too many, I say.

Can you please try and avoid two candidates of the same last name, it can be a bit of an issue in terms of appearance of the map and lists. I'd rather not have to check colors all the time because the names are the same in a list. F.D.R. should get the nod over Teddy anyways.

As for the English, I think Henry VI would get the nod over some of your list, but I guess balancing era's should probably win out.

MLK might be better off as a crusader for one of the pro-civil rights parties, or a major civil rights candidate, or as a VP. Lincoln seems to be a huge miss on the American list, my list of influential American presidents looks something like: 1. Lincoln 2. FDR 3. Washington 4. Kennedy (admittedly largely as an iconic symbol of a movement) 5. Reagan (as much as I dislike him, he has changed the face of a country).

What was the reasoning on Jefferson over Lincoln?

You can probably solve the glut of candidates problem by splitting the US into multiple regions (2 or 4 would work well).

Your English list possibly has a similar solution, but I'm not the one to ask about it.

Ultimately I think the biggest issue is how do you set where the countries and candidates are at on policy. If the candidate policy is actually based on what they did at the time they were in power, Lincoln would be to the right of Reagan on most issues. If you want to base it on where they were politically relative to where their country was at the times, then your actual position sliders need relatively vague descriptions. Where the countries are can be very tricky too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh wait, you're right. My original list didn't have both Roosevelts in it, it lacked Teddy and has Lincoln. And it's not about the candidates overcrowding the region, it's that I don't want to have that many effing' Brits and Americans from a philosophical standpoint. And MLK is the only half-decent American who can stand in the global Socialist primary. Other than that I had FDR, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Washington, originally. Since then I've been advised to add Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt.

And I'm not really trying much of a historical adjustment for people's issue positions. Take, for instance, what the introduction of Islam said about polygamy: it should be strictly limited. Only four wives. But saying "four wives is okay" is still a very pro-polygamy stance overall, even though it was a relatively anti-polygamy stance when it was introduced. I'm not trying to correct for things like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oy. I just added eight of my Nationalist candidates, and I'm trying to spacebar through but I'm getting various errors. Several of them, in fact; I think I got a "floating point error" and a "list index out of bounds" error both when I tried to end my first turn as the unopposed Churchill. The theory behind the Nationalists being that they are local "favorite son" candidates in a party with no primaries, so each of them ought to end up on the general election ballot separately. I've tried this on little experimental scenarios before and it's worked, but it appears to be screwing up right now. I have no idea why. Anyone have any ideas?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know that feeling where something really tricky you're trying to do works perfectly?

Okay, so, I fixed it: I hadn't assigned ANY delegates for the Nationalists! Changing that fixed the problem, and I spacebarred through as Churchill. Stalin won the Socialist primaries, and picked himself (gulp!) as VP; gotta figure out how to make that not happen, 'cause I'm certain I didn't put Stalin in his own running-mate list. Jefferson won the Liberal primary, taking Pericles as his running-mate (I think he had no other options). I won the Conservative nomination, obviously, being unopposed, and picked the also-unopposed Ramses the Great as my VP. Genghis Khan won the Fascist primary, and took himself as a running-mate. Once again, not sure how that happened. I had the Populist Party turned off, since I haven't really developed it yet very much. And then there were a bunch of Nationalists running in their not-really-a-primary.

On Election Night, Jefferson won big with 190 out of 459 EVs. He took Canada, the US, Mesoamerica, Brazil, Scandinavia, Great Britain, Iberia, France, Central Europe, the Balkans, Palestine, Persia, Pakistan, Egypt, Middle Africa, Eastern Africa, South Africa, Korea, Malaysia, and Australasia. I, Churchill, came in second, taking 91 EVs from China, Mongolia, Northern Africa, Sahara, Western Africa, and Madagascar. Stalin won just 34 EVs from Russia, Eastern Europe, Venezuela, and Argentina. Genghis Khan took 42 EVs, winning Central Asia, Poland, Germany, Italy, and the Horn of Africa. And then Ieyasu Tokugawa won Japan, Ho Chi Minh won Indochina, Akbar the Great won India, Abu Bakr won Arabia and the Fertile Crescent, Charles Stewart Parnell won Ireland, and Atahualpa won Andes and Colombia.

Now, the one problem I observed was that the Nationalist vote shifted around a whole lot, so for instance Parnell won 6.6% of the vote in Mesoamerica, where I hadn't intended him to really be on the ballot at all, and Akbar the Great won 8.3% in Korea. Both of those places have their own favorite sons coming, but I hadn't added them yet when I played this run-through. But Parnell also took 4.4% in the Andes, where Atahualpa was winning. One thought I have to try and fix this is to have the Nationalist primaries really early in the campaign to lock in votes before the people I have set at 100% have time to lose any support; maybe on the first or second day of the campaign. My only concern is that if I do that, I might end up with people endorsing one another, which I don't want.

EDIT: Oh, and the Parliament picked Khan. Probably they were scared of what he'd do if they picked someone else, like the guy who won 6.5% more of the national vote and 148 more EVs than he had.

EDIT #2: And I'm pretty sure Castro won the Caribbean. He ought to have done, at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tommy Douglas.

Or if you really want an American, Eugene V. Debs.

I'd go with Douglas, but that may because I'm a Canadian.

I'd also suggest Hideki Tojo as a Fascist. You have all the other WWII leaders, why not complete the set?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Douglas, actually, though I imagine he'll be pretty weak outside of Canada (it's already such a crowded field!) And the thing about MLK is that he was a socialist, and toward the end of his life he was advocating mainly for anti-poverty causes (and against the War). Debs is obviously more of a socialist, and probably makes a good VP candidate, but I figure he's not enough of a presence. I think I will add Tojo; you're right, it does make for better balance.

As for the problem of people choosing themselves as VP, what would people say to my taking off the VP lists all the Presidential contenders and replacing them with a bunch of B-list candidates? Maybe not the highest priority of anything, but I think it might be better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want a North American Socialist/Communist pickings are slim:

MLK is a bit of a stretch, Tim Buck is probably an ok option but compared to most of the name recognition in here he's quite outclassed.

MLK's not really a stretch considering he was a confirmed socialist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would call him a Social Democrat more than anything, but certainly left-wing.

The Socialist Party includes everything from Communists to fairly moderate Social Democrats. Clement Attlee is in there; so is Mandela. Then you have the slightly more nationalistic socialists like Nasser. Socialism is a big tent; so is liberalism, so is conservativism. Many people use these words to describe themselves and, in so doing, they signify many different things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Okay, I am now looking for ideas for vice-Presidential candidates for each of the parties. For all the global parties, I just want a selection of lower-tier historical figures; for the nationalists, I think I want one (or maybe two or three) people to correspond to each of the nationalist candidates, though it doesn't matter for the primaries because of the jungle primary setup. Ideally I'd also like to get people from regions that haven't yet contributed a candidate:

Afghanistan

Brazil (Brazil + Guyana + Suriname + French Guinea)

Central Europe (Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Liechtenstein, Slovakia, Switzerland)

Eastern Africa (Rwanda, Burundi, Comoros, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Seychelles, Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe)

Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Djibouti, Eritrea, Somalia)

Madagascar (Madagascar + Mauritius)

Malaysia (Indonesia + Brunei + Malaysia + Singapore + Philippines + Papua New Guinea)

Middle Africa (Angola + Cameroon + Central African Republic + D.R. of the Congo + Equatorial Guinea + Gabon + Republic of the Congo)

Pakistan

Poland

Polynesia (any small pacific island)

Sahara (Western Sahara + Chad + Burkina Faso + Mali + Mauritania + Niger)

Scandinavia (Denmark + Finland + Norway + Sweden + Iceland)

Venezuela

Western Africa (Nigeria + Benin + Cape Verde + Code d'Ivoire + The Gambia + Ghana + Guinea + Guinea-Bissau + Liberia + Sao Tome and Principe + Senegal + Sierra Leone + Togo)

The following people are currently on tap as candidates:

Socialists:

Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Mao Zedong, Che Guevara, Clement Attlee, Nelson Mandela, Mohandas Gandhi, Gamal Nasser, MLK, Golda Meir, Mikhail Gorbachev

Liberals:

Franklin Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, William Gladstone, Napoleon Bonaparte, Ashoka Maurya, Pericles, Akhenaten, Augustus Constantine, Sun Yat-Sen, Pierre Trudeau

Conservatives:

Ramses II, Suleiman the Great, Winston Churchill, Queen Victoria, Charlemagne, Hammurabi, Chiang Kai-shek, Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan (questionable, personally I'd like to turn him back into a VP)

Fascists:

Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Fransisco Franco, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, Augusto Pinochet, Vlad Dracula, Hideki Tojo

Populists:

Hatshepsut, Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great, Peter the Great, George Washington, Cyrus the Great, Simon Bolivar, Oliver Cromwell, Theodore Roosevelt

Nationalists:

Ieyasu Tokugawa, Kim Il-Sung, Shaka Zulu, Abu-Bakr, Akbar the Great, Charles Stewart Parnell, Robert Menzies, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Enver Hoxha, Qin Shi Huang, Muammar al-Qaddafi

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Would very much like it if you sent me a copy of your world map. I am very impressed, tried this myself and it was an epic fail.

Here's the general election:

4561248864_5926876099_o.jpg

I really want to even things out between the three parties a little bit more.

Here's the Socialist primaries:

4560885422_72a452d46f_o.jpg

West Africa is Mandela's, Stalin is leading in East Europe, Central Asia, Poland, and Germany, Gandhi in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Gorbachev in Central Europe and the Balkans, Attlee in Italy, and Guevara in the Caribbean. (Of those not on the front page, Nasser is the gold, King is the light yellow, Gandhi is the turquoise, Guevara the green, Gorbachev the pink, Golda Meir the light blue.)

The Liberal primaries:

4560622621_d4f3678ec9_o.jpg

Not including Hammurabi, Constantine, Pericles, or Ashoka. The light blue is Sun Yat-Sen and the sand color is Akhenaten. Russia, I'm pretty sure, is FDR's, while Gladstone is leading in Asia Minor and Palestine as well as India. Sun is leading Afghanistan, and Napoleon the Balkans. Obviously, Pericles will end up taking the Balkans, Constantine Asia Minor, Ashoka India, and Hammurabi much of the Middle East.

The Fascist primaries really, really don't want to load. I wonder why. But it's basically Mussolini (gray) in Italy, Franco (yellow) in Iberia, Pinochet (dark blue) in all of South America, Vlad the Impaler in Eastern Europe, Tamerlane in central Asia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, Genghis Khan taking the rest of Asia and all of Africa, and Hitler taking everything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been unfortunately busy with a few other things. It could be soonish; I only really need to finish up the Nationalists, do the Conservatives, and then maybe put in endorsers. I'm planning rather explicitly to not have events, both because I can't make them work and because it's kind of a timeless scenario, so events would be weird.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...