Jump to content
270soft Forum

Prime Minister Infinity FEEDBACK


PM2015

Recommended Posts

Hi, I'm glad to play the first release of this game. I have some initial feedback:-

- The party logos for Conservatives and Labour need to be updated.

- The leader description for Jerry Adams has his surname as 'Adam' (without 's').

- The UKIP percentage in the constituencies of 'Rochester & Strood' and 'Clacton' should not be 0% as the MPs for these seats are UKIP MPs and still hold a popular majority.

- Nigel Farage 'debating' skill is too low (by 1 or maybe even 2).

- Ed Miliband 'issue familiarity' is too high (by 1).

- David Cameron 'charisma' is too high (by 1).

- Nigel Farage 'issue familiaruty' is too low (by 1).

- Labour percentages in the Home Counties (N & S) is too high.

- UKIP percentages in the Home Counties (N & S) is too low.

- UKIP/Farage relations with Labour/Greens/LibDems should not be 'normal' - should be 'low'. (UKIP and Conservatives should remain at 'normal').

I will continue to play and send more feedback if I come across any other issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Leaving aside the cosmetic problems (like the UK not being founded in 1776!)...

- The support for the SNP is far too low, with current polls suggesting they will win 50+ seats

- TV and radio advertising is not allowed anyway, by law, at all!!!

- Instead media debates and appearances are strictly controlled (there has to be balance), and free

- Newspaper ads can be targeted at seats, or can be national

- There is no means of advertising by leafleting (which is cheap, as candidates get free postage)

- Billboards are also missing - and are very important

- Far too many votes are recorded, by a factor of at least 10!

- The campaign is too short, with grossly insufficient time to target seats, build up any footsoldiers etc. in more than a fraction of seats. In reality the campaign started on 1st January 2015! Either more time is needed, or it should be much easier to target seats

- When barnstroming etc the seats are not in alphabetical order!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes sense to keep all of this stuff in one thread... I'm Scottish so I'm going to focus on Scotland a great deal since I know a lot more about it.

The SNP are way way down from where they should be, especially in the "Southern Scotland" region. The Electoral Calculus poll averages have the SNP at 45% across Scotland with Labour only on 25.5% (the Conservatives are on 16%, the Lib Dems are on 5%, UKIP on 5% and others are 4%, mostly Greens). This should be a very important thing to fix - UKIP being around 15% nationally will likely only give them a handful of MPs while the SNP are going to get at least 25 and most likely 35-45 which would make then the third party in most probably a hung parliament. They're probably going to get a much bigger boost in the Central belt and in the West than in the North East; but we can't say that 100% quite yet.

Also all the seats in Scotland (and the UK) seem to have Conservative incumbants, which is slightly wrong. I'd also add Alex Salmond in the Gordon constituency and make him a star candidate - former SNP leader and first minister during the referendum does make you rather important!

There's another bunch of constituency polls coming out next week - they might be handy in getting more accurate regional breakdowns? The data stuff seems relatively easy to fix and its better to have a beta version of a game that has the mechanics mostly correct (the advertising thing would be something to change just to make it not involve Radio/Television and lengthening the campaign a little bit might work - the thing's all but started already!) and a data set that needs work done than have a game with a decent data set but enough bugs to make it unplayable...

e: Finished a spacebar as an Independent: got the following results ordering by popular vote

Labour: 320 (33.5%) (and apparently over half a billion votes...)

Conservative: 292 (31.9%)

UKIP: 4 seats (14.2%)

Liberal Democrats: 0 seats (7.8%)
Greens: 3 seats (5.6%)

SNP: 8 seats (2.1%)

Independent: 2 seats (1.2%)

Plaid Cymru: 4 seats (0.9%)

The rest of the seats and votes are by NI parties; which got less votes than Plaid - although it would be nice to be able to scroll through all the parties!

Those national popular vote figures... seem plausible. The SNP are way too low (the share that they are getting in Scotland would add up to around 4-5% of the vote UK-wide, taking most of that from Labour) but the seats results seem to show that there's something up in the inital results. The Lib Dems aren't going to get totally wiped out at the next election - the most disasterious estimate I've seen still has them with 18 seats - and the location of some of the other parties seats is odd. UKIP won Orkney and Shetland by a fair margin (9% majority), which is a seat that will always be a Lib Dem seat and UKIP wouldn't be a party even remotely considered there. The other UKIP seats were Boston and Skegness, Buckingham (which is a complicated case as its the speakers seat and they are unopposed by the three old parties, and although a statistical model would show UKIP with a chance they wouldn't win it - perhaps buff the other candidate to make it all but unlosable?) and Newcastle-under-lyme - I'll let folk from England tell you if they are credible UKIP seats. They should win Clacton easily and be competitive in Rochester (although that's one that will be close). The three Green seats are Brighton Pavilion (Lucas's seat, so it makes sense), Cambridge (again makes sense, they have lots of old Lib Dem voters that might be attracted by the Greens) and Norwich South (which is being talked about as a Green target) so they seem to be perfectly fine! The SNP should be a lot more competitive in Southern Scotland (all of their eight seats where highland seats) and there are some problems (I can't see Labour holding Dundee West just based on the referendum results). I don't know a great deal about Wales but I can't see Plaid Cymru making any gains. The two independents are Down North and Wyre Forest, the former a popular incumbant Independent MP and the latter somewhere where an independent (well, National Health Action Party technically) has a chance to win.

tl;dr: the national picture seems to perfectly makes sense bar the SNP; but in individual constituencies the Lib Dems and the SNP are way, way too weak and Plaid seem a little too strong, UKIP are winning random seats that they shouldn't but the Greens and Independents seem to be doing well where they should and not where they shouldn't.

One source for local numbers might be the Election Forecast site; because they take constituency polling and local factors into account and actually list all of their current predictions for seat results by percentage for each party. Its not going to be 100% accurate (Labour are not going to hold Stirling...), although its better than nothing!

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

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has postal voting been reflected in any particular new way or will it be more of a 'get out the vote (GOTV)' enhancement. Maybe parties with a stronger HQ or stronger GOTV stat, the number of leaning voters will change to decideds?

According to the UK Electoral Commission in regard to 2010;

"Almost 7 million postal votes were issued -15.3% of the entire electorate. Despite the new rules on personal identifiers, together with the need for electors to reapply for a postal vote, this is

more than three percentage points above the level at the 2005 general election. Only in Northern Ireland, where different regulations apply, was there a decline in postal votes issued."

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/105896/Plymouth-GE2010-report-web.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Thanks for this - noted.

2. No, they're just on or off. It makes it more simple.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, postal voting isn't explicitly modeled. You're right that it's of increasing importance in elections - we'll see.

Has postal voting been reflected in any particular new way or will it be more of a 'get out the vote (GOTV)' enhancement. Maybe parties with a stronger HQ or stronger GOTV stat, the number of leaning voters will change to decideds?

According to the UK Electoral Commission in regard to 2010;

"Almost 7 million postal votes were issued -15.3% of the entire electorate. Despite the new rules on personal identifiers, together with the need for electors to reapply for a postal vote, this is

more than three percentage points above the level at the 2005 general election. Only in Northern Ireland, where different regulations apply, was there a decline in postal votes issued."

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/105896/Plymouth-GE2010-report-web.pdf

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

Regarding the 1.9.1 release, It's all looking good and running well.

A couple of things I've noticed, there is a noticable slowdown mid campaign in terms of processing turns. (I did a test of just LAB v. CON and this doesn't happen to the same extent so I guess it is the calculation of 650 constituencies between the 12 or so parties), maybe this is a optimisation issue but isn't a game breaker by anymeans.

On the election night which is fantastic with the constituency tabs/candidates, I noticed that double digit percentages show as 3..% rather than 30%.

Its all great apart from that :)

Many thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great game! But however I find that when you click on barnstorming och for exampel hold a rally, it takes quite some time for it to be "done", in other words it can be a little slow. The reason for me to reaction to this is beacuse when I play President Infinty the same things are done instantly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Daons,

Thanks for this - 1.9.3 (latest internal) has fixed the problem causing significantly longer turn processing (sometimes up to a minute). It should now take no more than a few seconds.

@Falcon,

Thanks for this - speeding up things on the Main Screen is top of the list of things to do.

@RI,

Those buttons have been removed - I can't remember if it made it into 1.9.2, or is just in the latest internal. With 1.9.3 they shouldn't be there - you can still scroll between constituencies by selected the drop-down box, and then pressing up-down or left-right.

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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...