Jump to content
270soft Forum

Recommended Posts

Thought I'd also make a topic on some of the worst defeats we've had.

Economy: Yes

Spies: Yes

Fog of War: Yes

Dynamism: No

Favorite Sons - 1836 - September 2, 2005

vanburenloss0902.JPG

I was Democratic Van Buren (blue), and this was one I played almost two months ago, before I used any very effective strategies. I managed to win the popular vote by 18% and still lost the electoral vote...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's interesting how easy it is to win the popular vote and lose the electoral vote. I'd say that your Red Dawn scenario would be extremely hard to win without any negative campaigning.

Here's another one of those ones where I won the popular and lost the electoral...and also did worse that in history (as Gore)...I don't really lose much on close matchups, so this was pretty surprising like the above one.

A Nation Divisible - 2000 - August 3, 2005

goreloss0803.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

the trick in making scenerios "hard" is setting the % of voters who are "solid" and will not change regardless

not to toot my own horn too much, but have you tried the 1956 "Manchurian Candidate" yet - that's all about negative campaigning. supposed to play as General Scott and try to undermine Isling

Link to post
Share on other sites

How solid did you make it for Red Dawn? I still won it by 21% (with negative campaigning, though)...

As for 1956, do you mean Lyman? I can easily defeat Iselin with Lyman, but Scott only starts out with 1% or something. So I'm not too sure that's doable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like going negative, so I don't.  but it does seem to swing the game a lot

this is my current top finishes w/o negatives or scandals (by me against them)

Yeah, I should probably start playing games the old-fashioned way again...without negative campaigning or scandals. The elections were more fun then. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason that you can win the popular vote by so much and still lose the electoral vote or visa-versa is simply a game problem. In the 80soft games, if you only campaign in about 8 states, like what happened in 2004, those are the only states where any momentum occurs. Some solid states basically never have any momentum. But in real life, events matter more on a national level. 80soft games are a state competition, while real life is more of a national. If possible, I think this should be changed in the new P4E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe scenarios should just be more partisan in a sense...so that when I play as Hoover I don't overwhelmingly beat FDR in 1932. Forget dynamism...negative campaigning (and the ad cheat combined!) is enough to lose a candidate some 30% of all votes (a 60% swing). I think that campaigning in general should have a smaller effect on the election...that might fix it.

I also agree with johnny_raoul's assessment. News in itself should be like scandals (though of course, as I've said, with a smaller effect).

Momentum shifts should be less drastic, that's all. Dukakis going from +17% to -8% in Election 1988 was big enough...

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...