Jump to content
270soft Forum

An Update is Long Overdue

Recommended Posts

We have a few other things that we are working on right now, but once they are done we will update the official 2008 scenario.


Anthony Burgoyne


So much has changed since January and continues to do so. President Forever needs to keep up, especially if it wants to capitalize on election excitement.
Link to post
Share on other sites
We have a few other things that we are working on right now, but once they are done we will update the official 2008 scenario.

As far as I know the problem with Republicans being able to select their VP properly after the convention is still broken as well. As I had reported several times once the convention is held you have to choose your VP with NO information on their abilities. Then since the general election has already started the change VP button doesn't exist. It makes it unplayable this way. I still win anyway, but I would like to be able to see the VP attributes when I am making selections.

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

I hope they focus more on the game itself rather than scenarios. Scenarios are easy to make anyway.

A few things that may have already been mentioned/dealt with:

Debates: 1.Add the primaries debates

2. Change the way they work. it's always been a weakness. Make it so that the debate result affects overall momentum rather than the 'issue familiarity' issue. For the news story, make it so that the issue dealt with is one of the issues in the winning candidate's theme.

There should also be more result options with the following effects on momentum in each state (1st debate,2nd,3rd, VEEP)

e.g. Triumph +6 for winner, -4 for loser

Win +3/2/2.5/2.5 for winner, -2/-1/-1.5/1.5 for loser

Edge +1/0.7/0.3/0.3 for winner, -0.5/0.3/0.2/0.2 for loser

Draw 0,0

So for example, if we take 2004. The first debate might be classed as 'Kerry win'. As a result he gets a momentum of +3 in every state and Bush gets -2 in every state. A news story then follows concerning the debate and covering the 'military intervention' issue as that's in Kerry's theme. As i've shown above, I think that 'triumph' should reflect a situation where a candidate has given a 'knockout blow' or soundbite and that this should not be affected by which debate it's in. (This is because it's a short clip that gets repeated on newsnetworks over the following couple of weeks and is a news stroy in itself..)

To go back to the 2004 example, the VP debate ( a draw) would have no effect. The second presidential debate (a draw) would aslo have no effect. The last (Kerry edge) would give Kerry +0.3 and bush -0.2.

The first debate is often the most important with the middle deabte being of little importance and the last being the last word.

I know I've been waffling and this is all a bit jumbled but i hope that you will take this onboard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice if the issue importance factor would pick up some momentum itself. Each game, I set my candidates to the same 3 or 4 issues and leadership...since all the others are of little or no importance for the entire game. Gets a little boring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that the polls are less accurate could we get rid of the idea that footsoldiers in 'comforatbly ahead' states should automatically fundraise. I'm sick to death with seeing them fundraise in the last week of campaigning, only to see the state turn red on election night when I knew it always would.

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

Join the conversation

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

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.

  • Create New...