I understand that you must limit options somehow to make game mechanics work, but some of the limitations on which blocks each candidate can put capital toward seem inhibiting and not accurate.
Specifically, it has been big news about how the Republicans made a concerted effort to capture more of the Hispanic vote.
Don't really know much about the game, just a comment.
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 301
(6/22/05 4:43 pm) Reply
Voting blocks
In reality, it doesn't matter about the blocks, at least as far as the simulation goes. I won't even use that data in 2008. It's strictly there for gaming purposes.
Now as far as the game goes, not every block contributes 100% to that party. Only Conservative Christians and Organized Labor do that. Whichever party the block is primarily composed of is the party that has the right to influence it.
The opposing party candidate, if they have a cross-party tie, (i.e. a Hispanic Republican governor) can reduce the level of activation for the block. This results in more of those voters becoming undecided, and therefore available for pick-up throughout the campaign.
As far as targeting the opposing block outright, I haven't come up with a feasible way for doing so. I'm sure there are some things that could be done to this part of the game, like maybe adding a block or two, but it would mean totally revamping what's there. Maybe later, but for now it's working pretty well.
If you're interested in participating, I'd be more than happy to email you a copy of the instructions. It's not real hard, you just need a basic understanding of politics. The learning curve is about a turn or two.
Edited by: jwlbigdog at: 6/27/05 1:21 am
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 302
(6/22/05 4:59 pm) Reply
Text
So does anyone have a solution on how to get the tables to line up right? I'm copying and pasting from a Word document, and it doesn't want to transfer it right, even though it looks right in the box before I post it.
Not a huge deal, it just looks sloppy.
Edited by: jwlbigdog at: 6/22/05 5:00 pm
Re: Text
This reminds me of "The Political Machine," at least a little. (Except you can't run attack ads, and it seems more like a simulation as less like a parody.) Are the debate results random? How does the computer determine the specifics of the debates? Is there room for random occurances, such as a politician's bastard child suddenly popping up (like in Primary Colors?
Oh, and just how did the President refer to homosexuals in the third debate?
Fascinating stuff. I had just been reliving the campaign anyway with the news that Kerry did worse at Yale than Bush.
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 310
(6/26/05 5:22 am) Reply
Debate mechanics
I own the Political Machine, and in a way, it kind of inspired me to try this. I didn't like the way they did their election night, and they just took their data straight from the exit polls, which didn't reflect some changes. I used the same source, but modified it somewhat. Instead of just relying on the demographic info, I factor in the liberal/conservative question, as well as a few other things to determine the party base. So it's like the Political Machine in a way. Only better.
You're right, this is a simulation. The game is dressing, but it's fun. There could be more done with it, and I guess if I found a designer or some computer genius that could take my Excel program and turn it into a real computer game it might do something, but that's not my primary goal.
The debates are random, based on a die roll, with modifications based on issues, debate strength, etc. I've got a decent system, but I haven't spend an extraordinary amount of time on this. As my main purpose is to forecast 2008, I need a system that's not real complex, so I can easily override with the real data as it happens during the campaign.
The President didn't actually refer to homosexuals in any way: I used a twist on Kerry's screw-up with Cheney's daughter to illustrate a major Bush snafu on moral values. You know me, I like to narrate. The debate rounds do match up to real issues, and will affect the candidates' positions on the issues. If someone scores (or loses) points on an issue, I include that in the write-up on the debate.
No random occurances, I haven't found a need for them. I figure if anything like that happens in 2008, I can adjust my campaigning points across the board (I know, no one has a clue what I'm talking about...) Never heard of Primary Colors.
The beauty of this is, it's been pretty darn accurate so far. I've got a working model for 2008 now, though I'm sure that I'll need to adjust it some demographic-wise. Especially since I'm relying on the off-year elections to tell me some stuff. Other than that, I'm ready to receive campaign data as it comes out in a few years. Ran it for the first time tonight; if you're curious, I figure H. Clinton gets the Democratic nod, with Bill Richardson as her running mate. Sen. Frist for the Repubicans, with Jeb Bush as the Veep. The first run came out 301-237 for Frist. Popular vote Frist by 1.4%.
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 312
(6/28/05 4:47 am) Reply
In fact...
Imp, if you're interested, I'd be more than happy to send you a copy of the rules. My email's jwlbigdog@hotmail.com (which I probably gave out already) if you'd like me to forward it to you.
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 316
(6/30/05 8:51 pm) Reply
Re: In fact...
Your Senate Majority Leader.
He's the senior senator from Tennessee, and the most conservative out of the three believed to be the early frontrunners for the nomination. Giuliani and McCain are the other two. I don't think Giuliani can get the core of the party like a true conservative will, and McCain probably won't run, anyway (getting too old). The other possibility is Jeb Bush, but he's stated publicly he doesn't plan on running this election (meaning it'll probably be 2012 or 2016, betting on the latter.) So far I'd say your most likely nominee is Frist.
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 317
(7/1/05 2:50 am) Reply
Re: In fact...
True, she's been mentioned, but there's no way the Republican party is going to combat the "first woman president" mindset with putting an African-American woman on the top of their ticket. It sounds good in theory, but in reality, they won't risk it. I could see her being someone's running mate, but I don't think that's even in the cards. Especially since a future President Bush III is waiting in the wings to become the next Vice President. That's exactly what Jeb is up to. He won't run outright this time; he's putting himself in position to run in another four to eight years. If the Democrat wins in '08, he can run against him/her in '12... if the Republican wins, he becomes the VP and has an easy transition to the top job in 2016. Just like Daddy...
Edited by: jwlbigdog at: 7/1/05 2:54 am
jwlbigdog Field Marshall
Posts: 318
(7/1/05 2:53 am) Reply
Getting back to the subject at hand...
What does everyone think about the game, or at least what you can see of it? I'd love to get enough interest to start another game or two. Even if not, your thoughts are appreciated.
Re: Getting back to the subject at hand...
Ah, Frist, ok I see. Thanks for the info.
I used to be a regular pundit, but I have lost interest in anything other than the headlines when it comes to politics lately. Partly because I'm a Paleo-Conservative in a Neo-conservative world and partly because the most important thing on my mind usually is getting home to roll on the floor with my little boy, now.
Bigdog, the game sounds neat to me. I wish I had time to mess with it.
On a tangent, have you heard of Liberte by Warfrog? I own that one. It is really set in pre-Napoleon France, but it has a neat political control/voting mechanism for a boardgame.
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies