19 Responses to Release: President Forever 2012 v. 1.2.6

  1. ICX October 19, 2012 at 6:42 pm #

    I don’t know if you saw my last posts in the last update, but based on what he’s said and what’s on his website, Johnson should be center left or left on immigration, left on gay marriage (has said verbatim it’s a constitutional right), and far left on defense spending. Makes it more realistic plus it means that he’s not just competing in “safe” red states based on platform distance, but instead nearly makes him centrist.

    Also in 2016 there’s no way Bob McDonnell can be a 2 term Virginia governor since consecutive terms as governor are not allowed in VA. Bill Bolling (R), Ken Cuccinelli (R), or even Mark Warner (D, speculative candidate) might win the 2013 gubernatorial election.

  2. anthony_270admin October 19, 2012 at 6:46 pm #

    ICX,

    Thanks for this – noted. I’ll take a look at those issue positions, probably for the next release.

  3. Jonathan October 19, 2012 at 6:54 pm #

    Things I noticed on my 1st try of the 1912 scenario (I’m plays as Debs; so I can see how the computer plays the major parties). The top results will be from the primary start date, my 2nd try will be on the bottom and will be from the general election start point:

    1. Wilson’s bio says he was born in Georgia. I think he was born in Virginia.
    2. Bull Moose party and Socialist party have 0% popular vote at the beginning of the campaign.
    3. As elections were different during this time, I don’t think any of the candidates should withdraw until the convention. In the game, La Follette withdrew before his own state in Wisconsin voted.
    4. The game does a good job with Wilson overtaking Clark.
    5. You might want to change “pop artists for _________” to something more 1912.
    6. This is just funny, I liked the huge headline that said “TAFT HIT WITH PIE!”, in reality, he was just eating.
    7. Taft did much better than he did in real life among the states actually having primaries; however, he accurately picked up the states not having primaries.
    8. At convention time, both the Socialists and the Bull Moose (I’m running both Teddy Roosevelts in this election at the same time) have only 0.5% of the pop vote.
    9. The Democratic primary race is actually very exciting. Wilson takes the popular lead, but Clark is picking up a lot of states. Clark, despite being down 8% in the popular vote, wins the nomination, by 100 delegates!
    10. Taft/Butler vs. Clark/Harmon.
    11. Going into the General Election, the Republicans look as if they’ll win every electoral vote. They’re up 22% on the popular vote with only 5% undecided.
    12. Taft wins against Clark in a historic landslide.
    Taft 62% + all 531 electoral votes
    Clark 37%
    Bull Moose 1%
    Socialists 0.5%

    Starting from the General Election with all 4 parties (me as a Debs):
    1. The map looks accurate at the start of the general election.
    2. The didn’t have debates then, but they are held in this game. Maybe allow for the option of one, or you could assume it wasn’t a real in-person debate, but rather something in the newspapers.
    3. Going into election day: Wilson 35%, Roosevelt 18%, Taft 17%, Debs 4%
    4. Election results with EVs in parentheses: Wilson 48% (462), Roosevelt 24% (36), Taft 22% (33), Debs 6% (0). Overall, not too inaccurate actually. Roosevelt didn’t do as well as he did in real life, however and Taft picked up more EVs than in real life.
    5. Wilson was strong in the South as he should be.
    6. Weird, glitches after the votes are in. Taft was awarded Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, even though Wilson barely beat him with 100% of the votes recorded. Pennsylvania, Minnesota should have gone to Roosevelt and not Wilson.

    Overall, despite glitches and other things, it’s a very good Beta. I’ll look at the political platforms of the politicians next.

  4. Jonathan October 19, 2012 at 9:07 pm #

    I played 1912 for the 3rd time. This time I did the general election with no Bull Moose Party and with TR as the Rep candidate. The GE starts TR with only 20% of the vote, when he should pretty much have 50% or more. Is there a way to make sure that the Republicans and Bull Moose are going after the same voters (along with independents)? Most historians think Roosevelt or Taft would have won the election if TR hadn’t had split the party.

  5. DJP53916 October 20, 2012 at 1:18 am #

    I decided to play as Debs just to watch it play out between the main candidates as well.

    Taft selected TR as his running mate, so that took the Bull Moose Party out of this scenario. I’d look at modifying it so that Roosevelt and Taft couldn’t select each other as VP.

    Clark won the Democrat nomination in my game, and won only Wisconsin. He seemed to be competitive until nearly all votes were counted in Kentucky and Alabama, but otherwise, it was a GOP landslide.

    For the next update, I’d go with some of my suggestions on the previous thread as far as positions on the issues go (accuracy), and absolutely for sure wouldn’t have Taft and Roosevelt be able to select each other as VP. If you only make one modification for the next beta test, make it the Taft/Roosevelt change.

    Otherwise, seems to play pretty smooth. I’ll try again over the weekend, and actually try playing actively instead of passively this time.

    For a first effort for the 1912 scenario, I think you’ve done a good job.

  6. Peterson October 20, 2012 at 10:22 am #

    Jonathan’s right. Wilson was born in Virginia, not Georgia. He did grow up in Georgia, though.

  7. KM October 20, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    For this version, News articles doesn’t read the correct state, instead it reads the candidate’s home state. Example:) as Romney I barnstormed in Iowa and the article reads Romney meets voters in Massachusetts. It does this for AI players as well

  8. KM October 20, 2012 at 4:23 pm #

    ^^Forgot to mention this was for the 2012 scenario if that matters

  9. Keith October 20, 2012 at 4:46 pm #

    Just installed the newest version. Played once. (I played an older 2012 version already). In spite of Dems having the most votes in several states, such as Ohio, PA, MN, and Michigan, those states all went Red. I thought it might be related to adding the libertarians, but in PA, the only 2 candidates were Obama and Romney. Obama received 50.5% but the state was listed as a Romney win. This hadn’t happened to me when it was a 2 party game.

  10. Conor October 20, 2012 at 10:49 pm #

    When are you planning on releasing the candidate editor? This is the only thing holding me back from purchasing the game…was one of the better aspects of the 2008 version.

  11. Harry October 20, 2012 at 10:57 pm #

    Playing as Taft, it fast-forwarded endlessly.

  12. Harry October 20, 2012 at 11:09 pm #

    Also, in the 2012 scenario, when will you add Cain/Pawlenty to the game? And, will you add potential candidates that didn’t run, such as John Bolton, Sarah Palin, Jeb Bush etc? As well as adding new VP options, like Palin, McCain, Boehner, Jeb Bush, and others? And also, will you add more local newspapers to the game, like Seattle Times? And not only that, but also can we be able to endorse gubernatorial candidates in exchange for endorsement? Plus, can there be new surrogate endorsers like HW Bush, Nancy and Michael Reagan, as well as McCain, Palin, Boehner?

    I also have an idea I’d like to share. We should be able to pick a campaign manager, each of them having different pros and cons, one might boost your debating, another might give you more momentum for longer, and maybe one can help research scandals or help with spin.

  13. DJP53916 October 21, 2012 at 12:21 am #

    Harry, I think that is a GREAT idea about the campaign managers. After all, they are a key part of all campaigns, and they all come with strengths that are meant to help the campaign in some way, whether it’s fund-raising, or media relations, or coordinating schedules for the candidate to maximize stamina and efficiency, or whatever the case may be.

  14. Will October 21, 2012 at 3:49 am #

    I’ve just played a 2016 game with O’Malley/Warren vs Ryan/Christie. The Republicans won 469-69 (with only DC, CA and MA going to the Dems), but on closer inspection, I found that NY, CT, RI, VT, NM, OR, IA, IL, HI and ME went to the Dems in popular vote, but the Republicans got the electoral votes. Just as an example, O’Malley got 61% of the vote in Hawaii, but Ryan got the electoral votes.

  15. Jonathan October 21, 2012 at 7:18 am #

    Will,

    I think this is a new glitch on this release. It’s happened in the 1912 scenario as well.

  16. Jonathan October 21, 2012 at 8:46 am #

    Two things I noticed:

    – In the 1912 election, the Republicans get a huge bounce once the General Election begins. Democrats were up by 5% in the polls, then the next day (1st day of general election), Republicans are up 17%

    – Also, the primary starts with total Republican dominance—100% red. I would assume the primary map would resemble, somewhat, the 1908 election map (1904 and 1900 should be considered as well). The former Confederate states and some of the western states, should probably start out blue.

  17. anthony_270admin October 21, 2012 at 12:00 pm #

    @ICX,

    Thanks for this – Johnson’s positions in latest internal have been changed to Immigration Center -> Center-Left, Same-Sex Marriage Center-Left -> Left, Defense Spending Center-Right -> Far-Left.

    McDonnell’s description updated as well.

  18. anthony_270admin October 21, 2012 at 12:03 pm #

    @KM, I’m unable to replicate this error, but I’ve noted it.

  19. anthony_270admin October 21, 2012 at 12:04 pm #

    @Keith and Will,

    Thank you for this feedback – bug fixed in the latest internal, should be new version released later today.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes