Release: President Forever 2016 v. 1.3.9 Test Release 2

President Forever 2016 v. 1.3.9 Test Release 2 has been released. This fixes several bugs, expands the Editor to include an initial endorsers screen, adds Rahm Emanuel and Michele Bachmann as vice-leaders, and adds Mike Huckabee as a leader, among other things.

This is a Test Release, not an official release. You can download a Test Release by requesting a re-download e-mail at the link below. When you receive the e-mail, you will have both a President Forever 2016 link and a President Forever 2016 Test Release link. You will want to download the file from the Test Release link.

Note: if you are a President Forever 2012 owner, you are eligible for this upgrade.

To update:

http://270soft.com/updates-redownloads/

Version information:

http://270soft.com/updates-redownloads/president-forever-2016-version-information/

29 Responses to Release: President Forever 2016 v. 1.3.9 Test Release 2

  1. Tayya May 3, 2013 at 2:17 pm #

    Bug report: At brokered conventions, the delegates of the non-top two finishers will not be allocated. All numbers will be 0.

  2. anthony_270admin May 3, 2013 at 4:53 pm #

    @Tayya,

    Thanks for this report – noted.

  3. Dallas May 3, 2013 at 7:34 pm #

    Great patch! I like how you added Mike Huckabee, and the poll numbers suits him. and I have a question, for the last Republican contenders, could you possibly add Susana Martinez and Nikki Haley? Again, great patch and keep up the good work!

  4. Jonathan May 3, 2013 at 11:52 pm #

    Yes, great patch!

    However, I think Obama would be endorse-able sooner if Clinton or Biden were the sole candidate, especially BIden, as he is part of the administration.

    I think George W Bush would definitely be campaigning for Jeb Bush, as would George P. Bush, his son who is entering politics.

  5. Jonathan May 5, 2013 at 1:04 pm #

    Here are 12 things I’d like to see:

    1. contested nomination conventions; perhaps with a compromise choice if things get desperate.

    2. have surrogates campaign for free or for CPs during General Election.

    3. Add Booker, Emanuel, Kerry, Gillibrand, Patrick, Kaine as candidates for the Democrats.

    4. Add Rice, Portman, Perry, Bachmann as a candidate for the Republicans

    5. Different kinds of scandals

    6. More major “events” in the news that will change the importance of certain issues.

    7. Joe Biden as a stronger candidate–he would probably have Obama’s team with him if he runs.

    8. At least one 3rd party

    9. George W Bush and George P Bush as surrogates for Jeb Bush–could just label a general surrogate as “Bush Family”

    10. Specific knowledge instead of general knowledge. Perhaps have “Foreign Affairs” “Social” “Economics”…this way someone can attack a candidate on an area in which they are weak. Additionally, if the economic situation is bad, then a candidate strong on economics would get a momentum boost. This could hold true with the other specific knowledge areas.

    11. Add economic situation of the country

    12. General Election recounts

  6. Andres May 5, 2013 at 3:11 pm #

    I want to add:

    – In the game Clinton is very vulnerable and weak. She’s not winning the Democratic Nomination as the computer. I think you should make her more strong and less vulnerable to scandals.

    I would like to add that debate meltdowns should NOT be influenced by attacks. If I’m far the better prepared in the debate, I can’t concieve that my candidate will have a debate meltdown that will ruin my candidacy.
    Debate meltdown’s should be for the one’s who don’t prepare, not for the ones that prepare but recieve all attacks. Please try to fix this, it’s very unlikely this happens in real life. For example: Romney had everyone against him in the debates and his campaign didn’t recieve alot of negative news for that.

  7. Andres May 5, 2013 at 3:50 pm #

    Why is the brainstorming not sucessful for anyone???

  8. SANC May 6, 2013 at 5:27 am #

    To save us the bother of clicking on this state or that or scrolling down a big list, endorsers who aren’t centrist should already have endorsed when the scenario starts whether or not they had by then historically as pretty much all of them are foregone conclusions unless you’re running such an excellent campaign that you wouldn’t feel the need to bother getting any more endorsements.

  9. anthony_270admin May 6, 2013 at 10:38 pm #

    @Andres re: barnstorming,

    Can you say more about this? Nothing should have changed re: barnstorming functionality between this and the previous release.

  10. anthony_270admin May 6, 2013 at 10:40 pm #

    @Andres re: debate meltdowns,

    I agree that the debate mechanics could use a tweak or two – feedback noted.

  11. anthony_270admin May 6, 2013 at 10:44 pm #

    @Jonathan,

    Thank you for the feedback – noted. A couple specifics:

    2. I think tweaking how surrogates work vis a vis PIPs is a good idea – we’ll see.

    8. A 3rd party will be added once the editor gets to the point where parties can be added.

  12. anthony_270admin May 6, 2013 at 10:56 pm #

    @Dallas re: Martinez and Haley,

    Yes, they are on the list of candidates to add. We’ll see when that happens, though.

  13. Jonathan May 7, 2013 at 8:52 am #

    Oh and #13 on my list would be adding a function to allow candidates to not drop out–sort of like Ron Paul. Likewise, I don’t see Rand Paul dropping out, or at least not until the end. Perhaps adding something that has an earliest drop out time. Also, #14, might be a list, similar to the Vice President list, that has a list of candidates that the candidate is likely and not likely to endorse.

  14. anthony_270admin May 7, 2013 at 1:57 pm #

    I agree – I’m thinking of adding something like an ‘ideological’ rating, where the higher the ideological number, the harder it is to get a candidate to drop out.

  15. Jonathan May 7, 2013 at 1:59 pm #

    Sounds awesome.

  16. Jonathan May 7, 2013 at 2:01 pm #

    Also, when will you start working on other past elections? I’m pretty sure you could get some people on here to do some of the work for you…for free.

  17. anthony_270admin May 7, 2013 at 2:07 pm #

    Once the game editor is able to do past elections. Once the endorsers section of the game editor is completed, the next will probably be issues. Once that’s done, it will be close to being ready for expanding the scenarios.

  18. Jonah May 7, 2013 at 2:24 pm #

    I have a question: In all versions of President Forever, Mark Warner is presented as, maybe not quite the frontrunner, but typically in the top 3 in the polls. While I believe Senator Warner could be a strong candidate, I haven’t really seen any polls for 2016 (or even 2008) where he made it above 5% or so, let alone 10% or 20%. I was just curious what the polling rationale was, as in 2016, he’s above candidates like Biden, who appear to be doing far better in the polls (with double digit leads).

  19. Jonathan May 7, 2013 at 2:36 pm #

    A recent polls has Biden a distant second to Clinton. Warner is with a bunch of people in the 3rd place range. I haven’t seen Warner higher than Biden in a poll.

  20. anthony_270admin May 7, 2013 at 3:06 pm #

    @Jonah and Jonathan,

    Feedback noted.

  21. Jonathan May 8, 2013 at 4:49 pm #

    Also, I realized that I can only select the surrogate on the top of my list to “automatic”. Can you fix it to where I can set them all on automatic?

    How about also adding some corporations to the endorsers. They won’t add to the momentum, but they would add cash and maybe PIPs. Perhaps even have influential international organizations like AIPAC, that may add PIPs. These, naturally wouldn’t become surrogates.

  22. Jonathan May 8, 2013 at 9:18 pm #

    Also, I’d like to bring up demographics again. I think certain candidates should offer a demographic boost. Example, any African-American, or Female politicians may win more, or less, votes in certain states. These are just two demographic examples.

  23. Jonathan May 9, 2013 at 10:06 am #

    Here are some polls I recently read. As much as I don’t like Rand Paul, he is leading in polls in Iowa and New Hampshire.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/06/early-2016-poll-rand-paul-holds-big-lead-in-iowa/

    http://www.concordmonitor.com/home/5877847-95/early-2016-poll-finds-hillary-clinton-rand-paul-leading-nh-presidential-fields

    This also shows how huge Clinton’s support is at the moment.

  24. Jonathan May 9, 2013 at 11:15 am #

    If you want to add demographic bonuses to politicians, this might be helpful.

    States with most Hispanics:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010_US_Census_Hispanic_map.svg

    States with most African Americans:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_African-American_population

    States with most women:
    http://www.statjump.com/lists/female-population-dp1c5ts.html

    Likewise a very devoutly religious candidate could have a bonus in these states:
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/14/gallup-these-are-the-10-most-and-least-religious-states-in-america/

    Mormons would likewise have a bonus in Utah.

    Every candidate should have a bonus in their home state.

  25. Jonathan May 9, 2013 at 11:15 am #

    I have two comments awaiting moderation.

  26. anthony_270admin May 10, 2013 at 2:05 pm #

    @Jonathan re: automated surrogate,

    Thanks for this – noted.

    For corporations, can you think of any examples?

  27. anthony_270admin May 10, 2013 at 2:06 pm #

    Comments approved.

  28. anthony_270admin May 10, 2013 at 2:52 pm #

    @Jonathan re: demographics,

    I don’t know how these things would be modeled. One possibility is to have issues which are relevant to certain demographics, or even model demographics in terms of issues. This would work with the existing game structure.

  29. anthony_270admin May 10, 2013 at 3:01 pm #

    Interesting polls re: Rand Paul.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes