President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.4.9

President Infinity v. Ericson – 2.4.9 for Windows and Mac has been released!If you are a President Infinity owner, you are eligible for this upgrade.

  • Primary Results Screen > fixed bug that would cause game to crash
  • Notes > ‘New endorsers available’ > now shows which endorsers available

This is a comprehensive update.You can download this release by requesting a download e-mail at the link below.

To update:

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

Version information:

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

32 Responses to President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.4.9

  1. SirLagsalott November 21, 2016 at 5:45 pm #

    Any plans to add Libertarian to all 51 state ballots, which they accomplished this year? I like to pit third party against third party but the game crashes because no parties are on the ballot in Oklahoma, Michigan, and a few others.

  2. anthony_270admin November 21, 2016 at 7:08 pm #

    @SirLagsalott,

    Thanks for this – noted.

  3. Chris November 22, 2016 at 3:08 pm #

    Any plans to separate Maine 2 and Nebraska 2, Trump won ME-2 by 10% and only won NE-2 by 2.4% (just another example how different the electoral map was this year from the last several elections)

  4. Chris November 22, 2016 at 3:11 pm #

    Maine was actually close enough (2.7pts) where it could have been Trump winning ME 2, and Maine’s 2 at large electors and Clinton only winning ME 1

  5. Jonathan November 22, 2016 at 4:18 pm #

    @anthony

    I’m wondering what you could do to make candidates drop out before the primaries? Even at ambition 1, the candidates tend to stay past Iowa and New Hampshire.

    I’m not sure how this would best be done, since poll%, cash, endorsements, momentum, and expectations may all be factors. Perhaps some sort of expectations meter for Iowa, New Hampshire, and Super Tuesday could be included. For some, winning Iowa or New Hampshire is a must, and for others a 2nd or 3rd place is a good start. Likewise, for pre-primaries, a certain percentage or expectations must be met at certain points before the primaries.

    A good example would be with Walker and Perry, both soundly popular by Republicans, but couldn’t translate this popularity in a national election. Perhaps, unable to raise their poll numbers, or seeing a decrease for a certain amount of time, would force them out of the race.

    A good example of a during primary withdrawal would be Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. Both were front-runners in the Summer before the primaries. Both had expectations of taking Iowa or New Hampshire, if not both. Clinton managed to take Iowa, but Jeb greatly underperformed, despite cash and endorsements, forcing him out.

  6. anthony_270admin November 22, 2016 at 6:42 pm #

    @Chris,

    Not at this point. The basic architecture of the game allows for this to be done, but it would be a significant amount of work.

  7. anthony_270admin November 22, 2016 at 6:46 pm #

    @Jonathan,

    I think the way withdrawals works could use some careful thought. Presumably there are certain key indicators of support (financial, key endorsements, poll %s) that influence the decisions, but they’re different for different candidates.

  8. Caleb November 22, 2016 at 10:12 pm #

    How is progress coming along on the issue spectrum/voting blocs/favorability?

  9. anthony_270admin November 23, 2016 at 1:05 pm #

    @Caleb,

    No updates yet. There will be a PMI – UK update first, then work will resume on PI and updated issues, favorability, and voting blocs.

  10. Ed C November 23, 2016 at 6:02 pm #

    @Anthony
    Any way that the game could be amended to get candidates to drop out more easily? Realistically if candidates don’t get into second in a primary/caucus by at the very latest South Carolina (more realistically New Hampshire) then they tend to drop out. A bunch don’t ever even get to Iowa if they are polling in the single digits for too long in the early states and drop out from lack of money or lack of support (ie. Scott Walker). If you don’t win or have any prospect of winning anything in Super Tuesday either then most candidates tend to drop out, especially if they lose their home states (Marco Rubio).

    I’m currently playing as Romney in 2008 and have clinched the nomination by over 1400 delegates to McCain’s 392, yet Huckabee and McCain are still campaigning which is just a tad annoying as they are attacking and damaging me, and bizzare!

    One idea about fixing it i had was maybe for each candidate they could have a “Must win by” factor attached to them as well as some form of feature that says unless you get into the top three in New Hampshire or Iowa the AI quits?
    Cheers!

  11. Ed C November 23, 2016 at 6:03 pm #

    Just read up and realized someone else made the same comment XD

  12. Andre November 27, 2016 at 8:03 pm #

    Anthony,

    I agree with previous posts that certain candidates need to withdraw, especially when they don’t have considerable support. For example: I bombard negative ads against Fiorina for three months, you can see on the news “Fiorina campaign in collapse” and even if you make her poll at 2-3% nationwide, she stays until after Super Tuesday. Even with no wins.

    The real 2012 Rep Primaries started with 17 people, but on Super Tuesday they were only 5(Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson). Carson withdrawing after Super Tuesday. So they were really 4 candidates on Super Tuesday in real life. So, in President Infinity, you have way too many people on Super Tuesday. Some people who have almost zero support. They don’t withdraw and I think it’s because of the next point I will like to mention.

    The other point I want to mention is about fundraising.

    The current fundraising system is not cool, for Ex: you have Fiorina polling at 2-3% nationwide with 50 million raised, -20 momentum, and no victories. The same with almost every other candidate polling around those numbers. Huge amounts of cash raised. At the same time you have candidates polling 30-40% nationwide on the primaries, with victories, and few cash on hand, around the same cash on hand than the ones who have not win anything and are polling very low. Why is that?

    Momentum,

    I have +54 momentum, everybody else is at -20 momentum or something like that. I’m still gaining very little % per turn, less than 1%, even if the undecideds make 20-30-40% of the electorate.

    Campaign Attributes,

    I would like the idea that the AI candidates are able to increase their campaign attributes in order to make the game more dinamic.

  13. Daons November 28, 2016 at 1:53 pm #

    On the subject of recounts given the news of Jill Stein raising the money to try and challenge the results in the close Trump states. I have an idea on how this could be implemented in PI, CI, PMI.

    All states/seats could be made eligible for a recount request but the likelihood of for a change in the vote could be linked to momentum in that state/seat. Maybe for each 5 momentum points you get a increase of 0.50% or a decrease if its negative momentum.

    For example the Democrats lose Iowa by 0.75% but had momentum of 10 so you win the state by 0.25% (based on Republican momentum of 0).

    It could make election night quite unpredictable as a recount request may backfire if your campaign tanked before election day but prove vital if you got the Big Mo’ a couple of days before the vote.

  14. Chad November 28, 2016 at 5:01 pm #

    With the voting blocs would they be just male, female, conservative, liberal, moderate, etc., or be split like white male or black female, etc., ?

    Cause it would be fun to simulate campaigns where you could focus on certain groups like Trump and Clinton didn’t this election. I mean if this is possible with the engine.

  15. anthony_270admin November 28, 2016 at 7:15 pm #

    @Chad,

    They can be anything. What the voting blocs will be in the official 2016 campaign I can’t say yet.

  16. anthony_270admin November 28, 2016 at 7:16 pm #

    Probably, age, ethnicity, formal education levels, male-female. Perhaps others.

  17. Jonathan November 28, 2016 at 10:16 pm #

    @anthony

    I’d also add income level, religion (or religious attendance), political identification (liberal, progressive, moderate, conservative) to your tentative list

  18. Daons November 29, 2016 at 9:12 am #

    On the subject of Primaries, it would be useful if we could toggle the popup results screens on or off for AI parties so we can choose to only see our party primary results state by state. Maybe it could just show a summary of the AI results per party as Super Tuesday type days can become quite a click fest with multiple parties running.

  19. anthony_270admin November 30, 2016 at 1:45 pm #

    @Daons,

    Yes, with the new primaries results screen, it should be fairly straightforward to make this better. Thanks for this.

  20. anthony_270admin November 30, 2016 at 1:52 pm #

    @Daons,

    Why would a change in %s with recount be linked to momentum (in terms of realism)?

  21. anthony_270admin November 30, 2016 at 1:53 pm #

    @Jonathan,

    Yes, those are good candidates.

  22. anthony_270admin November 30, 2016 at 1:55 pm #

    @Andre,

    Thanks for this feedback.

  23. anthony_270admin November 30, 2016 at 2:38 pm #

    @Ed C,

    Yes, the algorithm to decide when a compute player drops out will probably be updated.

  24. Daons November 30, 2016 at 4:06 pm #

    @anthony

    Not strictly linked but was thinking more that as momentum, endorsers etc. Is a big key to votes winning on the PI engines, there may be an increase in the probability that the closer states are even closer.

    Or perhaps recounts could be linked to areas with very high turnout levels where votes could be being miscounted or missed etc. as a result of data or paper overload.

    How were you thinking it could be implemented

  25. anthony_270admin November 30, 2016 at 7:37 pm #

    @Daons,

    I don’t know exactly what recounts tend to do as far as changing results (there haven’t been many of them in U.S. Presidential history), so it’s not clear to me how to model them. One way to do it would be to have allocation of $s or perhaps some other campaign resources to increase the chances of gaining votes. But, I just don’t know how they actually work.

  26. Chris December 2, 2016 at 9:26 pm #

    tried to play 2014 Senate in Congress infinity and got this error: access violation at address 004D886C in model “ci.exe”. Read of address 00000018, redownloaded game and same thing happened other House and Senate races functioning fine

  27. EdgarAllenYolo December 3, 2016 at 3:26 pm #

    Will voting blocs be able to be enabled or disabled in the campaign editor just like you can currently do with polls?

  28. anthony_270admin December 3, 2016 at 3:28 pm #

    @EAY,

    Optional.

  29. anthony_270admin December 3, 2016 at 7:58 pm #

    @Chris,

    This has been fixed in the latest internal of CI – thanks for this.

  30. Chad December 5, 2016 at 5:29 pm #

    With voting blocs being implemented, will we also be getting exit polls in the game as well so we can know how we did with each voting group?

  31. Christopher Jacobs December 5, 2016 at 8:42 pm #

    Yes. I have been saying this for a long time. We need exit poll data. Stating how we did with certain groups.

  32. anthony_270admin December 7, 2016 at 7:15 pm #

    @Chad,

    A good idea – we’ll see.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes