President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.2.9

President Infinity v. Ericson – 2.2.9 for Windows and Mac has been released!

If you are a President Infinity owner, you are eligible for this upgrade.


This adds a new spin system, modifies how ground ops work, decreases the frequency of scandals, updates 2016 including new Veeps, and adds 1980 and 1972 campaigns.

What’s new in this upgrade

  • New spin system
  • Ground Ops > if more than 3 months before an election, the Power is multiplied by 0 (so, it’s 0 regardless of Org. Strength and Footsoldiers), if 3 months before, it’s multiplied by 1/3, if 2 months before, it’s 2/3, if 1 month before, it’s full power
  • % research scandal increases half as quickly, starts at 0.5% instead of 1%
  • Relations now have greater impact on chance NA pact
  • Relations improve automatically by 1 per week (used to be approx. 1 every day and half), and only if relations < 50
  • added United States – 1980
  • added United States – 1972
  • 2016 > Primaries > Reps > MA > FPP -> PR
  • 2016 > Sanders > Command 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Sanders > Spin 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > new Trump image
  • 2016 > Carson > Stamina 3 -> 2
  • 2016 > Jeb Bush > Charisma 3 -> 2
  • 2016 > Cruz > Stamina 3 -> 4
  • 2016 > Cruz > Strategic 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Clinton > Stamina 4 -> 3
  • 2016 > Warren > Leadership 3 -> 4
  • 2016 > Sanders > Strategic 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Huckabee > Debating 3 -> 4
  • 2016 > Relations > Trump-Christie > Normal -> Good
  • 2016 > Veeps > Republicans > added Sen. Jeff Sessions, Spkr. Newt Gingrich, Sen. Scott Brown, Sen. Bob Corker
  • 2016 > Trump > Research 1 -> 3
  • 2016 > Trump > Ads 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Trump > Command 2 -> 3
  • 2016 > updated Huckabee image
  • 2016 > updated Jeb Bush image
  • 2016 > updated Christie image
  • 2016 > Events > March 14, 2016 > added “Russians Begin Withdrawal from Syria”
  • 2016 > Events > March 22, 2016 > added “Brussels Terrorist Attacks”
  • fixed bug where message on election night occurred calling election for player who didn’t actually win
  • Editor > fixed bug where deleting leader would cause error due to not being on all ballots (ex., official 1968 campaign)
  • Editor > fixed bug where error if no debates for a party or in general election
  • Editor > Regions > general election > no longer have PR option
  • 1968 > Endorsers > fixed bug that would occur when viewing all endorsers
  • Select Campaign Screen > fixed bug where blurb didn’t update when switched between primaries and general election

This is a comprehensive update.

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

To update:

Version information:

27 thoughts on “President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.2.9”

  1. I think that both the Libertarian Party and the Green Party should be higher in the polls. A new poll released has the Libertarians at 5% and the Green at 3%. It would also be nice if the Libertarians had Austin Peterson and John McAfee as candidates and if the Greens had William Kreml as a candidate. (he won a state in the primary)

    It would also be nice for the Green Party to have their primary schedule updated.,_2016#Schedule

  2. Hey Anthony!

    I love the spin function! And love how the ground ops strength are toned down!

    I do agree with Jesse that the Libertarian Party should be polling higher in the game, though not for the Oct. 1st start. I think an event that hinges on Trump being in the race during April or May should give the Libertarian party serious momentum (and possibly a huge monetary boost to serve as a Koch brother donation, since one is speculating on donating to the party this year).

    Not sure I agree with Trump having his research moved to 3. A lot of his attacks towards Hillary are attacks that have been around since the 1990’s (references to Whitewater, and her husband’s rape allegations), so it is odd to say his research game is strong. But maybe my opinion could use a second opinion.

  3. @Dylan,

    Thanks for this – 3 party voter dynamics should be easier to model when Favorability is implemented.

    Re Trump’s Research strength, I am thinking more about the ability to research insights. His ability to create memorable phrases, descriptions, and so on, seems to have helped him a significant amount. Having said that, he does seem more willing to use potential scandals from the Clintons’ past.

  4. I know that I may be new to this but what is the difference between the ‘spin’ versus the ‘help’ options in the newspaper headlines? What can/does each doe?

  5. @Darius,

    A successful ‘spin’ against another player will decrease the story’s slant by 1. A successful ‘help’ towards another player will increase the story’s slant by 1.

  6. I was just playing as Bloomberg and it seems like his “convention” doesn’t occur before the General Election begins – so my org strength, foot soldiers, etc. don’t come into account.

  7. @Jesse re Libertarian party, thanks for this feedback – might increase their %s, we’ll see.

  8. I was really hoping the change in ground / organizational strength would prevent the strong bleed over from primary to general. I’ve played through the GOP primary twice, both times if I choose to work hard to compete in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and Michigan by the time the primaries are over the first three are solidly red and the latter is a battleground, which means I’ve won before I even had to try. It feels like the last time I played a round where both the primary and general was challenging was pre-Infinity.

  9. I really like the new spin functions. But again… I played the primary with Hillary Clinton, won the nomination, and when the game moved into the general election I did not get the option to receive the block grant/party funds. My speeches were also not replenished so I had no issues left to give speeches on.

  10. In the 1980 scenario the ID for John Anderson is the same for the Republican and National Unity Parties in the Percentages file, meaning that the latter starts with no support if a player should choose to start the scenario with him switched on in October.

  11. @Tanner,

    I’ll be looking at this with Favorability – thanks for this feedback.

  12. @Anthony
    If Libertarian’s are strengthened, you might want to consider strengthening Green, since they’re polling stronger than usual as well.

  13. Hi, I’ve been playing President Infinity for a few months, and I have several questions about what later updates may contain.

    First, I love the game to pieces, it’s well designed and leagues above other election simulators. Unfortunately, there are several things that break immersion and ruin the experience a little. I’ve also included a few things at the end about not important features I’d like to see.

    1. The voters are too fluid.In real life, there are several voting blocs that aren’t going to vote for a candidate that’s ideologically opposed to them. I feel that understanding voting blocks are necessary to getting elected, and they are not represented as of yet. Any candidate can win any state with a bit of time, regardless of how conservative/liberal the voters should be, and the amount of minorities that should severely hinder candidates. (Sanders with blacks in the South and Trump with Latinos/Muslims)

    If voters were to be categorized by political ideology, race, gender, etc, and have more of an individual feel than just a number like an other voter it could improve the game a lot.

    2. The game is very skewed to the Republican side. While I switch between the two parties and several third parties,

    the Republican party is almost always decimating the general election by nearly double digits by the time it rolls around. I feel that voting blocs might fix a large amount of this, with democrats no longer leaving in drones, but I’m uncertain.

    3. The AI focuses way too much on Iowa/New Hampshire, and oftentimes seems to ignore many other states.

    I’ve tested the game with frontrunner candidates with 1s in every stat/complete opposite platform, and they can still win the nomination because the other candidates just don’t compete outside of the first few states, and then only have a week or two to try and gain support in another state, only to not make a dent in the lousy frontrunner. I’m unsure of exactly what mechanic you could put in place to fix this, but I figured I’d mention it.

    4. The candidates feel impersonal, and any candidate plays just like any other, just a different number to a stat in most cases.

    This qualm I definitely believe could be partially fixed with the addition of voting blocs, as some candidates would have traits that make them more appealing to certain parts of the population, but the addition of some type of personality and way the candidate presents them self would be great, and I look forward to the favorability mechanic you plan on adding.

    5. The endorsement system is too easily abused, and endorsements can end up going to someone with the opposite of their platform.

    This one is due mostly to the major impact of momentum I’ve witnessed. I played a game as Eugene Debs in 1912, and due to my ads I got endorsements through the roof. Maybe by making the endorsements care more about their platform and less likely to endorse candidates from certain parties and candidates with outlandish personalities would help?

    6. The debates and interviews are way too impersonal.

    I feel like debates and interviews have a lot of potential in this game, I truly do. Debates could be used to showcase your platform on certain issues in contrast to others, and gain momentum that way. It can also be used to try and shift another candidate further left or right on an issue. One option I can see is for the debates to actually be somewhat playable, and be able to give responses and bring up platforms of yourself and others. This can make a candidates platform evolve and their voter base grows based on what they say instead of where they barnstorm. Talking about being Prolife could vet you some voters in the south, but it might cost you some in more urban states. This is another way to make the candidates and voters feel less like numbers.

    7. I’d like to see the ability to branch off and form your own third party if you don’t make the nomination, bringing your supporters with you to this new party.

    Obviously this is a much smaller complaint, but it would add a way for your campaign to go on if you didn’t clinch the nomination. For example, I played a very long and difficult game as Rand Paul, and game second to Donald Trump. I imagined my supporters (Libertarian-Republicans) would be outraged, and press Paul to run on an independent bid for presidency. It’s a smaller feature, but I’d love to see it nonetheless.

    8. Further interaction between candidates, including the ability to start a #Never(Candidate) pact if there is a frontrunner with outlandish ideas like the #NeverTrump movement.

    Honestly this one is more for fun, but it opens a lot of interesting ideas and scenarios. It would be hard to balance it seems. In general, I’d like to see candidate-candidate interactions improved upon since you mostly just ignore them other than trying to lower their support.

    9. Voting bloc endorsers.

    This one is pretty self explanatory, but essentially it’s that many endorsements belong to a certain voting bloc and will endorse accordingly.

    10. More personal feeling to each state.

    This would mostly be fixed with voting blocs, but being able to click on, say, Virginia and see what voters it’s comprised of, what’s important to them, and how they view the other candidates and I would be a big feeling of immersion. Home states are also completely irrelevant as far as I can tell, and the impact of losing your home state should be almost campaign ending.

    Overall, I’m very very pleased with this game, and I’ve spent countless hours running as Paul, Sanders, Kasich, Huntsman, or even Mr. Eugene Debs! I remember my Paul campaign and all my uphill struggles and it’s an amazing memory. I adore President Infinity, and I’ve loved seeing how interactive you are with the community around it, and I hope that my suggestions will be able to find a place in your game! Cheers!

  14. This is one of my favorite games, so it really bummed me out when I updated to 2.2.9 and am now unable to play. Regardless of which campaign I play, when election day actually comes around, the results are wildly different from what the polls predicted.

    The issue seems to be that the candidate polling in last (or near last) place actually ends up winning by obscene margins every time no matter what. It makes everything I do in the game irrelevant, and is very frustrating because, like I said, this is one of my favorite games.


    1980 Reagan Revolution playing as Jimmy Carter. First primary I was 40+ points ahead of Kennedy in the polls, but when the vote came Kennedy received 100% of it, and the same thing happened in all subsequent primaries.

    In 2016 O’Malley keeps winning 80%+ of the vote in every primary no matter what I do and despite him being in single digit polling numbers the day before.

    Similar things happen in all campaigns and parties…

    I’ve uninstalled and reinstalled multiple times on different pcs to try to fix the issue, but I’m at a loss past that. Could anybody offer any help?

  15. @Alex,

    That might be a result of a bug that’s been fixed in the latest internal. I recommend waiting for the next official release, and if it’s still happening please let me know.

  16. @anthony_270admin,

    Thank you for the reply. I wanted to let you know that I updated to 2.3.4 on Windows, and I’m still having the exact same issue as in my previous post. :/

  17. @Alex,

    Ok, thanks for this feedback. I’ll be looking at these things carefully with the next major features (in particular, Favorability).

Leave a Comment