President Infinity next release sneak-peek v. 3.1.0

President Infinity v. 3.1.0 sneak-peek for Windows and Mac has been released!

This sneak-peek continues to update 2020 (latest polling from after July debates, Hickenlooper and Gravel to ‘off’, Elon Musk as Yang surrogate, modifies various Democratic candidate attributes, adds an August 15th, 2019 start date, and more), and more.

Note: this version changes spacebarring to close various screens to ‘n’.

(Note: for goals for this release cycle, Summer 2019, see here.)

If you are a President Infinity owner on subscription (or if you purchased President Infinity within the last year), you are eligible for this upgrade.

This is a comprehensive update.

You can download this release by requesting a download e-mail at the link below. From the e-mail, click the link to the web page. On the web-page, there will be a ‘Sneak-peek’ link.

To update:

Version information:

What’s new in this upgrade from the previous sneak-peek (v. 3.0.9).

  • Primaries > added start date August 15th, 2019
  • Hickenlooper > Start > ‘off’ -> August 15th, 2019, ‘on’ -> March 4th, 2019
  • Gravel > Start > ‘off’ -> August 1st, 2019 , ‘on’ -> April 2nd, 2019
  • Yang > Surrogates > added Elon Musk
  • Warren > Surrogate > added Rep. Raul Grijalva of TX
  • Polls > Democratic primaries > added new IA, NH, NV, SC, CA, OK, WI, WA, PA, NC, TX, and US polls
  • reordered default Dem candidates
  • O’Rourke > Command and Strategy 3 -> 2
  • Booker > Command and Strategy 5 -> 4
  • Gillibrand > Charisma 4 -> 5, Command, Strategy, Ads, Spin, Fundraising, Research 3 -> 2
  • Klobuchar > Command and Strategy 3 -> 2
  • Inslee > Integrity 5 -> 6, Charisma 5 -> 4, Issue Familiarity 5 -> 6, Command and Strategy 3 -> 2
  • Gabbard > Command and Strategy 3 -> 2, Ground 1 -> 2
  • Delaney > Issue Familiarity 5 -> 6, Command and Strategy 3 -> 2
  • Castro > Debating 6 -> 7, Command, Strategy, and Ads 3 -> 2
  • Hickenlooper > Command, Strategy, and Ads 3 -> 2
  • Ryan > Command and Strategy 3 -> 2
  • Buttigieg > Leadership 5 -> 6, Command and Strategy 3 -> 4, Ground 3 -> 1, Ads and Spin 1 -> 2
  • Yang > Ground 2 -> 3
  • Moulton > Command and Strategy 3 -> 2, Charisma 6 -> 5
  • Gravel > Integrity 8 -> 6, Charisma 3 -> 2, Stamina 3 -> 2, Command and Strategy 2 -> 1, Ground 1 -> 2
  • Bennet > Charisma 5 -> 4, Debate 6 -> 5
  • Williamson > Ground 1 -> 2
  • Messam > Command and Strategy > 2 -> 1
  • Bullock > Command, Strategy, Fundraising and Research 3 -> 2
  • Sestak > Command and Strategy > 2 -> 1
  • fixed bug in which stories computer players choose to spin
  • general election > fixed bug doing ground effects
  • removed 2015 primaries polls
  • removed 2016 general election polls
  • endorsers.xml > removed second root element

18 thoughts on “President Infinity next release sneak-peek v. 3.1.0”

  1. @Curtis,

    President Infinity should be backward compatible with any campaigns made for it before. If that isn’t the case, please let me know.

  2. You should really change the money they start off with. For example mayor pete actually raised more money than all of them with over 20 million but in the game he only has 1 million.

  3. No I was saying he didn’t outraise everyone overall but correct he did outraise everyone in the second quarter.

  4. “why did you downgrade his ground game? They have over 300 staff, and at least 60 in Iowa.”

    The general Ground strength attribute refers to more than just staff on the ground. 3 -> 1 might be too much – it’s noted.

  5. *Warning: long read below*

    Been a couple of months so I might’ve missed it, but have we gotten/is there a timeline on a fix to the issue of really high numbers of undecided voters as the primary goes on? (usually swinging to the player, if they’re half-competent and build up some momentum – even on “hard”).

    I do understand that other games, the macOS changes, etc. have taken up a fair bit of time. And I’m sympathetic to the difficulties involved in rolling out a major new feature, and am definitely glad to have the favorability mechanic here (once it gets fine-tuned, anyway). But right now, this is a game-breaking exploit and will remain so until it’s fixed – it’s very hard to enjoy playing PI when the trajectory of every run is:

    1. Campaigning in the run-up to primaries raises undecideds through the roof (often 30-40%)
    2. Advertising, ground game, and campaigning in the weeks leading up to the primary builds up player momentum
    3. Player wins in a landslide as those undecideds swing their way

    It’s also harder than most exploits to solve by voluntarily tying my own hands, because those undecided voters are *there.* So if I don’t build up as much momentum as I can, other players will – and *someone* is going to get a massive surge on primary day from all those undecideds. Which might happen once in a while (see: Michigan primary, 2016), but shouldn’t be the norm.

    Solving this issue would also solve some of the broader problems with the modeling of how voters decide in primaries. IRL, the number of undecided voters is high through the fall, the number with a very slight lean towards one or more candidates is higher than the number with a strong preference, and both groups dwindle as people pick a candidate and/or develop stronger preferences as the primary gets closer – with the majority of voters developing some kind of preference a 2-3 months out, many or even most making a firmer decision by ~30 days out, and a substantial share (usually around 20-30%, maybe higher in a field with a large number of candidates) making up their minds in the final month/weeks.

    Instead of the candidates A. divvying up the undecideds very quickly, so any further gains require negative advertising/reporting on others (how the old engine played out) or B. bleeding support to undecided voters over time, who all swing one or two candidates’ way on e-day (current system), it would be great to approximate this dynamic. This would also reward people who build a durable ground game and campaign extensively – letting them lock in some gains from early campaigning and organizing, while forcing them to hit their stride or at least keep pace in the final two months (when most people decide).

    Why I raise this issue: I’ve almost always had success with a strategy of building a ground game ready to activate on D-Day minus 90 in the early/Super Tuesday states, doing what I could to get positive press, raising funds, but spending barely any money on ads and campaigning sporadically in states outside the first four until the final 2-3 weeks before a given state votes. Which means letting other candidates have the airwaves and the early states to themselves for 6+ months. IRL, a candidate who doesn’t advertise OR campaign in Iowa until December/early January would be dead in the water. And it would be nice for the game to reflect that.

    The other potential adjustment to favorability (much smaller issue relative to the above – though maybe related) is that voter opinions don’t seem as polarized as they should be. So someone like Bernie Sanders, who has a lot of firm supporters and a lot of people who’d vote for almost anyone else in a Dem primary, should have more of a bipolar distribution of favorability among primary voters – while someone like Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren, who has broader appeal, should have a more uniform distribution (though in Biden’s case, there could also be a decent-sized bloc that won’t vote for him).

    Again, I understand the practical difficulties involved in updating/adding new features to PI, I appreciate the work that’s gone into this game, and I’ve gotten many hours of fun out of it. So I’m pointing out the above in hopes that it helps address a blip with the current version/a major new feature, and could be useful in producing a more realistic game overall over the course of several months/years. Thanks for all your work on this over the years, and I hope this is helpful.

  6. AuH20,

    Undecideds are now much lower in latest internal. Starts at 30% in 2020, tends to drop towards first primary. This should be released this week.

    In the latest internal, the game engine treats ‘undecided’ for a voter as basically an unstable state, which the voter want to ‘pop’ out of. So if a candidate has + momentum and is one of the candidates tied for 1st with that voter (has Favorability score within the undecided range), there is a significant chance each day that that candidate will ‘pop’ up in Favorability for that voter and so put that voter in the leaning camp for that candidate.

  7. @Anthony

    That definitely sounds like it would help fix the issue with high undecideds, and could scramble the broader strategic calculations around flying low until the final month or two.

    Would be interested to know if there are ways in the engine to model (either explicitly, or through other mechanics helping to create this effect) the number of voters leaning a certain way dropping and the number committed to a candidate rising over time. But this already sounds like a huge step forward – looking forward to seeing this update.

  8. @AuH20,

    Sure, there could be a days-to-primary mechanism to move voters from undecided -> leaning and leaning -> committed. However, I’m not certain that’s needed. We’ll see as things move ahead.

Leave a Comment