Under rating threshold (hideshow)
you should make an australian version of the game where the only abilities are half hearted punditry and wildcard. and the only bills are repeal/establish carbon tax.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
07/20/13 12:16 -- During a speech in a public area, an assassin made an unccessful attempt on your life. If their aim was better, you'd be dead.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Bug Report: I got a message on my status page that someone tried to kill me. I had no stress gain, and it's not in the examiner.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Congressperson Green thought it would be clever to make a bunch of alts to boost their own bills. Congressperson Green now has 0 cash, 0 clout, 0 csp and 20 health. Have fun, Congressperson Green. I really loled when I saw this on clout news !!!
Really? Tell you what: get as many red stats as you can, and tell me how that works out for you EOD monday. Oh, also, do recall that Martial Law is a red stat of sorts, too.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Oh, and maybe change the "Invalid Selection." message to "You can't introduce that bill because xyz is opposed, yada yada yada..." or something like given the ambiguity and confusingness of "Invalid selection."
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I can't introduce any Foreign Relations bills, and when I try, I get an "Invalid Selection" message in my status page.
There are known issues with the algorithm he suggested, I wish to write all algorithms myself to increase opacity, the values he used for CSP are not realistically useful in gameplay terms, and as I said I have plans to do something similar in a different way already anyway.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Correction from Part 1: Player #3 should lose 80 CSP, not 70. Similar to a Borda Count poll system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borda_count).
I will be designing any algorithms for the game myself, as that way I am the only one who knows about them. I do have plans to improve the electoral system for VIPs in the future based on red stats and current party proportions.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
(pt. 2) The only issues with this equation are that 1) If the player is ranked, say, 12, it'll ADD the reverse amount of CSP. 2) If current happiness is higher than the threshold, then it will add the reverse amount to players' CSP. Both of these are easily fixed by a simple "IF (Player's clout ranking is >11 && Happiness is < whatever threshold is set) {subtract E from player's CSP}" -type PHP statement. So, now that I've done maybe a tenth of the work to implement it, maybe you'll make it happen?? :P
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
(pt. 1) Idea from Jerald's post in Global: If happiness gets too low, chances of a different party winning the presidency and cabinet positions should increase. Additionally, those in the top 10 should lose CSP when it gets too low, based on their ranking. For instance, if happiness is at 0% an Player A is #1, they should lose 100 CSP per day. Player B (#2) should lose 90 CSP, and #3 should lose 70 and so on. This should decrease based on whatever level happiness is at, and when happiness is at 100%, it should stop. Best explained by the following: A=Amount of CSP to be lost by #1 at 0% happiness, B=Happiness Threshold (or the point that public happiness must exceed for those in top 10 to stop losing CSP), C=Current Happiness, D=Ranking in top 10, E=CSP lost by Player. Therefore: E=(A*((11-D))/10)*(B-C). (cont.)
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I'd personally rather see the option of associating with the underworld added before you begin to focus on The Lobby. Just my $0.02.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Hmm... Clout, The Lobby... and the Wonderful World of Skullduggery, in which you take control of an innocent little thug/assassin. (Haha, just a thought I had when I saw the comment mentioning The Lobby. Just couldn't resist. However... I could see it in practice...) ;P
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Also I believe that every party should have elections and elect 5 ,let's say' leaders .The leaders of the party could make a statement of alliance , I don't know.Something like that . Because the reds are more of the libercons together. This is a travesty !!!
I'm not sure why you think people would be more apt to pay attention to an arbitrary "leadership" role that has no impact on their gameplay. Most of the people not working with you don't read any chats/posts/anything in the first place. The problem is different than you think at a basic level.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
You should be able to affect the game also in other ways like a binary that will arrange when you will get money .Like not a week but in three or four days