Revival Proposal

[Platypus]

If BK could maybe go through and put a X in the title of all the old threads, to separate them out, it could be helpful.

[Platypus]

I'd start it based on Australia, with 15 fully committed original players given specific roles to choose from, and then add more in as necessary.

Speaker, also gamerunner
PM
OL
DPM, plus ministry
SOL, plus ministry
Treasurer
STres
FA, Defence and Trade
SFA, Defence and Trade
AG + Immigration
SAG +Immi
Health and Community Services
SHealth and CS
"Infrastructure" (Comms, Transport, Housing etc.)
SInf
Enviro, Resources, Water etc.
SEnviro

The DOL and DPM choose one of the ministries in addition to their role.

Anyone else is a backbencher, and can be promoted to a ministry if someone steps out.

Once we have fifteen committed players and the game has been running for a while, we can broaden the frontbenches and the process a bit, and maybe bring in the Greens, and separate the coalition into Libs and Nats, etc.

The Speaker is basically the GM.

I'd also suggest people take on a specific electorate, and then the Speaker runs a mock election in which our players win their seats but people don't know who'll end up governing until the game starts. So, say, I signed up for the seat of Jagajaga, I could reasonably assume I'd be Labor and win my seat, but have no idea if I'd be governing or not. If I wanted to be flexible about the party I was representing but definitely wanted to be in government, I'd likely choose Eden-Monaro. If I wanted to be coalition, maybe something like Durack or Berowra.

[Platypus]

The thing is, we've tried that many times now. I think giving people a firm starting point and then going from there is better tan trying to create everything from scratch. People can and will and should act independently from exactly how the parties act, but if they want to be themselves they should go to Atlasia. In this concept, the focus should, I believe, be on playing a character in a parliament.

[Platypus]

I'm far from wedded to the idea of it being Australia, I suspect I'd have more fun if it was a country I knew less about. But with so many Aussies interested, Australia does afford us a strong base start in terms of understanding the system.

Perhaps if we start with everyone being guaranteed to win their seat, but still have an election campaign, so people will be able to choose their party and seat but not know if they'll be governing or not?

I really do think having specific roles at the start is necessary though. I've been around for each reboot, and the things that kills the game are this:

1. Complexity - nobody understands the system except Xahar

2. Lack of things to do.

3. Everyone creating their own party and/or faction.

I think, to start off with, choosing an existing country and system lessens the complexity around set-up. As much fun as I have had previously with creating the constitution and the history etc., it takes up the whole start and by the time it's done, interest has waned.

I also think making sure everyone has a responsibility and they know what it is is a necessary move first up, so having 15 defined roles (possibly too many, because we need to have basically every one of them be an active and engaged person) to start us off with is probably a good thing. These roles can change over time, and others can be created or folded out, but we should aim to have the game established before too much tinkering.

To do a parliament realistically that follows the Westminster model, people can't go running around creating parties and swapping across the floor etc. Strict adherence to the party whip is necessary, I believe. In all these reboots, the thing that has done the most damage to keeping the game going is everyone creating a new party, or splintering from one, or crossing to the other side, etc.; something which very, very rarely happens in real life. We shouldn't be aiming to look like Italy.

Obviously if the idea doesn't have support, it won't go ahead, but I really do think we should aim to adopt the simple, clear, two-party westminster-inspired model of the Australian HoR, with 7 frontbenchers on each side, a speaker, and then backbenchers. Maybe there's a Green or an independent, but there shouldn't be more than one crossbencher, and they shouldn't have the balance of power unless parliament is hung.

[Platypus]

But it also ensures the moderates basically govern.

If not two parties, then 5, two with about 30-35% support, 3 with between 10-15% support.

Labor, Liberals, Nationals, Greens, Moderates.

I still prefer two parties for the opening stages.

[Platypus]

"Australasia", perhaps, with everything like Australia systemically, but over the two nations, and with seven parties:

PRP - Progressive Reform Party (Aus. and NZ Labo(u)r parties) 40%
ACA - Australasian Conservative Alliance (Aus. Libs, NZ Nats) 35%
AG - Australasian Greens (Aus and NZ Greens) 5%
AP - Agrarian Party (Aus Nats, also support in rural NZ) 5%
NZIP - NZ Independence Party (Centrist NZ separatists) 5%
LP - Labour Party (Populist, Australia focused, anti-immigration One Nation clone) 5%
TP - Tasmania Party (Work with anyone, vaguely left, control all Tassie seats with huge margins, kind of like PQ on steroids) 5%

But I still prefer two parties

[Platypus]

I like them, but I'd switch Agrarian to a triangle and maybe ochre-coloured, add the fifth star for Labour, and do something quite different for the Progs, maybe something like this:



...but nicer

[Platypus]

OK, I think I've made my hidden point. The second we get too creative and detailed, people tune out.

Two parties, existing system, set roles, move on from there

[Platypus]

OK, I'm thinking this is a go, but just backtracking a bit

Two major parties, one left, one right. Name ideas? I'm thinking Reformist Labour Party and Australian Conservative Alliance, but it doesn't particularly matter to me.

Proposed seats:

Left (68)

WA (3)
Brand
Fremantle
Perth

SA (6)
Adelaide
Hindmarsh
Kingston
Makin
Port Adelaide
Wakefield

QLD (
Blair
Capricornia
Griffith
Lilley
Moreton
Oxley
Petrie
Rankin

NSW (23)
Banks
Barton
Blaxland
Charlton
Chifley
Cunningham
Dobell
Eden-Monaro
Fowler
Grayndler
Hunter
Kingsford Smith
McMahon
Newcastle
Page
Parramatta
Reid
Richmond
Shortland
Sydney
Throsby
Watson
Werriwa

ACT (2)
Canberra
Fraser

VIC (21)
Ballarat
Batman
Bendigo
Bruce
Calwell
Chisholm
Corio
Gellibrand
Gorton
Holt
Hotham
Isaacs
Jagajaga
LaTrobe
Lalor
Maribyrnong
McEwen
Melbourne
Melbourne Ports
Scullin
Wills

TAS (4)
Braddon
Denison
Franklin
Lyons

NT (1)
Lingiari

Right (68)

WA (11)
Canning
Cowan
Curtin
Durack
Forrest
Moore
O'Connor
Pearce
Stirling
Swan
Tangney

SA (4)
Barker
Grey
Mayo
Sturt

QLD (20)
Bonner
Bowman
Dawson
Dickson
Fadden
Fairfax
Fisher
Flynn
Forde
Groom
Herbert
Hinkler
Leichhardt
Longman
Maranoa
McPherson
Moncreiff
Ryan
Wide Bay
Wright

NSW (21)
Bennelong
Berowra
Bradfield
Calare
Cook
Cowper
Farrer
Gilmore
Hughes
Hume
Lyne
Macarthur
Mackellar
Mitchell
New England
North Sydney
Parkes
Paterson
Riverina
Warringah
Wentworth

ACT (0)
-

VIC (12)
Casey
Flinders
Gippsland
Goldstein
Higgins
Indi
Kooyong
Mallee
McMillan
Menzies
Murray
Wannon

TAS (0)
-

NT (0)
-

'Swing' (Please don't choose these seats, they'll be assigned to the side that ends up governing. (14)

WA (1)
Hasluck

SA (1)
Boothby

QLD (2)
Brisbane
Kennedy

NSW (4)
Macquarie
Greenway
Lindsay
Robertson

ACT (0)
-

VIC (4)
Aston
Corangamite
Deakin
Dunkley

TAS (1)
Bass

NT (1)
Solomon

Both sides will be guaranteed at least these 68 for the set-up election, but after that anything's possible

[Platypus]

They won't be characterised, just assigned as the left party or the right party.

[Platypus]

I wanted a second Queensland seat, and Kennedy (and Leichhardt, for that matter) are most certainly NOT your traditional conservative seats. Unless the ALP absolutely decimates the coalition and or/ has a real protectionist kick, it's probably the first of the swing seats to fall to the right, but it was a necessary number and I think not all that crazy

[Platypus]

His write-up for Solomon is impossible though

[Platypus]

For that particular seat as well, a swing seat based on Darwin, you would need to be unequivocally Darwinian

[Platypus]

I was going to suggest that I be the speaker until after the election, at which point the winning party will elect the new speaker and I'll create a player with one of the parties.

[Platypus]

I'll basically be putting an effect of each public action during the election on each seat. So, for example, if you have a policy relating to forestry, it would only have a small effect in Solomon, but a huge effect in Bass.

[Platypus]

Get your cards in order, because in a few days we'll start the election! I'll be looking for each party to have one unique policy on every topic, plus a policy on seven areas:

1. The Environment
2. Primary Schools
3. Live Animal Exports
4. Asylum Seekers
5. An infrastructure project
6. Automotive Manufacturing
7. Aged Care

Any further policies are welcome, too. I'll also be asking for a budgetary philosophy, so to speak.

Sometime around about next weekend we'll kick into gear, maybe a bit later if you're struggling to formulate policies. The election will involve the parties making press releases and speeches etc., doing 'interviews', a leader's debate, and various other bits and pieces, including reacting to two news items.

[Platypus]

*One unique policy on ANY topic, sorry.

[Platypus]

Yeah, but don't stand too much on your record and the LNP shouldn't focus too much on it either.

[Platypus]

Perhaps too complex for the very start of the game, but a good idea for whoever becomes the speaker after the election to consider.

[Platypus]

I'll start the election tomorrow if both parties are happy with that?

Also, could you please post the game name, username, and ministry/role of your parties here.

[Platypus]

Whenever you are ready. The plan was always for tomorrow, but I have no real objection to delaying for as long as you need.

[Platypus]

Are both parties nearing readiness for the election?

[Platypus]

OK, I'll start it off on Friday night Aussie time, which is still 5 days away, but it'll be started regardless of the readiness of the parties.

[Platypus]

Sorry all, been busy. Will get this sorted as soon as possible, But just reminding you that the election is imminent.

You need to have three things for me asap:

1. Full list of members and their seats, with ministries if they have them, posted in this thread.

2. Policies on the issues outlined earlier. They don't have to be 20 pages, just make sure they exist in some way. You can post them here too.

3. A list of the swing seats in order of how much your party is spending on them. You can PM that order to me.

I'll post daily news, occasional polls, and questions from journalists. I expect the election to last a week or so, but when you PM me the list of seats targeted, also include how long you'd like the campaign to last, and I'll take it into consideration.

Thanks

[Platypus]

Absolutely, there'll be one for each day of the election, which will loosely align with real days.

I'm currently in the final 7 of an online survivor game, which is taking up A LOT of time. But the 'good' news is that I'm likely to be voted out tomorrow so I'll be more available from then