398 replies to this topic

[sky_high]

less clicks

[sky_high]

gates and slots need to be harder to acquire. the fact you can build an unlimited amount of terminals instantaneously is a major problem. i have so many terminals i actually just feel dirty. nobody should be able to have 60 hubs on a realistic server, major airlines only have like 10. just make moderate restraints on things like hubs, gates, slots, and terminals (wait periods for construction). 

[Wyldon]

Not really, ar'.  However we typically operate at a lower profit margin, but we still operate in the black.  I was curious to see the effects of scam IFS for myself and tried it once.  Passengers were paying enough for crap IFS that it covered my monthly fuel costs and I was seeing 30-plus percent profit margins...and my maximum block hours was 91!  Unfortunately, regarding constant expansion, it seems that if one tries to self-regulate and operate a domestic network of 90 cities, for example, those airlines that offer 180 destinations would seem to have the edge.  It appears that when I encounter such airlines, regardless of the quality service, frequency, on-time percentage, and prices I offer, once that price is matched, customers seem attracted to that mega-destinations airline.  It seems reasonable.  Constant expansion, however unpleasant to some of us, may be an unfortunate reality we'll have to live with in AE.  Afterall, unlike in the real world where major carriers have one or more subsidiaries that likely operate under a brand name for the major carrier, their fleet numbers aren't added to the fleet totals of the major carrier.  In AE, to generate more passenger revenue by expanding into other (smaller) markets, those 30-125 seaters, for example, that normally would belong to contract/subsidiary carriers, expands our AE fleet totals considerably.  With this in mind, I truly have no clue how to curb constant expansion...realistically. 

 

For what it's worth, right now I operate a 65-city U.S. domestic route with 21 international cities initially planned in S3A.  The international cities will expand, but it's likely my entire network will not exceed 125 destinations so that's 8 potential points on my airlines overall reputation I'll not realize.  To get them, I'd have to go gobbling up destinations just for the 8 points...EXPANSION.

 

Well, I'm committed to the 65-city domestic network...we'll see how it turns out...

[ar157]

Random note, I was referring to 4* scam as opposed to 1* scam which is a rather big flaw in the game (and one that i'm glad is in game)

[LLC]

Can we please have one of the old style world (Open World) where we can expand really fast.

As whatever you did Yuxi to change AE I don't like it as I come here to have fun, not to "play an aviation management job"

 

I would like (especially in Open Worlds) more emphasis on competition, and limiting expansion hurts competition

(like not having any AI created used aircraft for sale at the beginning of a world) 

[Jsieczkar]

gates and slots need to be harder to acquire. the fact you can build an unlimited amount of terminals instantaneously is a major problem. i have so many terminals i actually just feel dirty. nobody should be able to have 60 hubs on a realistic server, major airlines only have like 10. just make moderate restraints on things like hubs, gates, slots, and terminals (wait periods for construction). 

This is where I would like to see a change, the hub system.  The hubs are too powerful, far to cheap to have and you are allowed an unlimited number of them.  Now I am not in favor of a hard cap, but I would suggest putting a finical burden on the massive hub networks.  The first 6 hubs stay as they are with number 7 the gate cost multiplier goes up to x2.5, 8 x3, 9 x3.5, 10 x4, 11 x5, 12 x6, 13 x7 and so on.

[iquit]

I would like (especially in Open Worlds) more emphasis on competition, and limiting expansion hurts competition

(like not having any AI created used aircraft for sale at the beginning of a world) 

Yes! AI and competition. Lets make AIs that actively seeking out spamlines and kill them when spotted before they even have a chance to expand.

[jrodneyfranks]

First, you could create the FAA to regulate the number of takeoffs and landings at airports. I don't have specifics, but I imagine that even JFK couldn't dream of handling the number of flights in and out that AE places on it. So in a way that Houston's Hobby Airport has a governmental restriction on the number of passengers to out of state airports, airports could be limited in the number of takeoffs and landings. Right now I can fly as many flights out of Jackson, Mississippi as I could out of Chicago, granted the passengers wouldn't be there. Limits such as the one above would impact the bigger cities tremendously. Just because you have a passenger demand and Bombardier fleet for hundreds of flights between Chicago and JFK you should be limited to something reasonable since other airlines need to use the airport also. So a total available slots for takeoff and landing commiserate with the number of gates or terminals you operate. 

 

Second, more focus on the airline's formation in the beginning could drastically change the game. Along with your initial terminal and aircraft force players to select either the spoke and hub or point to point business model which will come with pros and cons for each. Spoke and hub would have a reduced maintenance and personnel costs since it focuses on operating out of one or more hubs potentially. Cons to spoke and hub could be an increased ground time since it would have more aircraft operating out of key hubs. Point to point would be the opposite of spoke and hub with other potential perks to offset the cons (maybe a small percentage of pax boost similar to an alliance bonus for more direct flight).

 

Lastly, by allowing airlines to "contract" with certain aircraft manufactures, airlines receive a discount for purchasing from that manufacturer. I know historically that railroads purchased the majority of their locomotives from the same manufacturer and only occasionally ventured from their comfort zone for motive power. I am assuming airlines do something similar. That's the carrot. The stick is purchasing from another manufacturer other than your contracted manufacturer should cost you out the nose (something like a 25% hike of the base price). And if purchase costs for non-contract manufacturers goes up, then so too the maintenance costs go up.

 

No one of these alone will likely serve as a remedy. All together may still only make a dent. Having actual AI airlines in place may drive down passenger prices. Further, more emphasis on ratings would be a deterrent. Force airlines to spend more to get the lion's share. If you have people packed on a plane where it is standing room only, then passengers should only pay pennies while if you have a plush airline they should pay with Benjamins. Just some thoughts that others can add to or point out why they would fail. 

[dianemather]

A simple fix would be to restrict each player to a maximum number of aircraft, now you would need to think a bit more before you put a 747 on an ATL - IAD route, just an example!

No more than 6 new aircraft a year and can hold no more than 100 total, that should make it more interesting. 

[UnitedContinental]

Another way that this problem could be solved is by limiting the output of aircraft by each company. For example....

 

Currently, the Boeing company produces the 737 over several different assembly lines and produces 42(?) 737's a month. We could take this idea and split it up into several different "assembly lines" for each major region of the world. Such as 2-3 for North America and Europe (84-128 per month), 2 for Asia, South America/Africa, and Oceania (84 per month for each of the 3 regions). This would help to limit the amount of aircraft in the world. As for when they'd be delivered, the date would be worked out based off of when you ordered the aircraft. If the 737 or which ever aircraft type you ordered is backed up, then your order would be pushed back to the nearest available month. Thus making it more realistic. Airlines will put planes on order but won't typical get them until years after the order.

 

This is just one idea that could be implemented or adjusted to meet the games need.  

[Stevphfeniey]

Another way that this problem could be solved is by limiting the output of aircraft by each company. For example....

 

Currently, the Boeing company produces the 737 over several different assembly lines and produces 42(?) 737's a month. We could take this idea and split it up into several different "assembly lines" for each major region of the world. Such as 2-3 for North America and Europe (84-128 per month), 2 for Asia, South America/Africa, and Oceania (84 per month for each of the 3 regions). This would help to limit the amount of aircraft in the world. As for when they'd be delivered, the date would be worked out based off of when you ordered the aircraft. If the 737 or which ever aircraft type you ordered is backed up, then your order would be pushed back to the nearest available month. Thus making it more realistic. Airlines will put planes on order but won't typical get them until years after the order.

 

This is just one idea that could be implemented or adjusted to meet the games need.  

 

"I'll just go ahead and prevent my competitors from getting new planes by backing up the assembly line until 2050"

[UnitedContinental]

"I'll just go ahead and prevent my competitors from getting new planes by backing up the assembly line until 2050"

 

Good point. The only way to prevent that would be to somehow limit the cash flow or orders, but I have no idea how either of those 2 should be addressed. 

[LLC]

Without fundamental game economy changes, these fines would not make a dent in the war chest of most large airlines in AE today. That's like giving a millionaire a monthly parking ticket.
 
Achieving more realistic (read: thinner) profit margins requires costs to scale as an airline grows. If we have more realistic demand, ticket pricing, labor costs, maintenance costs, and remove the physically impossible efficiencies in aircraft/crew scheduling, it would result in lower profit margins overall. Without laying out a timetable, the current 140-hour flying weeks means extremely efficient flight schedules that would not be possible in real life if time-of-day-based demand, gate constraints, and other time-sensitive constraints are applied.
 
That said, I am in favor of having more unpredictability in terms of making worlds more dynamic. For example, there can be major weather events that shut down entire airports in a region for a day or two. This would have strategic implications and discourage airlines from putting all their eggs in one basket. Meanwhile, I think we should avoid gratuitous fines and planes "disappearing" for the sake of dinging airlines without any strategy-enriching value, especially if email alerts are involved.

Is airline-empires.com going to keep a "pre-change" Realistic and Open World for those of us who like the current way of doing things ?
(As the SIM3 and SIM1 worlds were kept around: Introduction_to_the_different_game_worlds)

Also this would allow us to compare the differences for ourselves.
 
I like "endless expansion" and would like at least 2 Worlds (1 each Realistic & Open) that allow for "endless expansion" to be kept around please.
 
really what I would like is an Open World where all of the aircraft are always available (Strategy Testing World ?) with 1990-2030 & 15 min / day
* this is a game, so not everyone is going to like the same things

[Hake.]

Yes! AI and competition. Lets make AIs that actively seeking out spamlines and kill them when spotted before they even have a chance to expand.

http://ae31.airline-...ae3s1&player=70 Wouldn't that kill your airlines? On a further note, I would support Fox's idea of old AE3.1 worlds.

[Pilot1868]

Maybe there should be really realistic world where you have to go and:

 

[...]scheduling maintenance for each aircraft or going down a huge list and lowering ticket prices one route at a time.[...]

[ветер]

What I find is that only large international airports have any demand what so ever in the American Midwest, A route from CYS-DEN in AE is 3 a day when being a person who lives in these cities knows that on most days they fill 100+ seats and still leave people at the airport waiting for the flight tomorrow, now I will be honest and say later back in the 1950-1980 there was probably no demand but, times do change, I find in AE the demand never is dynamic it will stay the same from 1950-2020 which is unrealistic, when they found oil in these wyoming towns the airports got very busy, now the only limit to the service is the fact these airports don't have the needed facilities for passenger jet service, but when Casper airport built a new terminal they found that legacy airlines and 2 low cost carriers were sending RJs and 319s to service to hubs all across th US and they get an average 80% load factor proving there is demand but they wouldn't have had that same demand 30 years ago, The demand rates need to be dynamic and well need to keep in mind factors such as tourism, oil and other major things tht would influence travel.

[ветер]

Because here in cheyenne the new proposal for a new terminal has already made airlines test the routes and make proposals for services across the country

[ветер]

Allegiant has already started test flights to Las Vegas and they are getting impressive load factors, but keep in mind that they aren't filling baby busses but actually filling mad dogs to Vegas

[Stevphfeniey]

Again, we should appoint a board of overseers headed by me to permaban players in worlds who display spamline-like attributes. 

[.Julicos.]

Despite i am newbie i have some ideas.

More political resctrictions example all nations under USSR prohibited to fly on NATO countries 1950-1989,also the same thing on Mao China until Deng Xiaoping's reforms ,on North Korea the prohibition can apply from 1950-end.The same aplies for NATO countries while non USSR or NATO countries can fly without restrictions.Also financial crisis for some years with lowered demand and bigger taxes ,the effect will vary from country to country.