398 replies to this topic

[kraspeed]

I had experiences with competing against A380 on a 300 mile route, with demand for around a daily A320 flight. Of course it was possible to do so only with dumping prices, which made me think: such aggressive 'spamline' aims for topping the rankings. What do they care about - valuation. If dumping prices so low that it makes low to no profit, even going negative had a bigger penalty on total valuation, maybe it would encourage such players to put more effort on route planning.

[Viero]

I'm not sure if this has been suggested before, but what if there was a limit on how many planes an airline could own/lease? Most airlines that become spamlines can only do so by utilizing an absurd amount of aircraft, perhaps putting a cap on plane usage could assist with that. I have seen few actual airlines with more then 1,500 planes, perhaps that is a fair amount?

[LLC]

When reading through the aircraft deliveries thread, I realized that we need to consider a deeper problem first in order to have any "realistic" delivery/backlog system work for AE. I think the root cause of the ridiculously high demand for aircraft lies in the fact that AE gameplay is mostly about constant expansion. Think about it: what do you do when you play AE? Especially for the large airlines, most of the playing time is spent adding new routes and assigning aircraft to them. If we want to have realistically sized airlines and number of aircraft in service, it would involve shifting the bulk of gameplay away from constant expansion. However, what we shift that playing time to cannot be some tedious, repetitive chore like scheduling maintenance for each aircraft or going down a huge list and lowering ticket prices one route at a time.

 

So if* we really want to get rid of the perpetual expansion aspect of AE, we'll have to make the airline maintenance and improvement aspects more substantial but also fun. Maybe aircraft scheduling doesn't have to be a tedious chore. Or exploring and expanding into new markets should be a more involved process than just magically seeing the exact supply/demand and plopping some planes down. Or we should make the product aspect of an airline more important and dynamic, and include opinions from passengers evaluating their choices between you and your competitors. With more realistic (read: thinner) profit margins, you would also be affected by and forced to respond to dynamic aspects of the world like spikes in fuel prices. In summary, we would need to add substance to parts of the game other than the "open new route" button.

 

* I know some people like AE for its simple, fast expansion and don't want to get bogged down in other details of their airline. We do have the option of keeping the gameplay the way it is and accept the unrealistically high passenger/aircraft volume as a side effect. It is a game after all, and making it less fun to play for the sake of realism may not be a worthwhile tradeoff.

 

Thoughts?

How bought making special Worlds that incorporate what you suggested Yuxi,
but that keeps the Ox & Rx worlds the way they are. 
(x = various world numbers)

[LLC]

I'm not sure if this has been suggested before, but what if there was a limit on how many planes an airline could own/lease? Most airlines that become spamlines can only do so by utilizing an absurd amount of aircraft, perhaps putting a cap on plane usage could assist with that. I have seen few actual airlines with more then 1,500 planes, perhaps that is a fair amount?

No that is not.

the USA Deregulated the Airline Industry (= Airlines with waay more than 3,000 Jets)

[Hake.]

No that is not.

the USA Deregulated the Airline Industry (= Airlines with waay more than 3,000 Jets)

Murica isn't the only country, and spammers (like yourself) are strangling other airlines.

[iquit]

Murica isn't the only country, and spammers (like yourself) are strangling other airlines.

He's not a threat to anybody, notice he's only active in the forum from open worlds reset until his airline fails miserably?

[MilanM]

I had experiences with competing against A380 on a 300 mile route, with demand for around a daily A320 flight. Of course it was possible to do so only with dumping prices, which made me think: such aggressive 'spamline' aims for topping the rankings. What do they care about - valuation. If dumping prices so low that it makes low to no profit, even going negative had a bigger penalty on total valuation, maybe it would encourage such players to put more effort on route planning.

 

Look what I had, totally opposite experience... My A320 (8C, 144Y configuration) 8x weekly vs his CRJ100ER 70x weekly!!! 

 

[Crane Airlines CEO]

My take on a possible solution is factor in reputation a lot more. Right now marketing has almost no impact.

Pax pay based on perceived quality. Give planes a allure rating, the newer the plane and the more prestigious the plane the more people will fly you. A 747 in america is more valuble than an equivilent TU or IL.

id say make the formula as such

ill type it up in semi code

STEP 1 DETERMINE PAX TYPE (price first, prestieige first, ect.)

1. gen rand int 1-100 (this types the passenger)

2. if int =0-9 pax=a,10-30 pax =B,31-99  pax=C

3. pax type= A or B or C

 

SCALES

PAX A //presteige first

IFS/IFE=5%

Leg room=15%

Price=10%

speed=20%

airline rep=50%

 

PAX B //everday

IFS/IFE=15%

Leg room=15%

Price=20%

speed=20%

airline rep=30%

 

PAX C // price first

IFS/IFE=2%

Leg room=2%

Price=90%

speed=1%

airline rep=5%

 

than the passenger will get on the first available flight that meets his scale

larger market share the more likley you will get the pax. have a small share but a very prestigious airline, you will get the first/bizz first

 

also to fight persistent expansion make the manufacturers have a output cap. say 100 a month at max this is about double current numbers of Boeing. 

[Crane Airlines CEO]

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

problem solves itself. your locked in while other airlines can purchase from other manufacturers.

if you have boeing locked down, ill just buy airbus, or so forth, less demand for a plane the cheaper it gets. small airlines eat the scraps and hope that they can win small markets to penetrate the big ones. 

[TNT88]

 

Look what I had, totally opposite experience... My A320 (8C, 144Y configuration) 8x weekly vs his CRJ100ER 70x weekly!!! 

 

What number is that? 8 flights per week? Are you crazy or what? 1.1 daily flights?

[MilanM]

Would you be kind to explain me why he's not crazy but I am??? Should I start that route with 30x weekly next time??? 

[Stevphfeniey]

problem solves itself. your locked in while other airlines can purchase from other manufacturers.

if you have boeing locked down, ill just buy airbus, or so forth, less demand for a plane the cheaper it gets. small airlines eat the scraps and hope that they can win small markets to penetrate the big ones. 

 

You're a conservative, aren't you?

[bAnderson]

Certain airlines, like THE Empire, Snowy Pacific Airlines, and Great Lakes Airlines make me mad because they have so much resources and are unaffected by anything. I like this.

[TNT88]

Would you be kind to explain me why he's not crazy but I am??? Should I start that route with 30x weekly next time??? 

8 flights instead of 7 flights per week. make the number a bit realistic, it's very rare an airlines operate 8 flights instead of 7.

[S K Y]

8 flights instead of 7 flights per week. make the number a bit realistic, it's very rare an airlines operate 8 flights instead of 7.

What do you mean not realistic? I can have two flights on Sunday and one on every other day. It's pretty common everywhere.

[TNT88]

What do you mean not realistic? I can have two flights on Sunday and one on every other day. It's pretty common everywhere.

Not really common to be honest, it's an odd number, also I rarely hear 8 weekly flight. Putting more flight in any day of the week is unrealistic.

 

I hear daily flight (7x a week), I hear 6 or 5 weekly flight. But I never hear 8 weekly flight.

[TNT88]

What do you mean not realistic? I can have two flights on Sunday and one on every other day. It's pretty common everywhere.

Not really common to be honest, it's an odd number, also I rarely hear 8 weekly flight. Putting more flight in any day of the week is unrealistic.

 

I hear daily flight (7x a week), I hear 6 or 5 weekly flight. But I never hear 8 weekly flight.

 

Also with those kind of demand, A320 would be too massive to operate. He should use smaller regional plane or turbo props 

[Stevphfeniey]

Not really common to be honest, it's an odd number, also I rarely hear 8 weekly flight. Putting more flight in any day of the week is unrealistic.

 

I hear daily flight (7x a week), I hear 6 or 5 weekly flight. But I never hear 8 weekly flight.

 

Source, please.

[MilanM]

I find it more realistic to have 8 flights weekly than to offer 780 seats for 177 pax daily, don't you think... 

 

For example Qatar offers 8 weekly flights from DOH to SLL, 2 flights on thursday... 

[Shaq]

8 flt a week exists. United flies EWR-PTY 9 times a week. Double daily on Saturdays and Sundays.