51 replies to this topic

[S K Y]

Is there such restriction in real world, or realism advocates now want the game less real instead after losing?

yes, it's called common sense.

[Whatever]

I was winning this game by a comfortable margin and had, until a few months ago, only a few hubs.  Now I've switched strategies.  You all are welcome to try as well.  I doubt that you could execute it as well as I do.  

 

Note that I have previously won 01, and that I have done so with a more conventional strategy.  If you look at my past posts, I have very clearly laid out how to most efficiently use time and aircraft to win at this game.  To my surprise, nobody seems to have applied the lessons I spelled out - despite demonstrable proof that they work.  Players are still, for example, scheduling routes beyond 5999 miles as soon as they have the range to do so.  That is just stupid for as long as shorter routes are unoccupied (they are).  

 

In short, I have won in the past by having the best strategies and the best execution of strategy.  This current strategy will only make my margin of victory bigger, it will not decide the outcome.

 

From what I've seen, you're supposed to turn everything you come across into a hub and then take advantage of the connecting passengers.

[Stryker8686]

Check this out, lol

 

That's a lot of people flying is Switzerland

Attached Files

•  1.png   437.86KB   0 downloads
•  2.png   263.38KB   0 downloads

[Luft]

Honestly, rather than adding a lot of stuff to AE4, I think that only a few things should be added (the most important ones), so that Yuxi, or anyone else, can take the time to work out the logistics of a system to edit individual routes.

[Hake.]

Honestly, rather than adding a lot of stuff to AE4, I think that only a few things should be added (the most important ones), so that Yuxi, or anyone else, can take the time to work out the logistics of a system to edit individual routes.

Editing individual routes? Are you serious?

[Luft]

Editing individual routes? Are you serious?

 

Why not?

[Hake.]

Why not?

Because while you may consider New York - Heathrow a 'priority' for changing demand, J could probably name 100s of routes which are well under demand. Tens of Scottish airports on routes to bigger Scottish airports, routes in the west of Ireland and all routes from Reykjavik to other Icelandic airports. Routes from rural African airports, routes in the Scilly Isles and much more. I can go on

[Luft]

No, I'm talking about some of the routes that really need changing. 

-African routes

-Certain routes from the Middle East

-Certain US transcons

-Mexican routes

-Brazilian routes

[Hake.]

No, I'm talking about some of the routes that really need changing. 

-African routes

-Certain routes from the Middle East

-Certain US transcons

-Mexican routes

-Brazilian routes

My suggestions really need changing too

[chuckmorris]

No, I'm talking about some of the routes that really need changing. 

-African routes

-Certain routes from the Middle East

-Certain US transcons

-Mexican routes

-Brazilian routes

Who said his routes didn't need changing?

[Luft]

Oh, sorry. I was talking in context to what you said about me wanting JFK-LHR.

[Hake.]

Oh, sorry. I was talking in context to what you said about me wanting JFK-LHR.

Don't worry, I was taking that as an example