21 replies to this topic

[aoumd]

Having read the sentiment in the forums against spamlines, I have a modest proposal on one way to control their pervasiveness.

 

I know AE already has a "One Hub/Terminal Limit" game as a special world.

 

Expanding on this idea into the "what's realistic" mindset, perhaps there should be a maximum number of hubs allowed in "realistic worlds" games that is maybe the number of hubs of the largest airline in the real world, plus one or two?  Looking at some of the largest carriers in the world, United for example has hubs (at least in the home country) of IAD, EWR, ORD, DEN, IAH, SFO, LAX and GUM (remember, GUM is a US Territory!).  AmericanAirlines' home country hubs (post-merger with US), are PHL, MIA, CLT, ORD, DFW, PHX, LAX and DCA.  So maybe cap airlines in realistic worlds at 9 hubs in the home country?

 

So often when I run into spamlines and look them up under the rankings they have like 25 hubs.  Not very realistic.

 

I only recommend this for "realistic" worlds as "open" worlds are supposed to allow things like this.

 

What does everyone think?

[Will101]

No, Southwest for example have bases and hubs everywhere. Capping hubs is not the way to go. 

[Falcon444]

No, Southwest for example have bases and hubs everywhere. Capping hubs is not the way to go. 

[QK Flight Industries]

 

No, Southwest for example have bases and hubs everywhere. Capping hubs is not the way to go. 

 

Put in more general terms... if this were to be suggested, it would kill point to point version airlines (since AE doesn't really have the capability to set up focus cities/transfer at non hubs).

[TNT88]

I always run spamlines and Hub actually are useless if you know how the game works. It increased monthly cost for gates (reducing monthly profit), it only bring connecting passengers that pay half the price (even scam IFE can't help generating income on most routes). Also limiting hub wouldn't solved the problem for spamlines.

 

 

 

 

 

P.S. Spamline master.

[CourtingPsych0]

personally when i first started this game i did spamming but it wasnt really worth it as the upkeep costs are going to become huge the more hubs and gates you get, i only hub / terminal the zones i see that have a good profit / astronomic upkeeps which then flips upside down to astronomic profits and decent upkeep.

 

 

Problem you have is every player has their own ways of running hubs and terminals, some dont hub anything some hub literally everything so if you limited it you would basically annoy alot of people that use the hub everything tactic

[Whatever]

How about we just stop trying to end spamlining?

 

This witch hunt is just useless and it's really getting on my nerves.

 

Just think about it! AE is a game meant for fun. Everyone has a different taste of what fun in AE is. Some like to play realisticly, others just like to see the cash flow in, others just like to play casually. Ending spamlining by setting restrictions like this one is not a good idea because it ruins the fun for certain players.

 

What if everyone just went ahead and tried to end realistic airlines or casual airlines? Would that be fun? No it wouldn't!

[aoumd]

Wow, an interesting diversity of opinions!  Thanks for sharing all the perspectives!

 

I was under the impression Southwest does not have hubs, as the company doesn't like to refer to itself as having hubs.

 

As so much has been discussed about ways to optimize the connecting passenger revenue/calculation methodology in the game, maybe there could be a way to work focus cities (in addition to hubs) in as a feature for future versions?  That seems to be more in tune with the type of airport activity airlines like Southwest have at most of their "stations."

[TheGreatOP]

Spamlining can kill your airline easily, so let the folks who want to try go ahead. In most worlds, most spamlines don't make the top; it's rather those airlines with large fleets (but smaller than spamlines) and fill up their routes with proper demand that top the rankings.

[Frdm920]

How about we just stop trying to end spamlining?

 

This witch hunt is just useless and it's really getting on my nerves.

 

Just think about it! AE is a game meant for fun. Everyone has a different taste of what fun in AE is. Some like to play realisticly, others just like to see the cash flow in, others just like to play casually. Ending spamlining by setting restrictions like this one is not a good idea because it ruins the fun for certain players.

 

What if everyone just went ahead and tried to end realistic airlines or casual airlines? Would that be fun? No it wouldn't!

 

Whilst you have a valid point here Whatever, the flipside to this is that spamming tends to ruin the fun for everyone else. When you've got an airline putting 5,000 Y seats on a 500 Y demand route and charging like $70 when the default price is say $600 then those of us who like/enjoy playing "realisitically" are pretty much screwed out of the route. (Yes this is obviously a gross exageration, but it's just an out of thin air example)

 

So you can see why there's always going to be the call to end spamlining.

[davedave]

I still find it deeply ironic that people complain about spamlines being unrealistic, when in fact they actually add to the realism by providing competition that would otherwise be completely lacking. Given how easy it is to make money in the game, I'd say running flights without competition is the least realistic thing anyone could do.

[berubium]

I know of many routes that have no competition in the real world.  As far a larger markets are concerned, the competition always comes anyway, but there are plenty of routes only served by one airline in reality...

 

On the note of spamlines & realism, I've seen spamlines that have more daily pax on a route than there are people living in that city!!!  How realistic is that?

 

That being said, people can play how they want to play & I manage to find a way to fill seats & make money on my semi-realistic airlines anyways.  The game allows people to play how they want to play, even if spamlines are annoying.

[davedave]

In the real world, airlines charge what the market will bear. If they're making excess profits over the costs of running the flights, the route will attract competition. As I said, the difference in AE is that routes are naturally unrealistically profitable.

 

"On the note of spamlines & realism, I've seen spamlines that have more daily pax on a route than there are people living in that city!!!  How realistic is that?"

 

Well, spamlines don't pretend to be realistic

 

Thing is, that spamline was probably making at least as much profit as a real airline would, so it would actually be realistic to try and compete with it.

 

For what it's worth, I find all the discussion of realism doesn't do much for me given that AE is clearly an alternate reality...

[Tesla]

Whilst you have a valid point here Whatever, the flipside to this is that spamming tends to ruin the fun for everyone else. When you've got an airline putting 5,000 Y seats on a 500 Y demand route and charging like $70 when the default price is say $600 then those of us who like/enjoy playing "realisitically" are pretty much screwed out of the route. (Yes this is obviously a gross exageration, but it's just an out of thin air example)

 

So you can see why there's always going to be the call to end spamlining.

I compete often (1 in every 3 worlds) with 2 competitors on $1. I charge more for economy than they do for business, and still get passengers.

[Stevphfeniey]

I think we should permaban everybody from this website. That'll solve the problem of spamlining in no time.

[Frdm920]

I compete often (1 in every 3 worlds) with 2 competitors on $1. I charge more for economy than they do for business, and still get passengers.

 

That's something of an anomaly in the game where charging $1 effectively creates infinite passengers on the route.

 

 

I think we should permaban everybody from this website. That'll solve the problem of spamlining in no time.

 

Starting with you?

[Tesla]

LOL!

btw, we should create AI passengers reviewing your airline, making you more service conscious.

[sound_guy0918]

As long as there is artificially high demand between smaller airports, there is no real competition so spamlines swell to fill the void.  The overstated demand and connecting pax issues need fixed first.

 

Meanwhile, if you want a world with no giant airlines, limit the number of planes you can own and now you have a "salary cap" on how big you can possibly get.

 

Or, create a special world with the "realistic" utilization, IFS, etc. requirements that some players insist are "realistic."

[Med.]

Spamlines exist because the game allows it and here are some solutions I think would direct the gamers to a more true to life airlines.

 

1. Realistic aircraft production delivery system where you reserve slots in the manufacturer's assembly line. That way it would be extremely difficult to own 5,000 A380s.

 

2. Dynamic demand. Demand would start small in the early years then grow through time. This will eliminate airlines flying 50x a day LAX-JFK on a DC-7 in 1960.

 

3. Utilization. For long haulers 15+ hours would be ok but regionals should only have 9-12 hours.

 

Other factors that could help are, emphasis on rating, configuring and timetabling to make players spend less time on buying planes and adding routes and more time THINKING about what would work best.

 

This game is intended to be a strategy game and I understand the solutions I gave may require a complete overhaul of the game but the design of the game itself now makes it too repetitive which makes spamming so easy and inevitable.

[TNT88]

Why don't we all start creating spamlines? By then, there is no more boundaries or exceptions on the gameplay.