80 replies to this topic

[Luigi]

I think it's a good idea. In theory it would get rid of most of the cheaters, but there is probably going to always be that one guy that ruins it for everyone...

Proud to be 15 and have a flourishing airline,

[Pacific]

Heh I'm #7 but you're probably above me due to your order backlog.

My profit margins for my prop routes are turning to pot so I'm trying to expand into mid-hauls.

As for "kids" flooding routes...try saying that to the bus company "Stagecoach" in the UK...

Free busses
Triple frequency
Paralell routes

[Edited on 6/23/2005 by Pacific]

[Luigi]

OMG....u guys are a bunch of morons!!!!!!!!!! ITS A GAME FOR CRYIN OUT LOUD.

[Luigi]

Originally posted by Pacific
Heh I'm #7 but you're probably above me due to your order backlog.

My profit marins for my prop routes are turning to pot so I'm trying to expand into mid-hauls.

Heh, we shall see...

As for "kids" flooding routes...try saying that to the bus company "Stagecoach" in the UK...

Ya, I've heard about them, and from what i've heard it was very effective...

[piercey]

Ahhh, Stagecoach, I've heard of that name a million times and I'm on the other side of the pond

[sfgiants13]

Originally posted by Luigi
OMG....u guys are a bunch of morons!!!!!!!!!! ITS A GAME FOR CRYIN OUT LOUD.

Indeed. But, what I don't get is why all of these "mature adults" are talking about 14 year olds being "armchair CEO's". Unless this is the last major step before you run your own airline in the real world (which it isn't), and you actually run a company of your own (which most of us here don't), then aren't all of us playing here "armchair CEO's"? I am yet to see one of you guys here play this game, and then go out and run an airline of your own. But anyway, I've got better things to do in my time.

[Crazy764]

jaxdtw2196 and Fredways,

Don't get me wrong. I like the suggestion of a optional pay-to-play version. What I don't like is the premise that the suggestion was based on:

At the very least, it'd keep the children out

these 14 year old armchair CEO's...really piss us off

Granted, there are immature 14 year olds. But there are also immature adults. Please don't use overgeneralizing statements like those above to paint everyone with the same brush.

Second, I don't see how offering $1-dollar fares and providing over capacity on routes are considered unrealistic behaviour. If people want to use unprofitable business practices, they should be free to do so. Airlines in the real world do this, and they go under (ie. JetsGo). The competitive market will take of these problems by itself.

Third:

2.) I don't consider winning, like in the real airline industry in this nation, to be high rankings and short-term profit, but rather long-term survival and persistance. The high rankings of some presently are fueled by the ability to grow quickly, and this high growth with rapid entry into multiple new markets is propelling their revenues, and in turn, profits to an extent. Wait until there's not many new places to turn, with some peoples' near hourly changing of routes and cities. A more solid, established foundation will prevail. Instant gratification isn't the goal. Or rather, it shouldn't be.

Of course we could all base our arguments on assumptions of things that may or may not happen. Perhaps you are right: all the top airlines (who, to their credit, have been near the top for a while) will go under over time, and you and your strategizing will prevail. But perhaps that won't happen. Since this game is based on a programmed script, we can't know that. So there is no point debating something that is anyone's guess.

Lastly, as for paying to remove cheaters, I think there are much more efficient methods. If there are people willing to pay $5 a month to play this game, there will be people willing to pay $5 a month to ruin this game. I think that's pretty obvious. It's much more effective to use technology to stop the cheaters (unique ip addresses, cookies, e-mail addresses, and a combination of them for example).

------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by pierceyThank You!! Honestly, you are the most mature person here! (and the best artist:))

Haha, thanks for that, although I'm sure many would beg to differ.

And AJ, no I do not paint planes. But I have downloaded many of your paints before, and they are great.

[Luigi]

Crazy, thank you for typing. I love you for it and I agree with you 100%.

Dude, you gotta stop categorizing people and assuming stuff. Not everyone wired the same way as everyone else...sometimes kids can be more mature than adults...

[piercey]

Crazy-The savior for all minors that are not immature:cool:

[actango]

Couldn't agree more with Crazy. Some of the people here are being extremely stereotypical of the younger people who play the game. Sure John Doe in New York may be cheating, that doesnt mean every 14 year old who plays in New York is cheating. Also, again as Crazy said, and I have brought this up before, I hate the fact that people are basing their opinions on 1$ fares or as Jetsgo called them "Loonie Fares." I have seen in numerous posts people wanting it to be more realistic, yet they go on at the end to say "1$ fares is ridiculous and should be stopped" or something to that affect and in the end, are contradicting themselves and looking like fools. I think the pay version may stop a few cheaters, but there is always a group of personalities that have an obsession with winning, nothing wrong with that, some people don't always do this in the right way, and thats what needs to be stopped.

[Sunshine Airways CEO]

please, lets get back on topic

[Mexicana757]

The pay to play idea has been brought before in another section of AE forum. I think its a good have pay for play game of AE. Im guessing this would have new features.

By the way no one needs classes in aviation management or any business clasess to play a simulation game.

[Edited on 6/23/2005 by Mexicana757]

[flick70]

Count me in. I would love to play in a "world" where the competition is a bit more realistic and avoid some of the actions of some in the free version.

As one of the first alpha testers here, I am in for the long haul...and would pay to play.

[AirKevin]

Originally posted by jaxdtw2196
You kiddies play it your way and mess us all up.

Understand that there are a couple kids, like myself, who want to run a successful airline and do everything the right way. I'm 15, and am smart enough to play right.

[AirKevin]

Originally posted by miller22
Oooohhhh, so this is how these threads deteriorate into shouting matches...

That is correct.

[Maestro69]

Well, i got no problem with Miller introducing a pay-to-play AE version, however, lets not get ahead of ourselves just yet. There is a lot of things that need to be done and we are all in a process of discovering bugs and providing ideas to make this game better, so it can represent a realistic view of the aviation indsutry around the world.



[Edited on 23-6-05 by Maestro69]

[Fredways]

Originally posted by Crazy764
jaxdtw2196 and Fredways,

Don't get me wrong. I like the suggestion of a optional pay-to-play version. What I don't like is the premise that the suggestion was based on:


Granted, there are immature 14 year olds. But there are also immature adults. Please don't use overgeneralizing statements like those above to paint everyone with the same brush.

Child-like behavior and age do not necessarily infer anything about the other. Don't put words in my mouth. Or maybe your feelings are coming to the surface?

Originally posted by Crazy764
Second, I don't see how offering $1-dollar fares and providing over capacity on routes are considered unrealistic behaviour. If people want to use unprofitable business practices, they should be free to do so. Airlines in the real world do this, and they go under (ie. JetsGo). The competitive market will take of these problems by itself.

Yes, nothing inherently wrong with $1 fares. However, do it with your legitimate/primary airline. It's too easy to do (and many people have done it) to form second, third, fourth, etc., airlines with the sole purpose of causing trouble. You could sit here making new airlines, putting them on routes charging $1 fares, run them into bankruptcy, trash them, and start over all day. Sure, if some of these people flying fleets of widebody jets want to charge $1 fares on some flights, great. However, suspicion surrounds some of these airlines that fly nothing but their original two aircraft (plus maybe a third) who are flooding a couple of routes with $1 (or similarly low) airfares. The probability is quite high these carriers aren't anybody's primary, but rather are formed for irresponsible motives.

Originally posted by Crazy764
Of course we could all base our arguments on assumptions of things that may or may not happen. Perhaps you are right: all the top airlines (who, to their credit, have been near the top for a while) will go under over time, and you and your strategizing will prevail. But perhaps that won't happen. Since this game is based on a programmed script, we can't know that. So there is no point debating something that is anyone's guess.

Nor am I saying that's what is definately going to happen, more likely a high probability guess. It's the approach I, and some others, choose to take to the simulation. I didn't say they would go under. I stated that the rapid growth, and the high flexibility that fuels it, will cease. That is a certainty, and has been exhibited within Airline Empires on previous iterations. When the gates run out, you are stuck with what you have. You have to deal with some unprofitable routes or less than pleasing yields. The airfares are dictated by whoever is most suicidal in the market.

Originally posted by Crazy764
Lastly, as for paying to remove cheaters, I think there are much more efficient methods. If there are people willing to pay $5 a month to play this game, there will be people willing to pay $5 a month to ruin this game. I think that's pretty obvious. It's much more effective to use technology to stop the cheaters (unique ip addresses, cookies, e-mail addresses, and a combination of them for example).

These items have already been introduced and haven't had the desired effects. For example, on an average day I could run three different airlines with three different IPs. I could easily sell aircraft back and forth. If I had a dial-up IP, I could sit in one spot and do it again and again. A small charge would discourage much of this, though of course there would be some who would be willing to pay for multiple airlines for undesireable purposes, but the scale would be much, much smaller. Additionally, billing would have to be tied to an actual name and address (even though something like Paypal, where the actual merchant receives no information other than the name) so creating multiple accounts under multiple identities would be quite difficult, unless one were to actually get a credit card under an assumed name.

[Fredways]

Originally posted by Mexicana757

By the way no one needs classes in aviation management or any business clasess to play a simulation game.

Correct, but some of the assumptions made about the realism of this simulation (at its present state) and the economics of the airline industry suggest they don't even have a pedestrian knowledge of the aviation industry, perhaps outside of things like airliners.net (the biggest farce on the internet).

[drv4truk]

I've said before that I would pay to play. Hopefully that would eliminate some of the people that are using bugs to their advantage.

I don't understand why you guys are having a problem with age. Who cares how old the other players are. And both sides have made some petty, immature remarks in the forums. Just knock it off and play the game.

[Fredways]

Originally posted by actango
Couldn't agree more with Crazy. Some of the people here are being extremely stereotypical of the younger people who play the game. Sure John Doe in New York may be cheating, that doesnt mean every 14 year old who plays in New York is cheating. Also, again as Crazy said, and I have brought this up before, I hate the fact that people are basing their opinions on 1$ fares or as Jetsgo called them "Loonie Fares." I have seen in numerous posts people wanting it to be more realistic, yet they go on at the end to say "1$ fares is ridiculous and should be stopped" or something to that affect and in the end, are contradicting themselves and looking like fools. I think the pay version may stop a few cheaters, but there is always a group of personalities that have an obsession with winning, nothing wrong with that, some people don't always do this in the right way, and thats what needs to be stopped.

Again: If you want to charge $1 fares with your actual airline, go for it. Though most seem to create alternate carriers to do so, absorbing the financial damage.
Jetsgo was piddly. In the real industry, if one were to drop fares to that level then capacity dump with B767s and the like (as some here did in the last round) they would be forced to stop.