Sign In
Create Account
"A real airline this size could open more hubs."
They might, but it would take years or even decades - not the single day of gametime required in Airline Empires.
For starters, consider gatespace. Effectively unlimited gates are instantly available in Airline Empires as long as you have enough money - and just about every "big" airline has the money to build as big of a terminal it wants anywhere. Want a 1,000-daily-flight hub at JFK? Done with a couple of clicks. In the real world, the vast majority of airports are completely gate-space constrained - there may be a handful of open gates, but if you want to build an entirely new terminal for 10, 20 or more gates, it would take years - or even decades - to work through the planning process, environmental review, construction time, etc.
Secondly, there's runway availability. LGA and DCA are, in the real world, legally slot-restricted. You could build all the new gates you wanted there and it wouldn't matter - you wouldn't be allowed to take off or land. For the rest of the airports, jamming a 500-flight hub into many of them would, in terms of capacity, bring them to their knees. Your hub operation would grind to a halt as delays piled up on top of one another. Never mind, as happens in AE, FIVE 500-flight hubs added to a single airport.
polarscribe's Content
There have been 24 items by polarscribe (Search limited from 27-April 23)
By content type
See this member's
#94228 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 29 October 2011 - 03:10 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
#94227 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 29 October 2011 - 03:06 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
" A real airline this size could open more hubs."
Sure, but it might take years - not a single day of gametime, as is currently possible in Airline Empires. The vast majority of American airports do not have hundreds - or even dozens - of spare, empty gates lying around for the taking, and building a new terminal is a non-trivial process that takes years or even decades. You can't just magically create 100 gates at the click of a button.
Then you run into the issue of runway capacity - LGA and DCA are under slot restrictions and most other major U.S. airports are at or near the physical limits of what their runways can handle. Opening a new 500-flight hub at, say, SFO, is quite simply impossible - your operations would congest the airport to such a degree that your hub operations would begin to break down.
Sure, but it might take years - not a single day of gametime, as is currently possible in Airline Empires. The vast majority of American airports do not have hundreds - or even dozens - of spare, empty gates lying around for the taking, and building a new terminal is a non-trivial process that takes years or even decades. You can't just magically create 100 gates at the click of a button.
Then you run into the issue of runway capacity - LGA and DCA are under slot restrictions and most other major U.S. airports are at or near the physical limits of what their runways can handle. Opening a new 500-flight hub at, say, SFO, is quite simply impossible - your operations would congest the airport to such a degree that your hub operations would begin to break down.
#94189 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 28 October 2011 - 02:04 PM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
That essentially negates the point of limiting the number of hubs, because the airlines that are big enough will just build a 40-gate terminal and dominate the airport anyway, whether they can call it a hub or not.
In the real world, every airline can't build an unlimited number of gates at any airport they want, overnight. You can't walk into LHR tomorrow, build a new terminal and open a 500-flight-per-day hub... doesn't matter how much money you have, there's not the terminal space or the runway capacity. If you want to get down to it, that's the most unrealistic part of the game. If you wanted to slow things down, reducing the number of available gates/landing slots and making terminal construction take actual time (months to years) would surely do it. Or, once an airport fills up... that's it, no mas, until maybe in a certain number of years they open a new runway.
In the real world, every airline can't build an unlimited number of gates at any airport they want, overnight. You can't walk into LHR tomorrow, build a new terminal and open a 500-flight-per-day hub... doesn't matter how much money you have, there's not the terminal space or the runway capacity. If you want to get down to it, that's the most unrealistic part of the game. If you wanted to slow things down, reducing the number of available gates/landing slots and making terminal construction take actual time (months to years) would surely do it. Or, once an airport fills up... that's it, no mas, until maybe in a certain number of years they open a new runway.
#94166 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 28 October 2011 - 07:28 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
The idea that low-cost airlines don't have "hubs" is a fantasy anymore. They may not call them that, but passengers certainly can and do make connections at such sites. Furthermore, call it a "hub," call it a "base," it's still a large operation to maintain that costs a significant amount of money no matter what name you put on it. Running 15 gates and hundreds of flights is not slightly more complex than a 2-gate outstation, it's hugely more complex. Airline Empires should reflect that fact.
The vaunted "point-to-point" of Southwest Airlines is now about 30 percent connecting traffic, and more than that at places such as Chicago-Midway, Phoenix and St. Louis.
And I'm open to tweaking the number of non-hub gates allowed. Maybe it's 7, not 5. That gets you 50 flights a day, and I daresay there's hardly any airline in the world that has a single outstation receiving 50 flights a day. Southwest's 10th-busiest station only serves 100 departures.
The vaunted "point-to-point" of Southwest Airlines is now about 30 percent connecting traffic, and more than that at places such as Chicago-Midway, Phoenix and St. Louis.
And I'm open to tweaking the number of non-hub gates allowed. Maybe it's 7, not 5. That gets you 50 flights a day, and I daresay there's hardly any airline in the world that has a single outstation receiving 50 flights a day. Southwest's 10th-busiest station only serves 100 departures.
#94159 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 28 October 2011 - 04:55 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
Again refining my idea... don't put a hard limit on the number of hubs, but limit the number of hubs per continent to somewhere between 7-10. If an airline wants to get supermega, they can, but they have to do it by broadening global reach, not dominating every single potential hubsite in a country/region.
#94158 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 28 October 2011 - 04:55 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
Double.
#94148 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 28 October 2011 - 03:00 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
Yes, but you would still be limited to the capped number of gates for a non-hub city. Otherwise, you could effectively build a hub-sized operation without technically making it a hub, skirting the intent of the restriction. The advantage of building a terminal would be saving on gate fees.
#94072 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 27 October 2011 - 01:42 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
Thinking about this, I think what should be done is establish limits on the number of hubs and tighten the limit on gates at non-hubs. In the real world, any airline getting so big as to attempt to run a hub in every major city of the US would run into major obstacles based on antitrust and fair competition laws, not to mention gate space and runway availability.
No airline could run more than 10 hubs, say, and no more than 7 on any one continent. It would force players to plan their expansions instead of going willy-nilly everywhere. First movers would still have an advantage, but couldn't ruin the game by basically taking over every route and city.
No more than 5 gates would be allowed at a non-hub city. I have been to most of the largest airports in America and have never seen a 15-gate outstation for any airline anywhere.
Of course, there would always be Open Worlds for people who don't want to play with semi-realistic restrictions.
No airline could run more than 10 hubs, say, and no more than 7 on any one continent. It would force players to plan their expansions instead of going willy-nilly everywhere. First movers would still have an advantage, but couldn't ruin the game by basically taking over every route and city.
No more than 5 gates would be allowed at a non-hub city. I have been to most of the largest airports in America and have never seen a 15-gate outstation for any airline anywhere.
Of course, there would always be Open Worlds for people who don't want to play with semi-realistic restrictions.
#94039 Any news on the Fuel Bug?
Posted by
on 26 October 2011 - 02:13 PM
in
General AE Discussion
I have some routes where I can open and close it half a dozen times and nothing will change... the fuel costs stay stuck at 97 percent. 
#94034 cant go in?
Posted by
on 26 October 2011 - 12:34 PM
in
General AE Discussion
I'm wondering if the slowdown is related to the fuel cost bug - it's trying to recalculate something all the time.
#94027 cant go in?
Posted by
on 26 October 2011 - 07:25 AM
in
General AE Discussion
No, it's not competition. I'm not that dense 
Check the fuel cost thread. There's a massive bug when you recalculate a route that's spiking fuel costs.
Check the fuel cost thread. There's a massive bug when you recalculate a route that's spiking fuel costs.
#94022 cant go in?
Posted by
on 26 October 2011 - 05:58 AM
in
General AE Discussion
It's really slow and the last thing I saw was my routes starting to lose money for no apparent reason - fuel cost bug rearing its head, probably!
Profit magically dropped $600,000 a day.
Profit magically dropped $600,000 a day.
#94013 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 26 October 2011 - 03:09 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
That's why I opened my airline's hubs in places like SMF, SAN, MSY, etc. But they're getting crowded, too.
Something needs to be done to slow things down... maybe it's not fewer airlines, but fewer planes, as the aim suggests. Maybe once your airline reaches a certain point in size, you run into regulatory hurdles, antitrust, etc.
Something needs to be done to slow things down... maybe it's not fewer airlines, but fewer planes, as the aim suggests. Maybe once your airline reaches a certain point in size, you run into regulatory hurdles, antitrust, etc.
#94009 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 26 October 2011 - 02:25 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
"Too little competition" is a feature, not a bug.
The fun part of Airline Empires is opening up routes and building an airline, not endlessly clicking through to change prices on routes by a dollar or two. That's FarmVille crap and it's what turned me off Airline Mogul after being a longtime player there. You go away for a couple hours and your entire airline is losing money because 10 people open a hub atop you and there's 80x 767s flying (to pick a random city pair) DFW-ORD.
In the real world, you couldn't have 10 airlines open a hub in the same city. It wouldn't work. Everyone in all these games wants to run hubs in the same places, ergo you end up with the games sputtering out into "who can spend the most time clicking to change route pricing."
Fewer airlines = more fun, less stupid.
The fun part of Airline Empires is opening up routes and building an airline, not endlessly clicking through to change prices on routes by a dollar or two. That's FarmVille crap and it's what turned me off Airline Mogul after being a longtime player there. You go away for a couple hours and your entire airline is losing money because 10 people open a hub atop you and there's 80x 767s flying (to pick a random city pair) DFW-ORD.
In the real world, you couldn't have 10 airlines open a hub in the same city. It wouldn't work. Everyone in all these games wants to run hubs in the same places, ergo you end up with the games sputtering out into "who can spend the most time clicking to change route pricing."
Fewer airlines = more fun, less stupid.
#93973 One-way flight
Posted by
on 24 October 2011 - 10:35 PM
in
(AE6) 2005-2030
Right, there are definitely exceptions, and it would be a great future feature 
#93971 One-way flight
Posted by
on 24 October 2011 - 10:28 PM
in
(AE6) 2005-2030
Of course, that's what a hub is for.
"Stopovers" (or multi-stop flights) have virtually disappeared from most modern airline markets because the hub-and-spoke system is a much more efficient means of routing connecting passengers. About the only (domestic U.S.) exception is Southwest, and even they have moved toward routing more and more connecting passengers via their largest bases such as PHX, BWI and MDW.
"Stopovers" (or multi-stop flights) have virtually disappeared from most modern airline markets because the hub-and-spoke system is a much more efficient means of routing connecting passengers. About the only (domestic U.S.) exception is Southwest, and even they have moved toward routing more and more connecting passengers via their largest bases such as PHX, BWI and MDW.
#93931 Bond interest dates should be flexible
Posted by
on 22 October 2011 - 07:39 PM
in
General AE Discussion
This isn't a bug, but a very real issue with the way the bond system is structured right now - that is to say, inflexibly.
My airline is profitable to the tune of $100m a month, has an AA credit rating... and is under threat of bankruptcy because $30,000 of bond interest payments didn't get made overnight, because their interest date is very early in the month, when I'm still in the hole from gate leases. (Of course, I took out those two bonds early in the game, before I'd figured out the consequences.)
It would be really nice if we could (for a fee, of course) refinance or modify the terms of bonds, as they would in the real world.
My airline is profitable to the tune of $100m a month, has an AA credit rating... and is under threat of bankruptcy because $30,000 of bond interest payments didn't get made overnight, because their interest date is very early in the month, when I'm still in the hole from gate leases. (Of course, I took out those two bonds early in the game, before I'd figured out the consequences.)
It would be really nice if we could (for a fee, of course) refinance or modify the terms of bonds, as they would in the real world.
#93875 Next theme game idea
Posted by
on 21 October 2011 - 04:41 PM
in
General AE Discussion
Slowing the rate of aircraft production would work as long as you instituted regulations (anti-trust?) to keep any airline from monopolizing more than a certain percentage of any given manufacturer's production slots. Otherwise, the first rich airline could buy out Boeing's entire order queue for the next year and break the game for everyone.
#93840 **New Airport Requests**
Posted by
on 20 October 2011 - 06:35 AM
in
Europe
http://en.wikipedia..../Buchanan_Field - KCCR, in Concord, Calif. Used to have commercial service to Los Angeles.
#93829 Cost of Leasing
Posted by
on 20 October 2011 - 01:41 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
You can already see how much you're making (or losing) with each given plane by clicking on the plane's page. I think that's sufficient.
#93760 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 18 October 2011 - 05:50 PM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
The limits are way too high. Should be 100 airlines per world.Like we already do?
#93744 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 18 October 2011 - 02:52 PM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
That's a good idea that I think would help slow down the carnage, but at the same time, it runs into a problem of too many players allowed per world. With 500 airlines per world, every single manufacturer is going to have their orderbooks filled to capacity long before the world comes close to filling up. Anyone who tries to enter even slightly late will be hopelessly screwed - they'll be unable to buy *anything* from the new market for years to come.
The fun part of these games is building up a route structure, developing hubs, buying planes, etc. Not going through routes endlessly clicking and changing prices by $1 to fix your economics. That's just FarmVille grind crap.
The fun part of these games is building up a route structure, developing hubs, buying planes, etc. Not going through routes endlessly clicking and changing prices by $1 to fix your economics. That's just FarmVille grind crap.
#93733 More realistic demand
Posted by
on 18 October 2011 - 07:19 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
To me, the real issue is that there are just too many airlines allowed per world. It really should be reduced down to 100 or so, maybe even less. I completely lost interest in Airline Mogul because of the ridiculous hub-camping that made it impossible to do any sort of realistic airline model.
The simulation aspect utterly breaks down at the point when every airline tries to build a hub in every city with 20x MD-87s flying between every random city on the map "just because."
If there were fewer airlines chasing pax, the demand-side issue would solve itself.
The simulation aspect utterly breaks down at the point when every airline tries to build a hub in every city with 20x MD-87s flying between every random city on the map "just because."
If there were fewer airlines chasing pax, the demand-side issue would solve itself.
#93724 Domestic demand modifier
Posted by
on 18 October 2011 - 03:00 AM
in
Suggestions and Feature Requests
This is also important for California routes. For example, Southwest flies (and fills!) 15-20 73Gs daily each way from Oakland to each of the major Southern California airports (BUR/LAX/SAN/SNA/ONT)... and they do the same at San Jose, Sacramento and to a lesser extent San Francisco. There is *serious* intra-regional flying in California.
