Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: alex
« on: September 09, 2018, 12:51:54 am »

To clarify, this isn't related to the recent changes. I'm using too many slots, not routes. This happens frequently to most airlines. The reason is because the number of slots you get per base level is directly proportional to loyalty, and loyalty is (for almost all bases) exactly equal to the volume-weighted average of flight quality, and flight quality is 20% determined by airplane condition. Which means that when your planes renew, or you add a big batch of new planes to a base, your slots shoot up and then slowly come back down.
Posted by: alex
« on: September 08, 2018, 06:28:44 pm »

No, that is extremely annoying. Just change the slot formulas so your slots don't go away, or get rid of airplane condition's effect on flight quality.
Posted by: Catweazle
« on: September 08, 2018, 05:27:07 pm »

I think random events of the type you are stipulating are less likely to impact high profile players. I have a large enough profit base that my reaction to any event should be mostly to tweak prices or occasionally route quantities at the margins, and otherwise weather the storm as a period of diminished capex. But, like, I'm not moving a base, and I'm probably not even canceling any routes if I'm convinced that they are still viable long-term economic prospects.

For example, I'm at -17 slots in Seoul (i.e. I am using 17 more slots than the airport would currently allocate me based on base level and loyalty). Expanding Seoul would cost $9.6 billion and create an additional $8.7 million per week in support costs. Ergo, I am simply never going to cut slots on any route to or from Seoul, for any reason.

I think if the "volume-triggered" events are mostly negative, and correlated to turnover (eg Airline hostess forceably removes a passenger on your airline, triggering social media outrage), it will be more challenge overall for larger players.  Another one is government tax - could be introduced on "large turnover" companies.

The specific situation you have i think arose with recent change to local/regional limit calculations. I agree, it would be good to have functionality to force players to correct 'over-limit' situations eg Seoul airport opens a window next time you log in and forces you to cut eg 1 route, and again the next day, etc, until finally you're down to threshold.
Posted by: Auburn Airlines
« on: September 06, 2018, 08:37:31 pm »

As far as end game ideas, what able multiple leagues/worlds you advance to as your reach a certain level?

So everyone starts in the bronze league and as you reach 100 reputation you can advance to the silver league and then onto a gold league. This would help keep people together in worlds with similar experience/competitiveness.

Thanks for all the work Patson, you've really created a spectacular/addicting product.

Auburn
Posted by: rampantfox
« on: September 06, 2018, 04:20:52 pm »

A little more flexibility on some countries. Take Cuba, Haiti, and Venezuela. All 3 allow foreign airlines to fly to and from but we can't in the game. Granted not many foreign airlines fly to CCS due to the political turmoil but all the major carriers fly to Cuba and Haiti (at least for USA HQ'd airlines)

Not sure if this change will help with the particular situation you suggested but think I'm going to factor in the country mutual relationship into this. If 2 countries have close ties (I got the matrix from some online data of trade relationship between countries with a bit of manual patching) then even closed country might allow at least inbound flights (no base allowed though) one example might be that North Korea might allow Chinese airline to fly to her airports

US airlines shouldn't be allowed bases in either of these countries but we should have in and out privileges!
Posted by: losgatitospeligrosos
« on: September 06, 2018, 03:45:57 pm »

Yeah it's really strange that nobody can fly to a country like Venezuela for example, even Colombia which has a +4 alliance relationship in the code.
Posted by: patson
« on: September 06, 2018, 12:11:01 pm »

A little more flexibility on some countries. Take Cuba, Haiti, and Venezuela. All 3 allow foreign airlines to fly to and from but we can't in the game. Granted not many foreign airlines fly to CCS due to the political turmoil but all the major carriers fly to Cuba and Haiti (at least for USA HQ'd airlines)

Not sure if this change will help with the particular situation you suggested but think I'm going to factor in the country mutual relationship into this. If 2 countries have close ties (I got the matrix from some online data of trade relationship between countries with a bit of manual patching) then even closed country might allow at least inbound flights (no base allowed though) one example might be that North Korea might allow Chinese airline to fly to her airports

Posted by: rampantfox
« on: September 06, 2018, 11:12:55 am »

A little more flexibility on some countries. Take Cuba, Haiti, and Venezuela. All 3 allow foreign airlines to fly to and from but we can't in the game. Granted not many foreign airlines fly to CCS due to the political turmoil but all the major carriers fly to Cuba and Haiti (at least for USA HQ'd airlines)
Posted by: alex
« on: September 06, 2018, 07:19:31 am »

I think random events of the type you are stipulating are less likely to impact high profile players. I have a large enough profit base that my reaction to any event should be mostly to tweak prices or occasionally route quantities at the margins, and otherwise weather the storm as a period of diminished capex. But, like, I'm not moving a base, and I'm probably not even canceling any routes if I'm convinced that they are still viable long-term economic prospects.

For example, I'm at -17 slots in Seoul (i.e. I am using 17 more slots than the airport would currently allocate me based on base level and loyalty). Expanding Seoul would cost $9.6 billion and create an additional $8.7 million per week in support costs. Ergo, I am simply never going to cut slots on any route to or from Seoul, for any reason.
Posted by: Catweazle
« on: September 06, 2018, 06:58:35 am »

Sorry to be a nay-sayer but i really think the space game is a ... different game.

My suggestions for late game -

1. Random 'events' for example:
- crashes / near misses (higher probability for low serviced planes, but random element eg ATC cause)
- economic boom / bust in different geographical regions
- governmental interference - local taxes, political
- hijackers
Random events are more likely to impact high profile players - but keep it challenging for them

2. advertising / marketing / promotions / frequent flyer points functionality
- the right mix of price, service, reputation, targeted advertising, and a great points program = success
- holiday packaging - invest in resorts/hotels at airport bases
- give away points to temporarily boost passenger numbers

3. Deeper political / economic system -
- government funding system for new "national" airlines (ie where first based)
- Economic cycles especially impacting FUEL prices
- a generally growing economy with rare horrific crashes will mix it up

Probably should have put this in ideas... oh well it's late.
Posted by: patson
« on: September 06, 2018, 03:21:37 am »

A non-trivial worry I have about the end-state of the game is that economic profits get competed down to zero, and eventually, even marginal profits get competed down to zero, until many airlines go bankrupt because they invested in big base expansions back when it was worth it to pay those exponentially-increasing costs.

I just see the profit crunch happening everywhere. I can respond to it rationally for a long while, and I'm in no danger of collapse or anything, but I dunno, I think by October or November we'll reach a situation where big airlines can go negative if they aren't tended to regularly.

I'm actually starting to note this. Most of the routes have an ideal price, but the competition keeps driving it down until it hits zero and goes below margin in highly competitive markets. While massive restructuring is possible, you'd need a large amount of cash in reserve to keep you afloat as you rebuilt and hope that someone didn't target you while you restructured.


I actually thought the second hand airplane market was something of a good humored joke, perpetually bound to be "the upcoming update" week after week, until the login notice was removed recently. I would be rather excited to see this as it being similar to the stock market in being another way for airlines to indirectly interact with one another.


Sorry about the delay of 2nd hand market. I started implementing it tonight and it's a bit ahead of schedule. So it's possible to be released in the next few days

Stay tuned :D
Posted by: t1853
« on: September 06, 2018, 12:48:25 am »

A non-trivial worry I have about the end-state of the game is that economic profits get competed down to zero, and eventually, even marginal profits get competed down to zero, until many airlines go bankrupt because they invested in big base expansions back when it was worth it to pay those exponentially-increasing costs.

I just see the profit crunch happening everywhere. I can respond to it rationally for a long while, and I'm in no danger of collapse or anything, but I dunno, I think by October or November we'll reach a situation where big airlines can go negative if they aren't tended to regularly.

I'm actually starting to note this. Most of the routes have an ideal price, but the competition keeps driving it down until it hits zero and goes below margin in highly competitive markets. While massive restructuring is possible, you'd need a large amount of cash in reserve to keep you afloat as you rebuilt and hope that someone didn't target you while you restructured.


I actually thought the second hand airplane market was something of a good humored joke, perpetually bound to be "the upcoming update" week after week, until the login notice was removed recently. I would be rather excited to see this as it being similar to the stock market in being another way for airlines to indirectly interact with one another.
Posted by: patson
« on: September 06, 2018, 12:32:11 am »

I think changing conditions as scenarios would work well, but I think changing conditions mid-game would not be very fun. Airlines in this game just do not have a much ability to restructure the parts of themselves already established. What they do have is the ability to adjust their future expansion plans in response to new conditions.

But I agree that the resale market is a much simpler project.

100% Agreed. Very slow change of predictable game condition might work . For example my very very very original thought for this game is one airline can try to develop a mid size city into a major traffic hub. For example if an airport is getting extremely high air traffic in a very small town, that small town will grow to a bigger size the next year....or something along that line :)
Posted by: alex
« on: September 05, 2018, 11:39:43 pm »

I think changing conditions as scenarios would work well, but I think changing conditions mid-game would not be very fun. Airlines in this game just do not have a much ability to restructure the parts of themselves already established. What they do have is the ability to adjust their future expansion plans in response to new conditions.

But I agree that the resale market is a much simpler project.
Posted by: patson
« on: September 05, 2018, 11:37:08 pm »

Ya...I'm also thinking about endgame.. that's  why I brought up the space idea (suggested by my inlaw and nephew)

Another thing that I actually started implementing but never actually completed is costly airport/city projects. I think it could be a fun concept though I haven't found any good way to implement it.

Another thing is a dynamic change of world conditions as many of you have suggested. The way the code currently structured the airport population and charms can indeed change dynamically and generate different result. This can combine with the user project  I mentioned. For example an airline can invest in rapid transit to the airport to increase the population coverage of it. But again those are big changes and I need to make sure they bring a lot of fun values to the game before I go with it


On the other end.i feel like the 2nd hand airplane market is probably a mid size project (probably one weekend ) so I'm going to work on that next :)

I'm also surprised with the  interest in space and beyond...I thought noone liked it ;)