AirwaySim
Online Airline Management Simulation
Login
Username
Password
 
or login using:
 
My Account
Username:
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Author Topic: We need some excitement...  (Read 3200 times)

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3068
We need some excitement...
« on: February 07, 2010, 01:06:06 AM »
I'm hoping for another couple of fuel spikes in the last 10 years of MT#1.  Going through the one of 07/08 was a great challenge (especially for myself as being my first month playing), and it was quite exciting to see big airlines falling left and right because they were unable to sustain their business through the price crunch.  Now that I'm optimized for super expensive fuel, I'm making money hand over fist - I'd love to see the screws turned on the world to see who survives :-).

I"m guessing noone else is with me...

stefan.aj@hotmail.com

  • Former member
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2010, 05:34:58 PM »
I'm with you. It's more fun with high oil prices than low. And it would also be challenging with a decline in demand!

flygresor

  • Former member
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2010, 11:51:24 AM »
Now it's getting really really boring. Low oil price, short wating time for new planes and lots of bancrupcies. We have lost 40 airlines in less than a week.

Offline [ATA] - lilius

  • Members
  • Posts: 1650
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2010, 10:21:10 PM »
I agree... we need some excitement! Higher fuelprices!  :)

Offline Sigma

  • Members
  • Posts: 1920
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2010, 07:49:59 PM »
This always happens, which is why I didn't support the move to longer games, mostly championed by players who haven't played even a single full-game yet so don't really know how it normally goes down.

Sami's got an "events module" planned for the future that will create random regional and global cost- and demand-changing events, but it can't come quick enough since the move to longer games.

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3068
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2010, 05:08:34 AM »
This always happens, which is why I didn't support the move to longer games, mostly championed by players who haven't played even a single full-game yet so don't really know how it normally goes down.

Sami's got an "events module" planned for the future that will create random regional and global cost- and demand-changing events, but it can't come quick enough since the move to longer games.

To an extent, there are challenges in longer games that aren't present in short games - specifically fleet planning.  In this game, you can't buy a truckkload of 737-200's at the start of the game and expect to still be flying them in the end. You're forced to replace them even if you're perfectly happy with them.

I guess I'm thinking something along the lines of adaptive AI for market/fuel conditions.  If everyone is making a runaway profit, then the game should sense that and push back by adding a little more challenge...

Offline Sigma

  • Members
  • Posts: 1920
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2010, 06:20:42 AM »
To an extent, there are challenges in longer games that aren't present in short games - specifically fleet planning.  In this game, you can't buy a truckkload of 737-200's at the start of the game and expect to still be flying them in the end. You're forced to replace them even if you're perfectly happy with them.

I agree, but that's actually another "problem" with the longer games because the design of the scheduling functionality doesn't lend itself to easily managing this process of moving from one fleet group to another as time goes by (in all fairness, this has been discussed a few times, and no good solution has ever come out of it).  As a result, and one reason why we see fewer and fewer airlines everyday, people quit out because they don't want to take the time to reschedule all their planes.

I'm sitting on almost 100 planes that I just have no desire to actually schedule.  They're supposed to be refreshing my fleet and making it more fuel-efficient but the process of replacing one plane with another (unless it's of an identical fleet group) is just WAY too time-consuming, tedious, and boring to bother with when you've got so many.  And I'm scheduled to take delivery of another 100 more too which will go the same way.

Exceedingly few players with large airlines actually want to put in the time it takes to manage them in the longer games, so you see a lot of "churn" in the upper-ranks as they fall out as time goes by.   That certainly has some positives to those that want to put in the time.  But it makes for a VERY empty game-world in the latter half, particularly the latter quarter, of a game.

I do like your idea though.  But just remember that for every person that thinks a game is too easy, there's always someone out there that's struggling to get by for whatever reason.  So it's not always easy to just make the game 'adapt' -- though there have been talks of adaptive salaries in particular that scale as your size does to reflect a common reality of larger airlines paying an ever increasing percentage of their revenues in salaries.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2010, 06:23:37 AM by Sigma »

Offline type45

  • Members
  • Posts: 843
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #7 on: February 20, 2010, 10:17:28 AM »
as you wish, the excitement has arrived: fuel price reached $1000 again, even 787 cannot make a profit

the world will have more EXCITEMENT when more airline would declared bankruptcy and having less player in the world

I would like to say "thank you" to you ;)

Filippo

  • Former member
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #8 on: February 20, 2010, 11:57:49 AM »
thank-you


Offline [ATA] - lilius

  • Members
  • Posts: 1650
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2010, 06:05:04 PM »
What do you mean "even a 787"? Its the last aircraft i can imagine being profitable at all. ???


Offline type45

  • Members
  • Posts: 843
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2010, 08:45:21 PM »
787 is designed for long thin routes, which is the major type of my long haul market. I don't think it can make a lot of money for me, but I expect it can still make a profit. However here are the numbers:

Sold tickets   750 779 USD
Line maintenance (A+B)   -18 888 USD
Insurance   -92 696 USD
Fuel cost   -379 562 USD
Route fees (1)   -136 975 USD
Weekly leasing cost   -456 145 USD
Total   -333 487 USD
(I'm the launch customer so I've enjoyed the 10% discount on leasing already)
the config is F4C10Y200 flying 3 times weekly on SAEZ - PHNL - KPDX - PHNL - SAEZ

yes, I have some planes can make a profit, all flying routes >6000nm
but why I use 787 to fly those routes if 767 can do with less fuel burn, only a bit smaller in pax number and fly "a bit" slower? ;)
especially there are no cargo in the game, this make the plane even less profitable to airlines relayed on long haul flight
the range between my base and Middle east cities are 6000+km, East Asia cities are 8000-10500km, even Europe cities are 5300-7200km. I don't mind to stay in a bad hub, but please give me something as good as I can have in real life ;)

I thing most of the players do not have this kind of problem as the don't need such a long range, but for those who have a similar situation, the high fuel burn and no cargo can be deadly
it is not making sense at all, sami. ;) 787 is just a deadly product under current config/fuel burn. This take place at the routes which 787 designed for. ;) If this is something happened in real world I don't think 787 can get so many orders ;)

please review the fuel burn, try to make it bigger to put more pax/cargo, or even introduce financial leasing system, to make it work like Beoing designed.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2010, 08:59:18 PM by type45 »

Offline [ATA] - lilius

  • Members
  • Posts: 1650
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2010, 10:50:15 PM »
Type> I agree there must be something skewed with the ingame performance of the 787. What I meant how I cant see making it any profit at all is "in game".

The problem with more obscure hubs like south-america will always be the distances of course but on the other hand the competition is lighter or non existant on domestic routes. If you want to fly "shorter" there are plenty of hubs in NA and Europe to pick :)

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3068
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2010, 12:03:43 AM »
Sami has stated in the past that the 787 fuel burn numbers are set to projections that are pretty close to the 767 fuel burn and will change when/if the actual performance data on the plane turns out better than it currently is.

I can't make any money with my 777-300ER's even running them pretty full...

kone_alta

  • Former member
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2010, 08:42:24 AM »
Sami has stated in the past that the 787 fuel burn numbers are set to projections that are pretty close to the 767 fuel burn and will change when/if the actual performance data on the plane turns out better than it currently is.

I can't make any money with my 777-300ER's even running them pretty full...

Due to the production slot problem on both A350 and 787 series(not exist anymore) I've order 30x787-9, but because the problem resolved I decided to cancel these orders because 787's fuel burn is not efficicent (compare to my 767 fleet and even A358 in game setting) and better fleet commonality (that's why I've ordered 117 A350 and more will be coming)

Totally I run 72 77W and they are my backbone to my profit(which 10 of them are for D check replacement)
The point to make good profit is old saying: own as much as you can and run a large number of it.  :)

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3068
Re: We need some excitement...
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2010, 05:18:59 AM »
Due to the production slot problem on both A350 and 787 series(not exist anymore) I've order 30x787-9, but because the problem resolved I decided to cancel these orders because 787's fuel burn is not efficicent (compare to my 767 fleet and even A358 in game setting) and better fleet commonality (that's why I've ordered 117 A350 and more will be coming)

Totally I run 72 77W and they are my backbone to my profit(which 10 of them are for D check replacement)
The point to make good profit is old saying: own as much as you can and run a large number of it.  :)

I've seen your 77W fleet around. You've got a bit of an advantage that you've got a home airport that can actually support 77W levels of capacity to more than 3 destinations. I would be doing just fine with them if I owned them, but seeing as how I joined halfway into the game, I've been rather busy playing catchup.  I was actually doing well on routes that you were on - they were some of my more profitable 77W routes.


 

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.

If you are using the latest version please turn OFF the compatibility mode.