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: Done with it  (Read 1979 times)

Offline Maarten Otto

  • Members
  • Posts: 1276
    • My photo site
Done with it
« on: August 17, 2011, 06:46:04 PM »
Guys I'm out.

No Boeing or Airbus means there is no party for you.
Version 1.3 has some benefits, but I feel the game is developing in the wrong direction.
Almost nothing has been done to make "a different approach" doable in the game.  In fact, since ABCBA routes were no longer allowed the game lost a lot of it's value, especially if you did operate an airline with small planes.

With game worlds which might take up to a  real life year I think the game will lose even more of it's volume. Game play has suffered and you can only run a profitable airline if you do he "standard" way of things over and over and over again. Wether you start in Barcelona or JFK it doesn't matter, the strategy is almost identical.

Don't you dare to try something else, like running an Airline in France using ABCBA routes with just 30 seater AC's. And you now even get penalized if you dare to run a 45 minute frequency.

Low coast carriers, Freight, Executive, Small regional airline.... these are just some names of ideas placed in the feature request topic many many times over the recent years. Nothing has been done to satisfy the needs of those who want to do something else for a change.

I'm done with 1450 order backlogs because the game started when any other decent manufacturer closed it's production line (read, Saab2000 and MD90 in MT5) just short before the game started. The result... frustration among a lot of players who are FORCED to go along in the order backlogs because the game offers no good alternative, let alone supports players to do something else then the standard way to play the game.

I do not find it thrilling to open an airline any more and do the same stuff over and over again. Now that I go on Holls for 3 weeks (to Switzerland and the UK) I decided that there was no room for AWS during my vacation, simply because running the same stuff over and over again does not satisfy me any more. Last few years I had my iPad or Laptop with me on Holidays just for AWS. I even looked up for hotels with good free WiFi and comfy sofa's so that after a day of walking and making photo's I was able to relax with looking at my airline while drinking a Guinness or something else of that black stuff.

Perhaps I'll get back in the game in three weeks, just to annoy some players witch in my perspective have grown too big. I hope I can get some joy in forcing someone into bankruptcy by rioting an airport, given the current climate I think London would do  ;)

One note:

It's nothing personal against any player or Sami, it's just frustration of not being able to "play" the game and explore the hidden secrets of AirWaySim.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:48:41 PM by Maarten Otto »

Offline Jona L.

  • Members
  • Posts: 3361
Re: Done with it
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2011, 07:14:42 PM »
Perhaps I'll get back in the game in three weeks, just to annoy some players witch in my perspective have grown too big. I hope I can get some joy in forcing someone into bankruptcy by rioting an airport, given the current climate I think London would do  ;)

Don't you dare to go to London!! I work on the guy being too big already!!

Offline Maarten Otto

  • Members
  • Posts: 1276
    • My photo site
Re: Done with it
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2011, 07:20:13 PM »
LLL... surely number 1 on my hit list  ;D

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Done with it
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2011, 08:14:51 PM »
I am finding myself sadly in the same shoes as the OP here.  I have tried running every type of fleet that is non soviet. 

In this game the 777 is BADLY broken.  I had a 757 flying 60% LFs making 500k per week while a 70% 777 was losing 300k per week.  Both were about 100% LF in C/F class too.   There are just too many planes that are way too wildly successful here that are not in the real world and vice versa. 

I am not a fan of Magic Carpet routes (ABCBA) as they were really unbalanced.  For them to return, I would request massive penalties to be in place between the BCB portion (like much higher slot costs). 

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14539
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: Done with it
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2011, 08:37:47 PM »
Swiftus, you yourself requested LH flights to have less income if you remember. That was done. There is nothing else "broken" in them (ie. no changes, apart perhaps that lease costs are higher now since plane demand is also rather high but that mechanism has been there always).

And Maarten, please try to see the big picture yourself. I am sorry for my 'whining' answer this time, but obviously you do not realize the time needed to adjust all the little things let alone the big things. There is a clear plan on which way things are developed in the long term and at the big picture but it's coming with smaller steps.

L1011fan

  • Former member
Re: Done with it
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2011, 08:51:24 PM »
I understand, but I must agree that ABCBA must return, with cabotage not allowed. I and others have been requesting it for long time now. Other than that, I find everything well with V1.3.  (and why would anyone want LH to have less income? Swiftus, I don't get that at all). I don't think anything is broken either, except not having a choice to run my airline ABCBA or hub or both. sami, I have faith that you'll bring it back, and I'll be patient.  Maarten don't let the door hit you on the butt on your way out. ::)
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 08:55:21 PM by L1011fan »

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14539
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: Done with it
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2011, 08:56:00 PM »
Abcd with proper traffic rights is planned. (was talked at ft.rq. forum earlier)

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Done with it
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2011, 08:56:31 PM »
Swiftus, you yourself requested LH flights to have less income if you remember. That was done. There is nothing else "broken" in them (ie. no changes, apart perhaps that lease costs are higher now since plane demand is also rather high but that mechanism has been there always).


Yes I requested it be changed.  There is no doubt.  But I requested that the game exist where real life planes are used.  Instead, all you see flying over the Atlantic (profitably) are narrow body planes and the odd 767-400ER.  So yes, income was lessened but not in the right way.

So, you swung the pendulum too far the other way.  Oh well, bring it back a tad.   And yes, LESS INCOME is correct.  Not LESS REVENUE! 

« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 09:01:39 PM by swiftus27 »

dvmaaren

  • Former member
Re: Done with it
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2011, 08:57:15 PM »
Even though I haven't been playing this game for that long I completely identify with the OP on one part, namely the looong backlogs on boeing/airbus. Even the used aircraft market is at some point pretty empty of useable boeing and airbus planes.

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Done with it
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2011, 08:59:44 PM »
 (and why would anyone want LH to have less income? Swiftus, I don't get that at all).

I want a world where wide bodies can be successful as well as small planes.

The income was so great on LH that it defrayed the cost of also running small a/c.   Also, it allowed people to easily force out the SH carriers in town too.

As I said above, the pendulum swung so far that 744s and 777s cant be flown



Offline type45

  • Members
  • Posts: 843
Re: Done with it
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2011, 09:04:57 PM »
Yes I requested it be changed.  There is no doubt.  But I requested that the game exist where real life planes are used.  Instead, all you see flying over the Atlantic (profitably) are narrow body planes and the odd 767-400ER.  So yes, income was lessened but not in the right way.

So, you swung the pendulum too far the other way.  Oh well, bring it back a tad.



777 and 744 is not good for airline don't have any cargo available...... the cost still charge you the part that you will never use (e.g. cargo space)

I can still make money on my 773, but I feel really bad as the leasing cost is so high that I can only barely make it

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Done with it
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2011, 09:07:58 PM »

I have to go make a demotivator or two now.

castelino009

  • Former member
Re: Done with it
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2011, 09:26:46 PM »
I was pretty close too, started 3 times , kept it simple yet nothing worked. Now just building slowly.

I think slot costs is the major factor, how can a small airline survive????

Also, as discussed before by many, we would like to have a feature of business plan and airlines structured on that.

Easy Jet does not pay same salaries/ costs etc as BA though they operate from the same base,how can we run a small airline here without getting heavy penalty? All airlines ending paying the same despite the kinda fleet we run.  A small airline will end up paying way more than a big one and this has to change.


hope at least a few are with me on this . I don't like to run a massive airline but a decent size one and V1.3 its getting impossible , all the big airlines are bankrupting like flies falling of from the sky :(


cheers
VJC

mukk

  • Former member
Re: Done with it
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2011, 10:32:19 PM »
regarding the OP:

it's a bit funny that you say you don't want to do the same thing over and over again, but on the other hand you quit the game because you can't get any airbus / boeing...
i mean, why don't you just go with either the larger props or medium jets (crj, e-jet) for example? you can do very good business with 'em if you do it right.
not that there aren't a lot of issues with smaller planes, that's true... but you aren't forced to use only airbus/boeing at all.

about LH:

the problem with LH is easily explained, there's just no balancing between the available planes (this is true for alot of other things in the game too btw...). i mean, take the 757 for example. if you compare it to any other LH plane <4000nm, it's just ridiculously cheap, uses a stupidly low amount of fuel, has only 70 minutes turnaround time etc. etc., but can carry about the same amount of passengers than a 767-200. it's just plain silly.
but as long as using accurate real life data is more important than playability, this will not change...

another thing is the fact that putting two smaller planes on a route often costs about the same as using one big. if you add the frequency-bonus to it, it's just not worth using a 747 over two 767 for example.

L1011fan

  • Former member
Re: Done with it
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2011, 10:32:58 PM »
Abcd with proper traffic rights is planned. (was talked at ft.rq. forum earlier)
Thats great to hear!!! I'll shut up about it now. Just, any idea when, approx?

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Done with it
« Reply #15 on: August 17, 2011, 11:19:54 PM »
I understand, but I must agree that ABCBA must return, with cabotage not allowed. I and others have been requesting it for long time now. Other than that, I find everything well with V1.3.  (and why would anyone want LH to have less income? Swiftus, I don't get that at all). I don't think anything is broken either, except not having a choice to run my airline ABCBA or hub or both. sami, I have faith that you'll bring it back, and I'll be patient.  Maarten don't let the door hit you on the butt on your way out. ::)

I am not sure if it is a good idea to allow airline based in ATL to have 700 aircraft for ABCDA in addition to 700 for ABA, while at the same time additional bases are severely restricted by cost (~35% staff overhead just to open the base) and aircraft limit of 100 (now) per base.

Taking into account how severe the restrictions are on bases, opening the floodgates by allowing ABCBA just does not seem to make sense.  Finding the right balance would just be very difficult.

Additionally, ABCBA routes would make some sense with passenger connectivity.  Without - they make even less sense.

Offline Frogiton

  • Members
  • Posts: 784
Re: Done with it
« Reply #16 on: August 18, 2011, 05:27:58 AM »
I never understood the point of ABCBA. How is it realistic at all? All that it's gonna do is make a already unrealistically easy game and make it unbeleivably easy. Now implementing regional airlines and connecting them to mainline flights or point-point like SWA or Easyjet would make more sense and be actaully realistic.
No replacement for displacement

Offline ukatlantic

  • Members
  • Posts: 1780
Re: Done with it
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2011, 06:45:02 AM »

In this game the 777 is BADLY broken.  I had a 757 flying 60% LFs making 500k per week while a 70% 777 was losing 300k per week.  Both were about 100% LF in C/F class too.   There are just too many planes that are way too wildly successful here that are not in the real world and vice versa. 


I totally agree here, I have tried (unsucessfully) to use 777's in previous games and cant even get them to break even, they are only really good at bases where you have decent C/F demand where you can add a sufficient number of seats in each of these classes and fill them up so again its bases like Heathrow and Tokyo where these aircraft can make money.  If you anywhere other than one of these major airports well forget it because there simply is not enough C/F demand to warrant running them and you can not make the types profitable even with a full economy cabin!

Also as Swiftus points out using 757's across 'the pond' is hardly realisitc yet it is the way to go in this game over 767 & 777 etc as they make good profitabilty and when you can add in the extra 'frequency' bonus by using the 757's it's a no braineir to use anything larger in AWS, yet at LHR do we see BA,AA etc using 757's for their LHR-JFK routes, nope its 767,777 and 747's and that is something I agree needs to be changed/tweaked, maybe for these longer routes that frequency bonus needs to be disestablished in total so if your flying 10 x 757's againt your competitors 4 x 777's then they are not getting any benefit/bonus from the frequency they fly and will only have load factors on the number of seats available.



Offline Meicci

  • Members
  • Posts: 821
Re: Done with it
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2011, 07:55:54 AM »
I'll be so sad when the current DOTM ends. Because then I must choose between game worlds that use 1.3. And that means I can't do the thing I like most, LH.

Or I can, but it's the same with short hauls, use A32X/B737NG or go bankrupt. Now it's in LH too, use A330/340 or get killed.

I don't know what is going on here, the game is just getting more boring. It is impossible to create a situation, where big guys can't dominate an airport without getting it in this situation, where everybody is forced to take the same strategy.

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14539
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: Done with it
« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2011, 08:11:27 AM »
use A32X/B737NG or go bankrupt.

Most certainly is not so.

 

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.