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: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty  (Read 4172 times)

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #40 on: March 22, 2013, 03:16:22 AM »
Hmm...  Maybe you are seeing only 20% of pax (when RI = 0) and the tech stop penalty reduces it to zero...

I have only flown tech stop flights where the starting demand was 2x or more of the aircraft capacity. and even though I started with very low LFs, it was above zero...


ReedME

  • Former member
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #41 on: March 22, 2013, 06:08:32 AM »
Wow - what did you do to your passengers? ;)

Absolutely nothing they just steadfastedly refused to fly. Route image was 15 when I took this screenshot. Those fares are -15%.

exchlbg

  • Former member
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #42 on: March 22, 2013, 10:42:47 AM »
Seems that all penalties were applied together: low RI,Low CI, tech-stop and flying route just two days a week.....

Offline Sanabas

  • Members
  • Posts: 2161
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #43 on: July 24, 2013, 05:03:48 AM »
Quote from: alexgv1
I think I am right in thinking that pax tolerance to tech stops is better in the early days such as 60s and 80s but goes down in the modern era.

Doesn't appear to be the case.

The biggest issue with this is that the demand graph is essentially off by 50% or more. If I look at a route that says 400 daily pax, and I stick a 300 seat plane, most appropriate to that route, on it, then when my RI and CI are high, competition is non-existent, I should get close to a full plane. But I don't. In fact, I get half the stated demand, or even less.

The problem isn't whether a ULH flight should be profitable, whether default pricing should be different (that's an entirely separate argument), the problem is whether an appropriate plane/s on a given route should be able to get roughly 100% of displayed demand when RI is 100, CI is 80+, and pricing is at the default. And right now, that doesn't happen. Players shouldn't be expected to look at the displayed demand, listed as 95% accurate, and instead treat it as being more than 100% optimistic compared to the true demand. Tech stops should only get penalised if there is a competing, direct flight.

At least until some future point where there is a much more complicated algorithm, and a virtual pax wanting to get from MLB-AMS has the same sort of options as RL, a 'direct', tech-stopping flight, or a connection in SYD, LHR, DXB, etc.

Just another example from the current JA. Amsterdam-Delhi with tech-stop, daily demand is in the low 60s for Y-class. RI is 100, though CI is only 30. I'm selling 22 seats/day, just 1/3 of demand. Amsterdam-Miami, daily demand is ~120, daily pax are averaging just 43, with a low of 27. Again, roughly 1/3 of the displayed demand, flying an appropriate plane on a route that pax should expect tech-stops on. At least I'm selling 100% of C-seats for the week, with 4 supplied and ~20 demand.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 05:07:55 AM by Sanabas »

Offline NovemberCharlie

  • Members
  • Posts: 604
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #44 on: July 28, 2013, 09:05:25 AM »
Please change this. It is sucking mayor profits out of my AEP based 748s (still profitable though).
With this rule in place I can only profitably operate A332s and 762s out of both AEP and MDQ...

Cheers!

Offline Mr.HP

  • Members
  • Posts: 2730
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2013, 12:21:05 PM »
Was the mechanism changed with the new UI and the new weekend feature?

Coz I'm flying a monopoly cross continent 2500nm 280 pax demand route on a A320-200 with default price and my LF is about 45-50%

How does changing tech stop penalty to mini plane penalty help, then?

Offline Sanabas

  • Members
  • Posts: 2161
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #46 on: August 04, 2013, 01:09:05 AM »
How does changing tech stop penalty to mini plane penalty help, then?

Flying a plane that is (just) too small will result in getting most of the available pax anyway, if there is no comp. If there is comp, then the appropriately sized plane will get most of the pax. That's how it should also work with tech-stop vs direct. Tech-stop and no comp, 90+ % of actual demand willing to fly your route. Tech-stop and direct flying comp, 75+% of pax preferring the direct flight. But what actually happens now is that with a tech-stop and no comp, you won't even get 50% of the demand willing to fly.

Offline Mr.HP

  • Members
  • Posts: 2730
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #47 on: August 04, 2013, 01:28:57 AM »
Flying a plane that is (just) too small will result in getting most of the available pax anyway, if there is no comp.

That is not entirely correct. As I said above, I can get only up to 50% LF on a no comp route. That is my flight from JFK to GYE

On the other hand, another mini plane warning route of mine flying to YVR, although just an international routes with 2100nm range, but has 500 pax demand. My B767 doesn't attract more pax than my alliance member mini A321 do

Guess there are many levels of mini plane penalty, and so are tech stop penalty

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #48 on: October 03, 2013, 04:39:12 AM »
Flying a plane that is (just) too small will result in getting most of the available pax anyway, if there is no comp. If there is comp, then the appropriately sized plane will get most of the pax. That's how it should also work with tech-stop vs direct. Tech-stop and no comp, 90+ % of actual demand willing to fly your route. Tech-stop and direct flying comp, 75+% of pax preferring the direct flight. But what actually happens now is that with a tech-stop and no comp, you won't even get 50% of the demand willing to fly.

Yeah, I think one penalty is enough...  And the penalties should be reduced if pax has only 1 option - only 1 airline flying the route.  But should fully kick in if there is a competition flying direct.

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #49 on: February 25, 2014, 11:16:24 PM »
With the longtime gameworlds and a very long time no aircraft avaiable for real long-haul is there some update on this? It seems like a still existing problem:
http://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,52301.0.html

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992

The person who likes this post:
Re: Treat tech stop penalty like 'plane is too small' penalty
« Reply #50 on: June 04, 2014, 02:07:44 AM »
How about completely removing the tech stop penalty if no other airline is flying non-stop?

I guess the reasoning behind tech stop penalty was to eliminate "unfair" competition of flying tech stopped smaller aircraft against bigger aircraft flying non-stop.

But if the situation does not exist in the first place (tech stop vs. non-stop) why still assess the penalty?  It should be relatively easy to see in the pax allocation algorithm if the penalty should be assessed (tech stop vs. non-stop) or if it does not need to be assessed (no one else is flying the route or all players are flying with tech stop).

If this is implemented, the result would be that more routes would become viable to fly, something for the players to do when after they saturated the demand that can be supply with non-stop flights.

 

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.