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: Slots - the final solution  (Read 4435 times)

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2013, 12:38:18 PM »
try 40m



Yes--this new rule is unfair for existing game worlds because you are forced to use cash to buy slots versus going negative.  People have ordered large batches of planes and now it will be impossible to schedule them.  Bad idea, at least to implement today.

Offline Maarten Otto

  • Members
  • Posts: 1276
    • My photo site
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2013, 02:29:07 PM »
So if I understand Jumboschrimp correctly he is saying that anyone using anything smaller then a 737 is a pain in the arse and has no right for slots as my aircraft is 'just to small and resources could be better spend'. Not polite Schrimpy.

If I am prepared to pay 800K per slot for a 30 seater then that is MY choice. Fine that the same slot can be better used for a 737 at 800K. But as long as we pay the same price it is up to the player weather to decide if he is prepared to cough up the money or not. Regardless of type of aircraft.

Offline Sanabas

  • Members
  • Posts: 2161
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2013, 03:16:44 PM »
Posted this in MT thread, reposting it here as I was having ideas as I typed and it turned into more of a feature suggestion about slots...


I would say the exact opposite. Slot hogging is making a conscious effort to buy as many slots as possible, to limit your direct competition to as few slots as possible. Using smaller aircraft out of an airport that is not going to be persistently slot-locked requires buying a lot of slots at once, up to 105 for 3 turboprops, is certainly not slot hogging, but the new system will not make an allowance for that. It is smaller airlines, short haul airlines, in size 5 but not slot-locked airports that will be indiscriminately punished.

It is going to be longhaul airlines, starting in big airports, that will be punished the least, because they get the most revenue for the least number of slots. Exactly the same way that starting with 2 x DC10 as your initial planes is the best way, by far, to start growing explosively. 35 weekly slots is enough for 7 LH planes, or 2-3 a320s, or just 1 turboprop. Limiting explosive growth at the start of the world is something I'm 100% in favour of. But doing it this way is going to offer huge advantages to LH over regional, even more than it does now. They can get 7 times as many planes before running into highly inflated slot costs. And each of those 7 planes will produce much more revenue.

Make slots be plane-size specific when purchased, and not transferrable, and it'd work far, far better. That way, the 'bought too many slots in last month' amount could be weighted differently for each size, say small = 0.5, medium = 1, large = 2.5, v.large = 5. Go over 200 points in the last month, and you're paying the anti slot-hog fee. Allow a bank for those who are not buying slots, that credits them with 50 slots/week multiplied by the % amount of slots in their HQ between 0600-2255, less 20. So in an 80+% full airport, e.g. LHR, CDG, AMS, etc, you get no credit. In a 50% full airport, you'll get 15 slots/week added to your bank, enabling you to schedule in bulk later. In a near empty, 20% full airport, you'll get 30 slots/week banked, so if you go 3 months without a slot purchase, you'll have ~600 slots available before hitting the hog-fee, enough for 15-20 turboprops.

That would slow down explosive growth, without unduly punishing those running regional airlines, without unduly punishing those in bigger HQs without so much slot pressure who want to schedule in bulk on a weekend.

It would also stop players abusing the current system by getting a handful of LH planes as cash cows, then any 50-100 seater they can find to hold as many slots as possible for later switching to LH. You want to hold a slot for a v.large LH plane, you'll need to buy it as a v.large slot from the start. Or buy it as a medium slot for a medium plane, then close the route and rebuy it as a v.large later on. Easy to slow that hogging down too though, if you give back a slot of one size and want to buy it again, you could have to pay a really large fee.

Players attempting to run huge airlines in huge airports might actually have to start focusing on actually buying slots for the routes they're about to fly, instead of focusing on greediliy grabbing as much of the limited resource as they possibly can, in order to keep anyone else from having it, and to distribute to their real routes at leisure.

Offline [ATA] Sunbao

  • Members
  • Posts: 901
    • FmFreaks
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2013, 04:14:50 PM »
Yes--this new rule is unfair for existing game worlds because you are forced to use cash to buy slots versus going negative.  People have ordered large batches of planes and now it will be impossible to schedule them.  Bad idea, at least to implement today.

Not at all, you will get a new 737/320 every 25 days or so, that flies three routes thats 21 slots, then you will get one long haul also around every 25 day, thats in total around 28 new slots every 25 day.
And that will not be penalized under the new rules.

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2013, 05:33:07 PM »
So if I understand Jumboschrimp correctly he is saying that anyone using anything smaller then a 737 is a pain in the arse and has no right for slots as my aircraft is 'just to small and resources could be better spend'. Not polite Schrimpy.

If I am prepared to pay 800K per slot for a 30 seater then that is MY choice. Fine that the same slot can be better used for a 737 at 800K. But as long as we pay the same price it is up to the player weather to decide if he is prepared to cough up the money or not. Regardless of type of aircraft.

Airports want passengers, and they want their potential passengers be actual passengers.  When it comes to assigning a slot, they would always prefer a larger aircraft with more pax to smaller aircraft.  I don't remember seeing 30-seaters at JFK, definitely not at NRT.

If slot is the limiting resource, there is more demand than the airport can serve with its existing slots, the slot "resource" could definitely be better spent on a larger aircraft than on a 30 seater.

My proposal is not to ban 30 seaters, but to grow slots until there is some surplus, and at that point, 30 seaters are fine.

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #25 on: October 10, 2013, 05:55:29 PM »
It is going to be longhaul airlines, starting in big airports, that will be punished the least, because they get the most revenue for the least number of slots. Exactly the same way that starting with 2 x DC10 as your initial planes is the best way, by far, to start growing explosively. 35 weekly slots is enough for 7 LH planes, or 2-3 a320s, or just 1 turboprop. Limiting explosive growth at the start of the world is something I'm 100% in favour of. But doing it this way is going to offer huge advantages to LH over regional, even more than it does now. They can get 7 times as many planes before running into highly inflated slot costs. And each of those 7 planes will produce much more revenue.

I suggested a way to close down the initial LH exploit here, to slow down the initial exponential growth:

http://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,46457.0.html

The RI modification that Sami implemented left this exploit unaffected.

Offline Maarten Otto

  • Members
  • Posts: 1276
    • My photo site
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #26 on: October 10, 2013, 07:33:48 PM »
Airports want passengers, and they want their potential passengers be actual passengers.  When it comes to assigning a slot, they would always prefer a larger aircraft with more pax to smaller aircraft.  I don't remember seeing 30-seaters at JFK, definitely not at NRT.

If slot is the limiting resource, there is more demand than the airport can serve with its existing slots, the slot "resource" could definitely be better spent on a larger aircraft than on a 30 seater.

My proposal is not to ban 30 seaters, but to grow slots until there is some surplus, and at that point, 30 seaters are fine.
In other words you dictate me and the others out there that do not wanna fly like every one does to do so. Your spoiling a game. I believe this was called AIRWAYSIM... Not 737/A320 SIM.

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #27 on: October 10, 2013, 07:48:27 PM »
In other words you dictate me and the others out there that do not wanna fly like every one does to do so. Your spoiling a game. I believe this was called AIRWAYSIM... Not 737/A320 SIM.

No, I want to improve it, so that we are again playing AirwaySim, not a SlotSim.

If the slots grew based on demand for slots, there would be room for everyone.  But when the slots at major airports are completely sold out, and airlines can't get a slot for a 777, it seems counterproductive to have a Beechcraft taking up a slot.

Offline Maarten Otto

  • Members
  • Posts: 1276
    • My photo site
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #28 on: October 10, 2013, 07:53:18 PM »
Well. That guy with his Beechcraft BOUGT it for a hefty sum, and has the same rights as a 777 airline.

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #29 on: October 10, 2013, 08:05:08 PM »
Well. That guy with his Beechcraft BOUGT it for a hefty sum, and has the same rights as a 777 airline.

Well, maybe he did not.  If you are based outside of the slot constrained airport, you pay a lower price for the same slots compared to an airline HQd at one of the slot constrained airport.

Which is one of the reasons I favor the Airport Expansion Fee, assessed per slot.

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #30 on: October 10, 2013, 09:49:15 PM »
So let's start from scratch with the back of a napkin and talk theory of constraints.  What should be the constraint for an airline's growth?  Slots? Money? Aircraft?

The theory of constraints being the weakest link in a system is going to constrain the entire system, not just one part of the process.  You can have infinite slots and money, for example, but if you don't have the aircraft it will constrain the whole system.  So--what should be the constraint?

Offline Teadaze

  • Members
  • Posts: 777
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #31 on: October 10, 2013, 09:56:36 PM »
small airline(or beginning)
money(which also translate into aircraft)
medium airline(after a year)
money(reason of aircraft), aircraft(if your model is popular, or everyone filled the production queue already) and slot(if airport ran out of slot)
large airline (after a few years)
slot, assume your airline is successful.

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #32 on: October 10, 2013, 10:02:11 PM »
small airline(or beginning)
money(which also translate into aircraft)
medium airline(after a year)
money(reason of aircraft), aircraft(if your model is popular, or everyone filled the production queue already) and slot(if airport ran out of slot)
large airline (after a few years)
slot, assume your airline is successful.

A terminal system would give small/medium airlines all the slots they need and just leave money as the constraint, followed by aircraft avail.
For large airlines that are successful, a terminal system would also lead to slot scarcity and force them to use bigger aircraft/less frequency or pay large sums to further expand.

IMO the constraint should always be money, no matter what.  If an airline has billions in cash, but there are zero slots available to buy at any price level, then this is a problem.  For a couple billion you could build another runway at Heathrow/JFK/etc.

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #33 on: October 10, 2013, 10:27:48 PM »
So let's start from scratch with the back of a napkin and talk theory of constraints.  What should be the constraint for an airline's growth?  Slots? Money? Aircraft?

The theory of constraints being the weakest link in a system is going to constrain the entire system, not just one part of the process.  You can have infinite slots and money, for example, but if you don't have the aircraft it will constrain the whole system.  So--what should be the constraint?

I would rank the constrains, as they should be (IMO) from highest to lowest:

Money > Aircraft > Slots

Unfortunately, many players (in busy slot constrained airports) will find themselves in situation where it is completely reversed

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #34 on: October 10, 2013, 10:29:19 PM »
IMO the constraint should always be money, no matter what.  If an airline has billions in cash, but there are zero slots available to buy at any price level, then this is a problem.  For a couple billion you could build another runway at Heathrow/JFK/etc.

Completely agree.

brique

  • Former member
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #35 on: October 10, 2013, 10:32:10 PM »
I have money, aircraft and slots : its the pax who are missing :(

I think demand needs to be included in the mix of constraints too : after all, the reason LHR, CDG, ETC get slot-locked is the potential demand outstrips the ability to service it :

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #36 on: October 10, 2013, 10:45:36 PM »
I have money, aircraft and slots : its the pax who are missing :(

I think demand needs to be included in the mix of constraints too : after all, the reason LHR, CDG, ETC get slot-locked is the potential demand outstrips the ability to service it :

In the current system, demand is what it is.  When the connecting pax system is implemented, you may be able to create some of your own demand through connections and steal some of the demand from neighboring airports.

brique

  • Former member
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #37 on: October 10, 2013, 11:06:16 PM »
Indeed, its going to be far easier than sending out my ninja goats to kidnap unsuspecting citizens in Port Moresby and keep forcing them onto my planes at gunpoint...

Offline Sanabas

  • Members
  • Posts: 2161
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #38 on: October 11, 2013, 12:39:26 AM »
I suggested a way to close down the initial LH exploit here, to slow down the initial exponential growth:

http://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,46457.0.html

The RI modification that Sami implemented left this exploit unaffected.

Yeah, I think that's a reasonable idea.

The slot-hog tax as currently described will just exacerbate the problem of LH being a far, far, better way to get a quick start.

As for constraints, it should be money as the biggest one. The major problem is that the game is just too easy, especially in a huge airport. You can quickly generate enough money so that you no longer have to make many tactical decisions about what to spend money on, you simply use all that free money to grab any slot you have access to, any plane you have access to. Fixing that is a challenge, because it needs to reduce the easy money in LHR and other big airports that are actually some of the easiest places in the game to be a profitable airline, without also making things much harder for all the tiny airlines, all the new players, the hundreds of airlines every game that BK in the first 5 years because things are too difficult.

Offline Teadaze

  • Members
  • Posts: 777
Re: Slots - the final solution
« Reply #39 on: October 11, 2013, 01:07:56 AM »
i think a few more thing that can be addressed if a revamp of such magnitude is happening:
the demand model should work inline with slot.
Make larger size aircraft more plausible(727/747 etc) and nerf frequency rape... which is another cause of slot restrain.
-If the recent slot grab penalty is in place, it should not be only towards the leading airline. In a more reasonable world, everyone should be able to grab some at the same cost or slightly higher.
-If the terminal/expansion system is in place, perhaps something can be work with involving alliance. Right now the alliance mechanic is too minimal IMO.

I don't necessary agree the LH route start is the culprit. If you nerf it to the point it is not really usable, everyone flying SH start will kill the slot even faster. A sudden increase of competition as everyone is flying SH start will make new comer even much harder to survive.

 

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.