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: [-] Flag Carrier  (Read 1132 times)

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
[-] Flag Carrier
« on: November 29, 2013, 10:27:24 PM »
I think every country should have a "flag carrier" that is the airline currently serving a particular country "the best".  There could be bonuses attached for alliance score and achievements included also.  IRL the term is used in different contexts, but is often the state run airline, but we'd be using it to declare who serves the country the best.

I'm not sure how all the numbers are tracked on the backend, but there would need to be several benchmarks used as the flag carrier shouldn't simply be the "biggest" carrier, otherwise RyanAir would be the "flag carrier" of Ireland instead of Aer Lingus.  It would have to be a balanced scorecard approach where connectivity and domestic destinations are included.  The denominators would be the best in the country for that one metric, so it would look like this:

score = (airline pax)/(country airline with highest pax)
* (airline route pairs/direct flights)/(country best)
* (airline domestic route pairs/direct flights)/(country best)
* (airline CI)/(country best)
* (number of airports served)/(country best)
* (number of staff)/(country best) [this would be in place of fleet size since large aircraft require more staff than small]

This means a small domestic airline could earn a higher score than a large international airline with sparse domestic coverage.  Flag Carriers could also have their country flag displayed by their airline name.  There could be other benefits for being the flag carrier, such as a CI boost or when city-based demand is implemented there could be some other sweeteners.  When terminals are implemented there could be other restrictions or benefits given to flag carriers.  For long term players, there could be an achievement where a player has to finish a game world as the flag carrier of the top 10 countries in the world (would take 10 game worlds).  If they accomplish this, then they get to play AWS free for life (or some other benefit).  This would also keep players in the game until the bitter end versus pulling the plug early.

Top 10 Countries to get Flag Carrier status (can get one or the other, in no particular order):

United States or United Kingdom (largest airline markets in the world)
China or Japan (major Asian countries)
France or Germany (large European countries)
Italy or Spain (also large European countries)
Singapore or Hong Kong (city-states)
Korea or Malaysia (large Asian markets)
Egypt or Algeria or South Africa (major African countries)
Canada or Australia or Russia (vast, sparsely populated countries)
Brazil or Argentina (South America)
Wildcard: Turkey, Thailand, UAE, India, Philippines, Taiwan, New Zealand, Mexico, others?
« Last Edit: December 08, 2013, 09:04:39 PM by sami »

Offline LoonyToony

  • Members
  • Posts: 388
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2013, 09:05:40 AM »
Although I generally might like the idea I think this will just add another achievement for the major airlines. People who direct purchase 40 Concorde's are probably going to have  high scores on all the things you mentioned and thus will be Flag Carrier.

To be honest, I rather have those massive behemoths pull out early rather than spoil the used market with their unflown brand new aircraft which they refuse to check.

It will just be another prestige achievement.

Also I'm not entirely sure if the UK is among the two largest airline markets in the world :) But if it should be implemented why not have a flag carrier for all countries?

Offline Infinity

  • Members
  • Posts: 1564
    • Aviation Awareness
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2013, 04:56:13 PM »
Although I generally might like the idea I think this will just add another achievement for the major airlines. People who direct purchase 40 Concorde's are probably going to have  high scores on all the things you mentioned and thus will be Flag Carrier.


Yup, this is what I see also, particularly with the proposed formula. Speaking as one of the airlines most likely to get said title under this formula, I don't think this adds anything of value to the majority of players, just some ePeen attachment for the biggest guys - not really what this game needs right now.

mavi

  • Former member
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2013, 11:01:12 PM »
I don't think it is needed in big markets like USA/Europe/Japan, but it could be a useful feature for smaller countries that could encourage more people to play in smaller nations.  One limit to being a flag carrier should be that the number of airplanes operated by other carriers in the country should be less than 100 (or some other arbitrary number).

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2013, 12:45:33 AM »
I don't think you guys looked at the formula very closely.  It would be easy for an all domestic carrier out of an airport like CVG to outscore a major airline flying all over the world out of JFK.  It is skewed towards airlines flying multiple thin routes versus a handful of dense ones.  The factors are multiplied together, so if there are only two airlines in the country with CI of 100/70 and serving 10/20 airports, then the first airline with 100 CI would be 100/100 * 10/20 = 0.5 and the 70 CI airline would be 70/100 * 20/20 = 0.7 and thus the major airline flying dense routes with a 100 CI is going to have a lower score.  That is why they call it the balanced scorecard--you can't just rock out a single factor, but have to have a balanced approach.  The easy way of course would be to calculate the scores for airlines in running game worlds to see who comes out on top and whether the equation makes sense or needs more tweaking.  Airlines with 40 Concordes most likely be hurting their score because they won't be flying them domestic and will be using their valuable slots (which will be even more valuable when terminals hit) at the expense of serving domestic demand.

why not have a flag carrier for all countries?

I think every country should have a "flag carrier"

The point of this would also be to get some of the "usual suspects" out of their "usual airports".  I'm picking on DanDantes just because it was posted in another thread that he "always starts at LHR" and there are several players who always base at the same airport (I've seen DanDantes base at ORD before, but you get the point).  They'd of course be able to keep doing so, but won't get the "ePeen points" like the rest of the better players will be.

Also the unchecked used aircraft is a completely separate issue and has nothing to do with this.  Sami is looking into adding extra restrictions/rules to address this issue if you look at other threads discussing the problem.

Offline Mr.HP

  • Members
  • Posts: 2730
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2013, 06:57:47 AM »
I don't think you guys looked at the formula very closely.  It would be easy for an all domestic carrier out of an airport like CVG to outscore a major airline flying all over the world out of JFK.

Not sure if I agree with you on this. I based in JFK last MT8, how do you score my airline, then?

Green Air, bases: JFK, EWR, BOS, MIA



Oh, and there's another one, American GreenFLY, bases: LAX, MSP, MCO, MIA



Could you find a candidate, not a mega airline, who can compete on par with us 2 mega airlines for the title flag carrier in the USA?

Maybe you should put in Fuel Burn as a parameter. The less fuel use, the more score

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2013, 08:41:07 AM »
The stats available on an airline stats page aren't sufficient to complete the equation because it does not break out domestic traffic...which is why I said in the original post that I don't know if the numbers are tracked already or not on the server backend because they aren't visible on the frontend.

Edit: If you want a good example, compare my airline in DOTM based out of Paris Orly with the two airlines based at Paris CDG.  The #1 airline at CDG (by a small margin) is Air Paris and has the same number of staff as I do, but has nearly double the available seat kilometers.  I serve more airports, both domestically and overall, and we are essentially the even in terms of pax carried.  Our CVs are essentially the same and we both have ~200 aircraft.  We have two completely different strategies (I'm flying short haul out of curfewed airports with mostly economy whereas he is flying international long haul out of a 24 hour airport with large amounts of business/first demand).  The #2 airline out of CDG has double the CV, yet doesn't really serve ANY domestic demand.

So given the formula I proposed, I'd guesstimate that me and Air Paris would be very close in score despite our strategies being almost polar opposites.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2013, 08:58:06 AM by LemonButt »

Offline Mr.HP

  • Members
  • Posts: 2730
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2013, 09:36:32 AM »
But still the airline has to be mega in A/C size to get the title. In your case, you have the largest fleet in France with 225, as compare to 195 and 168 of the two in CDG

Also, you can't be the flag carrier, if you have next to zero international traffic, in this case, Escape Air of USA

Your idea is good. If the flag carriers can add points to Alliance, it'd make Alliances to diverse different strategies, because as it is now, Alliance with the most mega airlines tends to get the most score.

However, you need a more balance formula, or it is just another addition to the biggest airlines, like saftfrucht said

« Last Edit: December 01, 2013, 09:43:19 AM by Mr.HP »

Offline Dasha

  • Members
  • Posts: 1001
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2013, 09:55:20 AM »
I'd be the flag carrier of Vanuatu by default. Don't have to do anything just fly.

Other airlines, like in the US would have to work hard to get the title and benefits and I just have to open one domestic route in Vanuatu and be the flag carrier, get a better CI and other benefits making it even harder for new players to join in at that airport.

In real life, there are no official 'flag carriers' unless they are state supported, like Emirates. In other cases like KLM, the country is too small to support another airline. Also, in the case of Ireland, not Aer Lingus (which is/was state owned and officially the flag carrier of Ireland) would be the FC, but Ryanair would be.

Then there is the point of the benefits, if you make it to FC in big countries/regions, you are obviously doing pretty good. Giving a bonus to CI (which is probably already 100) or more pax, would be unfair competition as you'd only get further ahead of the rest.
The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes, decide everything

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2013, 04:24:03 PM »
In real life, there are no official 'flag carriers' unless they are state supported, like Emirates. In other cases like KLM, the country is too small to support another airline. Also, in the case of Ireland, not Aer Lingus (which is/was state owned and officially the flag carrier of Ireland) would be the FC, but Ryanair would be.

I feel like no one is reading my posts.  I even used this example of Ryan Air and Aer Lingus to explain my rationale for the formula I presented.

You can be the flag carrier of Vanuatu, but what does that really mean?  I could be the flag carrier of Djibouti just by basing there also, but when other players see the Djibouti flag next to my name versus the flag of France etc. it isn't a very sexy title to have.  Thus, the achievements surrounding flag carrier status would be based on the big markets versus setting up shop in a tiny country with zero competition.

Of course you'd have to be a "mega carrier" to get the title of flag carrier--it is flag carrier!  You can't expect an airline with 10 aircraft to get the title over one with 100.  However, an airline wtih 100 aircraft can compete with one with 500.  In my case in France, I have the largest fleet with 225 aircraft (75% of which are 100 seats or less), but Air Paris with only 195 aircraft has 2x the ASK, yet we have the same number of staff employed, CV, etc.  You can't just look at one metric and say "he has the most aircraft" as it just doesn't work like that.  If an airline has 500 aircraft and flies all international versus one with 100 aircraft flying 80% domestic/20% international, who serves the country better?  Don't you think it would be a little embarrassing to call the 500 aircraft airline the flag carrier when an international passenger is forced to use a different airline once they enter the country because they don't fly any domestic routes inside the country?

I'm proposing we add another layer of gameplay to the game with this and all the feedback is just "you are wrong" and no one is really offering anything constructive here and offering additional metrics to track to make it work better.  If there are 150 countries in the game, there will potentially be 150 flag carriers, but as I said having the flag of France, USA, Japan, etc. next to your airline is much sexier than Djibouti, Cuba, or Laos.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2013, 04:30:26 PM by LemonButt »

BD

  • Former member
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2013, 07:22:14 PM »
I'm proposing we add another layer of gameplay to the game with this and all the feedback is just "you are wrong" and no one is really offering anything constructive here and offering additional metrics to track to make it work better.  If there are 150 countries in the game, there will potentially be 150 flag carriers, but as I said having the flag of France, USA, Japan, etc. next to your airline is much sexier than Djibouti, Cuba, or Laos.
It would be interesting to have something that could be at another layer to work towards.

In the spirit of being another game layer, the rewards for it probably need to be outside of the things that currently help build a "competitive mote", as those are the things that would help one towards the flag carrier achievement to begin with.

Perhaps, as a reward, it could be a factor applied to alliance scoring, giving some smaller alliances a chance to make up some ground on the top ones.

How to measure performance to that end, right now I don't have a suggestion yet. 

One question:  How soon after a new game world starts would this kick in?  Perhaps at the same time as alliances form?

Offline Dasha

  • Members
  • Posts: 1001
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2013, 07:38:32 PM »
[sarcasm]The idea of achievements is already proven to be very succesfull hasn't it?[/sarcasm]

Take a look at the used market in Jet Age 8, completely ruined and corrupted and useless all because of some achievement that 'rewards' you for having a certain number of aircraft.

We can't implement a treaty making it possible for pacific island airlines to base in another country because it's a simulation but we can give out achievements for airlines having 1000 aircraft. What does that simulate?

It doesn't add another level of gameplay to have or to be a FC of any nation. It will be another way to ruin the game for those us of who do not buy planes just to buy aircraft or to be the biggest or the best or whatever.

And as I already said, what's the point of the benefits, if you're already the biggest and best? Just the flag of your airlines HQ?
The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes, decide everything

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2013, 09:13:58 PM »
Take a look at the used market in Jet Age 8, completely ruined and corrupted and useless all because of some achievement that 'rewards' you for having a certain number of aircraft.

I'm not in JA, but the used market going to hell in DOTM is a result of a lot more than achievements.  If it were, players wouldn't be ordering the most popular aircraft with a 5 year backlog and offering them on the used market for +60%.  The problem is players have too much capital and nothing to spend it on since they can't expand (slots) and if they don't spend it, the taxman confiscates it.  When terminals are implemented, they can spend all that capital on actual expansion versus accumulating assets they will never use.

Quote
It doesn't add another level of gameplay to have or to be a FC of any nation. It will be another way to ruin the game for those us of who do not buy planes just to buy aircraft or to be the biggest or the best or whatever.

Again, I feel like you aren't reading my posts.  It isn't about who is the biggest or owns the most aircraft--it is about who serves their country the best using a balanced scorecard approach.  And whether it is an achievement or not, there will always be people striving to build the biggest airline with the most aircraft or highest CV or otherwise--that is human nature.  This is a sandbox game and you aren't going to stop people from trying to be "the best", which is defined differently by every player.

Perhaps, as a reward, it could be a factor applied to alliance scoring, giving some smaller alliances a chance to make up some ground on the top ones.

One question:  How soon after a new game world starts would this kick in?  Perhaps at the same time as alliances form?


As I mentioned above, if a player earns the flag carrier achievement in all 10 categories, they could play AWS for free for life.  That would be something most of the seasoned players would strive for and it would require them to play the airports they don't play in regularly (there are players who always base at LHR or JFK etc.).

Another requirement could be that only flag carriers could start an alliance, which would ensure stability for alliance leadership.  You don't see small podunk airlines banding together to form international alliances and codeshares--it is the large established carriers that do this.  It could also be used as an "anti-monopoly" feature as if an alliance has too many flag carriers they face the threat of being "broken up" to keep alliances competitive.

As far as the advantages/disadvantages, a flag carrier could have higher legacy costs (pensions, union rates, etc that are weekly expenses and hit weekly cashflow) and get the ability to open a fifth base (keeping in mind that the fourth base increase costs substantially and a fifth base would increase costs even more and make it relatively easy to BK if not done right).  Obviously the benefits and disadvantages could be determined after the fact, but those are a few ideas that come to mind.

BD

  • Former member
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2013, 01:03:36 AM »
[sarcasm]The idea of achievements is already proven to be very succesfull hasn't it?[/sarcasm]

Take a look at the used market in Jet Age 8, completely ruined and corrupted and useless all because of some achievement that 'rewards' you for having a certain number of aircraft.

...
Not sure what the goal was to begin with to determine success or failure on the achievements feature.

Also, not sure achievements are a driver for the unused aircraft sitting on the used market for extended periods from brand new.  That is a function of an imbalance in the game dynamics for which a few other feature requests are outstanding.

I certainly wouldn't want to see something like this exacerbate that imbalance, but I don't see that is the intent nor necessarily the outcome of the proposal. 

It is possible it could be structured to mitigate some of that imbalance.  Worth tossing ideas around on how to make it so, IMHO. 

Nothing lost if we don't come up with anything.


Offline Dasha

  • Members
  • Posts: 1001
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2013, 09:50:14 AM »


We can't implement a treaty making it possible for pacific island airlines to base in another country because it's a simulation but we can give out achievements for airlines having 1000 aircraft. What does that simulate?




People here have said many times that we want to strive to make the game as realistic as possible. Even if I think it was a good idea to have flag carriers, it wouldn't be realistic so it has no chance of succeeding :)
The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes, decide everything

BD

  • Former member
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2013, 04:41:51 PM »

People here have said many times that we want to strive to make the game as realistic as possible. Even if I think it was a good idea to have flag carriers, it wouldn't be realistic so it has no chance of succeeding :)
I guess that it depends on how one measures success.  I'm rather dispassionate about any particular idea unless I can see that it does at least one of these things:

  • Addresses a problem
  • Adds to the realism
  • Adds to the fun
  • Simplifies or Enhances the user interaction/playability

In this case, we have a problem with an imbalance in the game.  I'm a rather noob, and I see a flicker of an approach that could mitigate some of that imbalance.  Others who have played AWS for some time might see a way to use something like this to aid in that.  Maybe not.  I'm just arguing that we don't close the door on it so quickly without giving it a bit more consideration.   ;D

And, yes, the achievements have been, at times, comically ironic, at least for me, as I received my Airline Age Level 1 (10 years without BK) on the game week I went BK.   :laugh:  They are more a "feel good" element than a serious motivator to or reward for particular action.

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14535
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: Flag Carrier
« Reply #16 on: December 08, 2013, 09:04:35 PM »
Compared how flag carriers were formed in the course of history and how things are modelled here (free market) and game play balance, I wouldn't see this necessary here.

 

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.