That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard. What is it with your hatred towards team players? I kind of don't get it that some mavericks like you are doing literally everything to ruin the game for team players. It's so sad.
This game is about competition - competition is always to someone elses detriment. What peculiar world do you (want to) live in, some weird Barbie Dream House where all live together in peace and nothing 'bad' ever happens? How disgusting.
I have said time and again that buying planes to lease them out is to absolutely _NOBODYS_ detriment, especially not smaller players! What does it take for you to finally get that? You got your way with forced maintenance, which I kind of agree on, and that's as far as it should go. How do you always come up with another idea to sabotage more dedicated players games? What's next if this 'idea' is approved, a general cap at 100 planes per player?
I have nothing against team players, but as it was stated it is to the detriment of other players. The theory of constraints says an entire system will be constrained by the weakest link in the system, so if it limit is production slots, airport slots, etc. it doesn't matter how much money you have etc. because the effective price is infinity if you resources don't exist.
I apologize for coming up with ideas. The game clearly has flaws because players are working the system in ways that it shouldn't be, jamming up production lines in this. If you don't believe the current system isn't at least partially broken and need fixing, then just say so--no reason to call me stupid etc. for actually trying to contribute. My ideas get implemented less than 50% of the time and I think I've exchanged one PM with sami in the several years I've been playing this game, so there is no behind the scenes anything happening and everything has been public on this forum.
For the record, I live in the US and am a libertarian--I love the idea of free markets working and believe the chaos of an open/free market is order. The problem is many of the concept in AWS are not market based. For example, if there are zero slots at an airport there is no mechanism to respond by building a new terminal/runway/etc. If there are 5000 orders of an aircraft type, there is no mechanism to build a new manufacturing plant and double production. If a busy airport is full, you can't serve the demand out of a secondary airport (yet--city-based demand will fix this).
IRL there are no airlines putting in huge aircraft orders to lease them out to alliance mates or otherwise. C-level leadership reports to a board of directors and shareholders to which they are accountable. Why did you just spend $1 billion on aircraft orders? For our alliance mates. This doesn't fly. IRL that billion would be used on an acquisition, stock buyback program, etc. The only way to add "realism" and keep players from doing insane things like dropping $1 billion on aircraft to lease out is to enact arbitrary measures to keep it from happening. If it makes you feel any better, sami could create a board of directors in AWS and anytime you do something crazy just popup a message saying the board won't let you perform this action (ordering >400 new aircraft, too many used aircraft at once, etc).
The finite elements of the game are airport slots, aircraft production slots, and aircraft availability (used+new). There are already several measures/plans in place to resolve many of the issues such as city-based demand, terminals, limits on ordering used/new aircraft, etc. but there is still obviously work to be done. In a perfect Barbie Dream House world we'd have perfect competition with responsive markets with a virtually infinite supply of slots, aircraft, etc. I would love to see LHR with actual competition and every player having equal opportunity to do anything in the game regardless of start date, base airport, etc. When scarce resources become abundant, people use them differently. However, if it weren't for certain resources being finite there wouldn't be much strategy in this strategy game, so we can't have unlimited everything.
So in the end, the only way to make sure players aren't acting irrationally (i.e. not looking out for shareholders best interests) and placing orders for aircraft they'll never use, jamming up production lines for other players, we have to put some arbitrary system in place. As I mentioned in other threads, many airlines get large because they abuse the system, but not everyone who abuses the system is large. Thus, most new features put in place are to the detriment of large airlines. I was a big opponent of the "cash only" system for slots because it hurt small airlines more than big ones (we used to be able to buy slots with negative cash) and IMO it still hurts small airlines and helps big airlines by reducing competition. Regulation IRL is nearly always for the benefit of the big established companies in placing additional barriers to entry or reducing competition, so I'm all for anything that helps the little guy and small airlines be successful, including unjamming the production lines.