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: New base rules, feedback  (Read 5169 times)

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #20 on: June 06, 2014, 10:07:32 AM »
Hi Sami, finally got some money to move my aircraft to the new base, the reason I couldn't find the command was that my finances made it not work. Good.
Now I've got the base running I took a look at my personnel and automatic mode has put many more staff in than is stated as minimum, and when I reduce those I get a hit to my staff morale of course. Perhaps, if you ever get a spare minute, you'd have a quick look and see if it needs a tweak.
Still getting a lot from the game and I believe these new base rules are a big addition to the tactics for late entrants (which is real world of course) and I praise you for not allowing players to buy advantage, I much prefer the nominal game rent and I hope you are getting a decent reward now for all the years of work you must have put into it. Well done.

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #21 on: June 06, 2014, 10:21:15 AM »
Hi Sami, for the long term can the new base have their own maintenance teams, so two types of aircraft can be used at each base, but not affecting the other bases with different aircraft requirements.
I can have 100 aircraft at my new Level 2 base, that number seems very high, 5 or 10 would do before I have to build a company regional HQ to accommodate all the staff associated. Looking forward to the new base rules for the other long games.

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #22 on: June 06, 2014, 07:48:44 PM »
Those Staff numbers seem to be OK now. If you didn't do anything it must have been a cycle in the programme that corrected them later. Cheers.

Offline Captim

  • Members
  • Posts: 1323
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #23 on: June 07, 2014, 11:14:40 PM »
+1 to Mr HP's solution.

Nice simple downgrade to the current LH build trick. Spend those spare buck$ into the route marketing by all means, but keep them $'s away from crazy LH leads to crazy SH growth situation.

Offline knobbygb

  • Members
  • Posts: 605
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2014, 12:25:35 PM »
Quote
Hi Sami, finally got some money to move my aircraft to the new base, the reason I couldn't find the command was that my finances made it not work.

Didn't this change a few months back? Re-basic aircraft no longer costs anything.  It used to be a nominal fee - a few thousand $$ but now it is free yes?  I've not opened a new base in this game yet.  Is there a new cost I'm not aware of, other than the base opening fee itself of course?

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #25 on: June 08, 2014, 02:28:24 PM »
Hi Knobby, the new bases are about a million for a level 2, it seems to depend on depend where and the size of the new airport itself.

I think the trick is to get a good first base established. You'll then find you are pushing the traffic supply so some smaller aircraft are becoming marginal so that's the time to start a new base, with the smaller aircraft, and get that core business established again before you have to buy bigger base and aircraft for the growing new services.

It would be helpful if each base had it's own two a/c type allowances, and new aircraft reception limits.

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #26 on: June 11, 2014, 08:55:25 AM »
Sami
Back on thread, my summation so far.

I've failed in GW#1 and GW#2, got a viable airline GW#4 with a 2nd base 16 a/c and mainly short and short/medium routes but it's tough.
GW#3 is much the same mix and just as tough but those New Base Rules have made the expansion easy and faster but there are still problems.
Problem 1 - I have expanded into a different size of airport and that requires new TYPES and I trip over the Commonality Rule. eg I started with 2 leased ATP's and 2 Pipers. Both have become obsolete (or old) types so now Saab340's and B1900's are the right mix so I've leased several which is 4 makes and 3 engine types. So adding a single Type only at the new base adds Type (and maybe Engine too) to Fleet and increases maintenance costs but surely this base has it's own maintenance division. I can fly Saab 340's into it, but not them operate from it so the rules say Type Maintenance has to be at this airport .
Solution - Each base services it's own a/c and has it's own commonality rule.

Problem 2 - My new economy base is a level 2 (its equipped with B1900's only, I can fly 340's into it, but not operate them from it). , It's a very big financial step to level 3 to get a choice of a second aircraft that can operate economic routes from this airport.
Solution - Levels by Standard Pax Capacity, 2 allowing the smaller piston and turbo props, say 40 pax. I don't expect jets, just a bit more than the B1900.

Problem 3. Not a new problem but it's causing me headaches, getting out of a lease contract seems to cost the same as the rest of the lease, the lease gets a lump sum and a/c in decent condition, so I put it into store and it deteriorates but my lease payments are over a long period. I'm sure RW don't have that situation.
Solution - Could you ease that buy out payment a bit (50%), or do I have to take short leases only to avoid being locked into poor a/c choices?

These new base rules are really good for short haul airlines, which is all the launch capital allows. Are they going to into other games, or at the next game starts. The options for growing from a short haul Prop to a mid range jet operation make the game much better.

Offline Infinity

  • Members
  • Posts: 1564
    • Aviation Awareness
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2014, 09:15:28 AM »
Solution - Each base services it's own a/c and has it's own commonality rule.

Completely against it. Match your base and aircraft choices, that way you won't have to complain about anything. If you expand into a base with completely different route and demand structures than your headquarters, you have made a bad choice. Plain and simple. Blaming the game for that and calling for relief from the games side instead of learning from it is just wrong.

Problem 2 - My new economy base is a level 2 (its equipped with B1900's only, I can fly 340's into it, but not operate them from it). , It's a very big financial step to level 3 to get a choice of a second aircraft that can operate economic routes from this airport.

There is no need for level 3 to get aircraft larger than 40 seats. You can fly regional jets from a level 2 base, such as Avros and CRJs.

Problem 3. Not a new problem but it's causing me headaches, getting out of a lease contract seems to cost the same as the rest of the lease, the lease gets a lump sum and a/c in decent condition, so I put it into store and it deteriorates but my lease payments are over a long period. I'm sure RW don't have that situation.
Solution - Could you ease that buy out payment a bit (50%), or do I have to take short leases only to avoid being locked into poor a/c choices?

Canceling a lease early already costs 50% of all remaining lease payments. There are two simple ways to work around it: Make better choices or shorter terms.

This game already is very easy, especially in the start. There is absolutely no need to make it even easier, that would completely ruin the game.

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #28 on: June 11, 2014, 09:39:51 AM »
Solution - Each base services it's own a/c and has it's own commonality rule.

Really bad idea.  The higher cost of fleet with lack of commonality forces airlines to make a good selection of few fleet types.  Filling up the HQ and all the bases with only few types takes some time, which means there is only so fast the airlines can grow.

Your solution of unlimited types would let airlines have 1000+ aircraft in less than 10 years.  Being limited to, say 3 types, it takes 20 years to get that number of aircraft.

Problem 3. Not a new problem but it's causing me headaches, getting out of a lease contract seems to cost the same as the rest of the lease, the lease gets a lump sum and a/c in decent condition, so I put it into store and it deteriorates but my lease payments are over a long period. I'm sure RW don't have that situation.
Solution - Could you ease that buy out payment a bit (50%), or do I have to take short leases only to avoid being locked into poor a/c choices?

Wait, so you want both, a lot cheaper lease payments with 15 year contract, and ability to get out of that contract without penalty.  Do you see that it is not adding up?  You can have one or the other.  You can have a cheap lease payment, or a short lease commitment.  Not both.

You should only get a very long term lease contract if you thought it through and you are confident that you will definitely be flying the aircraft tor that long.  If you are not 100% sure, just get a shorter term lease contract.

Offline knobbygb

  • Members
  • Posts: 605
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #29 on: June 11, 2014, 10:31:21 AM »
To be fair, it also has to be said that your strategy of opening a second base while you are still such a small airline is not really the best way to succeed in this game.  I think whatever your aircraft types, even if you had just one or two types, or even if the changes you suggested were implemented, you would still struggle.  Personally I follow the mantra of maxing out all the available routes at my HQ before even considering another base and I don't even add a second type, let alone a second base until I've got maybe twenty aircraft and all the routes are stable and profit making.  If you choose to operate a very small "regional" turboprop airline, the game is going to be very tough. At least it is becoming more of a possibility now, with the recent changes and it can be a fun challenge but maybe you would be better getting more experience with a more "conventional" airline first.

Offline gazzz0x2z

  • Members
  • Posts: 1385
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #30 on: June 11, 2014, 09:06:52 PM »
To be fair, it also has to be said that your strategy of opening a second base while you are still such a small airline is not really the best way to succeed in this game.(.../...)

When your first base is very quickly full, it is vital to expand outside it. I had to search Outside Glasgow to keep some expansion rate OK. Didn't go far : Glasgow Preswick(level2, only CRJs here, while I have a mix of 732 & CRJs in Glasgow itself). That was 15 months after the beginning of the game, and my company was still fairly small(maybe 12 732 and 6 CRJs).

But I get your point : opening a second base is quite an investment, and making the maximum from your first base before looking elsewhere seems a sound strategy. Just, for smaller airports(and 2 opponents did settle here rather quickly), the filling of routes comes very, very quick.

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2014, 04:36:25 PM »
Just lock airlines out of Heathrow altogether, you can fly in, but not start or base there.

Offline samsaunders85

  • Members
  • Posts: 129
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #32 on: July 02, 2014, 09:26:50 AM »
I can speak from personal experience in saying that the number of bases allowed is too high. One particular airline has four base hubs (two of them 100 miles apart!) in one country. Though I get the competitive nature of it, it's hard too swallow when you pay real world money to watch someone force airlines out of every major airport in a large country.

A cap of two hubs would seem a reasonable solution too me. Right now the games are being dominated by 10 or so big guys bullying 400 or so little guys. Realistic? Sure. But its costs money and its meant to be a fun hobby
Canada Airlines: Start Here, Go Anywhere

Offline Infinity

  • Members
  • Posts: 1564
    • Aviation Awareness
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #33 on: July 02, 2014, 12:37:41 PM »
So, you're saying remove competition because it costs a couple of cents per week? Right...

Offline samsaunders85

  • Members
  • Posts: 129
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #34 on: July 02, 2014, 07:45:58 PM »
So, you're saying remove competition because it costs a couple of cents per week? Right...

Thanks for the sarcastic feedback. No, what I'm saying is control competition so it doesn't make the game unplayable. As I stated, I have nothing against competition, what frustrates me is a few guys opening multiple bases and suffocating the market for the vast majority.

And 'a few cents' isn't the issue. The issue is the fact they've spent the money (no matter how 'small' you perceive that to be) and they don't want it to see it all go for nothing.
Canada Airlines: Start Here, Go Anywhere

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #35 on: July 02, 2014, 08:12:53 PM »
If you don't want to see your "money" go, maybe let yourself be forced out of the game then?

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #36 on: July 02, 2014, 08:26:41 PM »
Thanks for the sarcastic feedback. No, what I'm saying is control competition so it doesn't make the game unplayable. As I stated, I have nothing against competition, what frustrates me is a few guys opening multiple bases and suffocating the market for the vast majority.

And 'a few cents' isn't the issue. The issue is the fact they've spent the money (no matter how 'small' you perceive that to be) and they don't want it to see it all go for nothing.

There is always a place in the world where you can find an airport with very limited competition, game world with fewer players, less competition.

But you are in the #1 Game World as far as number of players, and as far as competitiveness of the Game World.  And you are in Canada, which is always cutthroat.  That's a context that is useful to keep in mind when commenting on the rules that affect all of the Game Worlds, all of the airports / countries in those game worlds.

Offline Infinity

  • Members
  • Posts: 1564
    • Aviation Awareness
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #37 on: July 02, 2014, 08:37:06 PM »
No, what I'm saying is control competition so it doesn't make the game unplayable.

I was hardly under the impression that the game was unplayable. But of course, one needs to adapt his base to his playing style. You can't log in once a day and expect to be successful in London Heathrow, you know.
The game allows bases, and that's not going to change. So, if you don't want an established player to open shop in your place, don't base yourself in a hyper-competitive market like Canada or the US, where slots are basically endless and a huge number of players active.
See, if you open in Macau, or Qatar, or whatever, there are no other airports from which players could come. So you know your competition going in. Or, if you are not interested in competition at all, you could always start in, I don't know, Venice Treviso.
Also, Modern Times is maybe the most competitive of all game worlds, especially in the beginning. So maybe, and I don't mean to offend you, it's plainly the wrong game world for you?
You can't open in a random game unwittingly and expect to find Disney Land.

The issue is the fact they've spent the money (no matter how 'small' you perceive that to be) and they don't want it to see it all go for nothing.

Sorry, but that is your risk when you start a game. This is not a lawn mowing competition where even the last place gets a consolation price. Do you get your money back when you lose  a bet on a football game? I don't think you would...

Offline samsaunders85

  • Members
  • Posts: 129
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #38 on: July 02, 2014, 08:38:18 PM »
I'm not doubting the scale of the competition, nor that it is cutthroat. What I am saying is that multiple hubs (as in, more than 2) always leads to increasingly saturated markets. Fun competition isn't watching one guy move city to city and wipe out everyone in their path. A cap on hubs means competition can't quickly escalate into the scenario where by we have 400 little guys and the same 20 or so massive airlines
Canada Airlines: Start Here, Go Anywhere

Offline samsaunders85

  • Members
  • Posts: 129
Re: New base rules, feedback
« Reply #39 on: July 02, 2014, 08:49:21 PM »
I was hardly under the impression that the game was unplayable. But of course, one needs to adapt his base to his playing style. You can't log in once a day and expect to be successful in London Heathrow, you know.
The game allows bases, and that's not going to change. So, if you don't want an established player to open shop in your place, don't base yourself in a hyper-competitive market like Canada or the US, where slots are basically endless and a huge number of players active.
See, if you open in Macau, or Qatar, or whatever, there are no other airports from which players could come. So you know your competition going in. Or, if you are not interested in competition at all, you could always start in, I don't know, Venice Treviso.
Also, Modern Times is maybe the most competitive of all game worlds, especially in the beginning. So maybe, and I don't mean to offend you, it's plainly the wrong game world for you?
You can't open in a random game unwittingly and expect to find Disney Land.

Sorry, but that is your risk when you start a game. This is not a lawn mowing competition where even the last place gets a consolation price. Do you get your money back when you lose  a bet on a football game? I don't think you would...

I would never use money on a sports bet but that's by the by. I don't expect a prize or to have to win every time, what I want is to know that when I start a game it won't be immediately a wash out. I think you believe that I want to win and wipe the floor every time (perhaps that's how you play, and that's your prerogative), but I don't, I just don't want to be driven out of business by someone who's sole intention is to be a big an airline as possible. I want to be stable and consistent, not the largest in my country or even city.

The issue at hand isn't about me or how I 'should' run my airline. I've been playing this game for years, and doing just fine until recently, but thank you. It appears the bigger airlines always run with the line "don't base yourself in busy countries then". I've raised a simple concern and immediately been patronised. A shame, really, after 6 years here.
Canada Airlines: Start Here, Go Anywhere

 

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.