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: [ok] Changes to Alliance Scoring  (Read 518 times)

Offline Sigma

  • Members
  • Posts: 1920
[ok] Changes to Alliance Scoring
« on: August 24, 2010, 05:58:23 AM »
This isn't a big deal as it's nothing more than bragging rights I suppose, but there's a couple issues with the way Alliances are scored under the first pass of integrating it into the game, but one in particular I see has a pretty huge deal-breaker.

I was looking through all the alliances in the Alliance Challenge game, trying to determine if the hugely differing scores between alliances was readily apparent, and I found that it really wasn't.  A top scoring Alliance didn't look all that different from a bottom-scoring one, everyone had a fair mix of larger and smaller airlines developing, no one seemed to be dominating in particular, though the scores were vastly different.  Then I went to look how the scoring is determined and I found a pretty glaring issue with it...

The vast majority of the score is the "Variable" component.  A single player could theoretically earn up to 80 points, a pretty huge number really.  The problem is with the statistics that are currently being used to gather that score:

1>  Fleet Utilization
2>  Profit Margin
3>  Load Factor
4>  Transported Pax

But there's one big problem with that list.... 3 of those 4 statistics (utilization, margins, and LFs) are almost exclusively dominated by new/tiny airlines.  For countless obvious reasons, large airlines almost never rank near the top of those stats and they are usually made up of airlines of 1 or 2 aircraft either just starting out or that were abandoned by a player shortly after beginning and are just stagnating.  So the reason I couldn't really see why an Alliance was ranked as the "best" was because they weren't necessarily dominating the game world in sheer size yet, but rather that they had a number of tiny little airlines just starting up with a single aircraft, that were actually contributing more (a lot more) points than already established, growing ones.  Which, of course, makes no sense at all.

Which lends itself to a pretty big exploit -- All I've got to do to get a crazy amount of points is get a handful of people to join my Alliance about 3 months before the end of a game, tell them all to lease a plane or two, spend no money on Marketing and just barebones everything to get the best margins, and just fly it on the most unfilled and longest route they can.  Their utilization, margins, and LFs will be great, they'll jump to the top of those respective lists, and they'll contribute FAR more points than any airline playing in an Alliance from the beginning could ever hope to achieve because few very large airlines could ever dream of placing anywhere near the Top 20 of 3 of those 4 stats.

Now I'm not saying that anyone's going to do the above exploit and that reason in particular is why it needs to be changed, I'm just using that to emphasize the point that those numbers in particular are completely meaningless to determine the "best" Alliance and, in fact, the chosen scoring system would actually far better lend itself to determining the youngest Alliance, not the "best" one.  A newer Alliance in the world wouldn't have much time to accumulate negative Cumulative points and are far more likely to rank higher in 3 of the 4 variable point categories than a long-standing, larger airline would, therefore would almost certainly have a much better score.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 09:41:09 PM by sami »

Offline doing2030@hotmail.com

  • Members
  • Posts: 137
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2010, 01:24:14 PM »
I absolutely agree with you and I can't believe the this thread hasn't generated more heat.

One of my biggest gripes is that the accounting system 'cash accounts' which produces wild swings in profit margin.

E.g when you put a deposit down for an aircraft this gets taken off revenue as a cost in the income statement. In real life the downpayment or even the purchase price would go to the balance sheet as an asset with the resulting depreciation being the only thing that effects the income statement.

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2010, 01:30:48 PM »
I absolutely agree with you and I can't believe the this thread hasn't generated more heat.

One of my biggest gripes is that the accounting system 'cash accounts' which produces wild swings in profit margin.

E.g when you put a deposit down for an aircraft this gets taken off revenue as a cost in the income statement. In real life the downpayment or even the purchase price would go to the balance sheet as an asset with the resulting depreciation being the only thing that effects the income statement.

Trust me, we know GAAP isnt applied here. 

Offline doing2030@hotmail.com

  • Members
  • Posts: 137
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2010, 02:02:31 PM »
I was thinking perhaps IFRS (nothing like sad accounting banter!!)

Offline RushmoreAir

  • Members
  • Posts: 900
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2010, 03:05:30 PM »
http://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,20723.0.html

We really need Accrual Method accounting!

Ile

  • Former member
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2010, 05:28:28 PM »
Yes we need better accounting. Probably I should visit Sami's office and explain it to him...

But back to the topic:

3 of 4 scoring categories does not tell anything about airline, so those should be changed. You can get good points in 2 categories simply by changing your schedule totally during last month of game in many ways:
- by removing all extra turnover time, and flying with minimum prices making huge losses
- you can just put every aircraft for sale except one and put that on long route with good demand and minimum price and no extra turnover time.

But what should those categories be? I can not find any good category to define "good small airline". So I would need just one category, airline value. You can not cheat with that...

Ile

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 15029
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2010, 07:38:46 PM »
There will be some additional stats included in the scorings soon. I do agree what Sigma posted that it would be fairly too easy to gain extra points at the end of the game by just that .. So I'm adding some stats to include how well-established the airlines are, such as company image and sales revenue. And also punctuality to mark how well managed an airline is.

And further, a 10-aircraft minimum will be set there so that small airlines cannot twist the score (ie. all airlines under 10 planes are excluded from alliance scores, so if the rank #1 airline at LF% stat for example has 5 planes, and #2 airline has 50 planes, the #2 becomes #1 in the view of this score calculation).

Sounds fair, or anything other to tweak?  ..as usual, it's now or never ;)

(idea of the scoring is still to measure primarily how well airlines are managed and how efficient they are, not just how big they are .. of course a bit difficult still with the poor accounting systems etc. But have to work on what's available now )
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 07:41:23 PM by sami »

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3393
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2010, 03:19:13 AM »
To throw in a few cents with regards to plane utilization, lets assume there's not any small airlines in the mix, but it really depends on the nature of the market that an airline serves.  Airlines that focus exclusively on long haul international and only do a turn or less per day for their planes have significantly more air time than someone that is running a regional short haul setup getting 7-8 round trips out of a plane in the course of a day.  Both are "fully utilized" according to the scheduling page, but the utilization metric only counts air time and not turn time.

Transported pax leans more towards a short haul carrier since they're filling their planes multiple times per day whereas a longhaul operator fills it once.

In the industry, ASM is typically regarded as a measure of an airline's size...

If we're looking for a measure of how well run an airline is, what about looking at a ratio of owned versus leased planes, average number of airplanes per fleet type, or some off the wall metric that computes how close to forecasted demand is to seats provided on each route the airline flies?

Talentz

  • Former member
Re: Changes to Alliance Scoring
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2010, 04:24:05 AM »
Samiiiiiii - Weekly operating profit margin and monthly too!

I think this is the biggest measure of how "well" you run an airline in any condition/capacity.


Not sure if you should make it viewable for everyone to see (as people will cry omgz howz?!) but at least add it to the income statement.


That's pretty much want I'd like to see :)


Talentz

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 15029
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?

 

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.