Am I the only one waiting for the "ultralong-gameworld"?

[Jona L.]

Hello, all of you!

I was thinking, if I was the only one still wanting the planned [way ago] long-term-scenario... That is why I an asking you! Let me know please

@ sami: this is not to pressurize you to produce that game world, this is just to know how many would appreciate it

regards to all

Jona L.

[DenisG]

You are not alone, Jona!

Denis

[Seattle]

I'd love a long too! I also do not think that it would be any harder for Sami to create than a regular world - would it?

[GEnx]

Yeah, that would definitely be fun. The only real problem is that after 20-some years, there's not much opportunity for new airlines to start up anymore due to a lot of saturation..

[Jona L.]

Yeah, that would definitely be fun. The only real problem is that after 20-some years, there's not much opportunity for new airlines to start up anymore due to a lot of saturation..

As sami would say: "New airlines can still start up, they should just look at the smaller airports first!"



Anyways: this was discussed, but since the discussion went low, I began thinking, that there was no more interest...

Jona L.

[Daemus]

Yeah, that would definitely be fun. The only real problem is that after 20-some years, there's not much opportunity for new airlines to start up anymore due to a lot of saturation..

I am still new to this sim but from what I have seen, it seems like the big airlines can get themselves into trouble real fast if a new airline comes along and starts competing on their routes. It is something I saw in MT2 where a large airline became severely crippled by a newer airline pumping planes onto the same routes that were much lower cost to operate. The used market is more favorable later in a game world from a startup standpoint, as is the new market (the big airlines have maxed their available routes and don't have 100+ plane orders on backlog). When you have a huge airline, it has so many more pieces, and if all of them aren't working together well, it can be devastating to the whole. A new airline with a fleet of 30-40 economical planes on key routes can really hurt a large operation. As it grows its fleet, it will do more damage and eventually the large airline has to make some big tactical decisions, some of which might be required for survival but not possible because of poor planning due to complacency.

If anything, a longer game world should be harder on the larger airlines as there is a lot more time for newer airlines to come in partway through the game and build up into large airlines themselves. With a 20 year game world, the halfway point only gives 10 years for a newer airline to do some damage. Airlines either start up and don't come to realize their full potential by game end, or the player never signs up for the game world because they both feel it would be wasted and know that they are really just paying credits to not have a real chance at making something big. About the only thing the current length game worlds are good for when starting late in the game is testing start up strategies. With a 75 year game world, the newer airline coming in halfway through has over 35 years to build up - plenty of time to take a big guy down, become a big guy, and watch a small guy take them down. If anything, I think that a longer game world would be more new airline friendly and maintain a higher overall activity level than the game worlds there are now. Starting late in the current game worlds really isn't a questions of opportunity, it is just a question of how little time you have to do things in. In a really long game world however, you can get pretty late into the game before the chance at really building a large airline is out of the question. Unless there is a coding/management issue I am not seeing on Sami's side, I think both in terms of player enjoyability and potential income (in terms of both active players and new sign-up frequency), a longer game world makes sense.

[HypeType]

Hi @all,

I'm also interested into a unlimited version of this game. I mean, I pump money into it and have start up again and again.
This sucks!

Ade

[Sami]

I mean, I pump money into it and have start up again and again.

But you've still only registered today, a few hours ago (??).

I was thinking, if I was the only one still wanting the planned [way ago] long-term-scenario... That is why I an asking you! Let me know please

Longer world will be taken into consideration after v.1.3 game engine has been made available and found to be working .. Depends though on what kind of major modifications are planned but I am keeping this in mind already by now, since it's been talked in the past.

[Miltra]

fully support longer games!

@ sami: your new version is due by next Monday, right?  )

cheers
Maege

[Frogiton]

Long-term playability would be difficult. At about 1960 a majority would probably be out of it.

[Jps]

With longer game worlds, I would see the game play to be dynamic; some players leaving and others joining when they feel the game has reached an interesting era for them. I doubt there would be many players who would play for longer than few decades, but if new players kept coming, the game could have a constant player pool at all times.

[Jona L.]

I am still new to this sim but from what I have seen, it seems like the big airlines can get themselves into trouble real fast if a new airline comes along and starts competing on their routes. It is something I saw in MT2 where a large airline became severely crippled by a newer airline pumping planes onto the same routes that were much lower cost to operate.

I am still in there (and will finish there)...

I saw MANY HUGE airlines go broke... I myself am HUGE operating from LHR (ofc. ) there were 7 (or more) major airlines going down, which heavily affected my traffic from LHR...
to name a few:
SkyTrain - Toronto (+ Bases) [400+a/c]
{I forgot the name} - Chicago (no bases) [500+a/c]
Singapore Airlines - Singapore (no bases) [500+a/c]
FlyUS     - Seoul (no bases) [200+a/c]
Paragon - Seoul (no bases) [400+a/c]
Egyptian Airways - Cairo (+ Bases) [300+a/c]
Moonlight - Tokio NRT (no bases) [300+a/c]

[Tujue]

I am also interested in an ultralong gameworld. Currently I'm playing at five game worlds at the same time with one operating Sud-Aviation SE-210 Caravelle's and Douglas DC-6 (Jet Age #3), the Fokker F28 Fellowships and Embraer EMB-110 (Jet Age #2), Fokker 70/100 (Alliance Challenge) and Embraer E170/E195 (The Modern Times #2/#3).
It would be great if I could operate this jets in a single game world, starting with Caravelle's and ending with Embraer's. I'm fully supporting this idea, just lets see what will happen with v1.3 and hope that this ultralong-gameworld starts as soon as possible.

[Brockster]

Paragon - Seoul (no bases) [400+a/c]

Actually, I left the airline unattended to because it was too easy and became boring, so it wasn't because another airline stepped in. Literally 200+ of my fleet were unscheduled. I would assume quite a few of the other major bankruptcies were also due to boredom and not because she were in financial trouble.

[Jona L.]

Actually, I left the airline unattended to because it was too easy and became boring, so it wasn't because another airline stepped in. Literally 200+ of my fleet were unscheduled. I would assume quite a few of the other major bankruptcies were also due to boredom and not because she were in financial trouble.

Well, I don't see the reasons in the airlines-subpage, just: Airline XYZ has declared bankruptcy... Well, I now have taken over 85% of the demand Thanks a lot

btw. these bankruptcies of the huge are never letting the game get boring to me

Jona L.

[Brockster]

Well, I don't see the reasons in the airlines-subpage, just: Airline XYZ has declared bankruptcy... Well, I now have taken over 85% of the demand Thanks a lot

btw. these bankruptcies of the huge are never letting the game get boring to me

Jona L.

I guess I didn't make my point clear enough. What I had meant to say is that it is unfair to assume that any large airline to declare bankruptcy was caused solely because the airline was run poorly. True, it was put into a bad financial position but in my case and surely a few of the other on the list as well it was due to boredom which left the airline on autopilot which then caused the airline to crash. And I had meant to transition that over into saying that until the long-term playability is fixed the world will become very boring for over half of the people playing the game, as has been discussed numerous times in other threads. So while I think a long world in theory would be great I would be a bit surprised to see one launched in the near future.

Having said that it is extremely easy to join a game past the halfway mark and be successful. After I left the game, I re-joined a few years later at Narita and have since enjoyed monopoly on many of the routes that were left by the airline that BKed and the other airline serving the airport that disappeared. So it definitely should not be intimidating for people to join a game past the halfway point because it's not difficult at all to build up a healthy airline if you choose the right airport.

[ICEcoldair881]

well in your case Brock you could choose LHR 75% of the way through the game and still claim monopoly. 

[Jona L.]

I guess I didn't make my point clear enough. What I had meant to say is that it is unfair to assume that any large airline to declare bankruptcy was caused solely because the airline was run poorly. True, it was put into a bad financial position but in my case and surely a few of the other on the list as well it was due to boredom which left the airline on autopilot which then caused the airline to crash. And I had meant to transition that over into saying that until the long-term playability is fixed the world will become very boring for over half of the people playing the game, as has been discussed numerous times in other threads. So while I think a long world in theory would be great I would be a bit surprised to see one launched in the near future.

Having said that it is extremely easy to join a game past the halfway mark and be successful. After I left the game, I re-joined a few years later at Narita and have since enjoyed monopoly on many of the routes that were left by the airline that BKed and the other airline serving the airport that disappeared. So it definitely should not be intimidating for people to join a game past the halfway point because it's not difficult at all to build up a healthy airline if you choose the right airport.

I did NEVER say, that it was due to finacial state, or anything, I didn't say anything about the reasons, I just said, that many big ones were "going down"...okay, I admit, the phrase has a dual meaning, but what I mean was rather, that it was dropped, and not, that it was busted due to the CEOs not being able to manage an airline that size...
Anyways, I and we all now know you went BK due to boredom.

Jona L.