Changelog and Previews comment thread

[blahmeh14]

Not sure where to put this, but there's a typo on the A330-300 order page. The new 242tn variant that was just added is listed as 2,420,000 kgs for the PW4000 engine type on the overview page . Talk about a world record!

[blahmeh14]

Was the range on the A330-200 with the GE engines changed in the past 24hrs? I have two aircraft on order and one currently in my fleet with the +3tn CF6 engines, and the advertised range when ordering this variant was 6900nm (6940nm with my seating config), and that was lowered to 6840nm when I went to order two more +3tn variants. The current a330-200 in my fleet still shows a range of 6940nm, but the two I have on order (placed before the change) now show only 6890nm with the same seating config and the same +3tn MTOW. This brings the range of those aircraft under that which may be required for some of the routes I wanted to use them for. Were any changes made in the past 24hrs?

[schro]

Was the range on the A330-200 with the GE engines changed in the past 24hrs? I have two aircraft on order and one currently in my fleet with the +3tn CF6 engines, and the advertised range when ordering this variant was 6900nm (6940nm with my seating config), and that was lowered to 6840nm when I went to order two more +3tn variants. The current a330-200 in my fleet still shows a range of 6940nm, but the two I have on order (placed before the change) now show only 6890nm with the same seating config and the same +3tn MTOW. This brings the range of those aircraft under that which may be required for some of the routes I wanted to use them for. Were any changes made in the past 24hrs?

Changes like that are never made to an in production game, so here's what probably happened:

1. You ordered the plane and changed the seat configuration on the order page.
2. You didn't notice that the range stated by the ordering page only quotes range with default setting and does not display the range with the seat assignment selected at that time.
3. Upon delivery, you discovered that range went down as that's the first time it was presented that way.

No need to fear though, you'll only be seat restricted by a handful of seats and the plane will be just fine on the route.

[blahmeh14]

The opposite happened, though -- I ordered less seats than default. If you take a look at the attachments, the airplane I currently fly has the same seating config as the ones on order, and is the same MTOW variant with the same engines, but the range has decreased for the ones on order versus the one I fly. 

For reference, I've also attached the order page specifications to show that the range listed in the "aircraft on order" page takes into account the seating arrangement. The +3tn went from 6900nm to 6840nm default overnight. 

Many thanks for the reply, though, schro! 

[schro]

Check it again on delivery. I don't think the order page number seems accurate - most reliable will be when the plane is delivered. That being said, running 250 seats on a 332 at max range does not bode well for your profits, though, it should be fine in beginner's world. If you go up to a big world, I'd suggest other options first....

One other thing that I'll often do is not worry about removing seats to add range but let the system handle the seat restrictions. The payload range chart can give you an idea of what to expect....

[Tim]

Guys, do you really think anybody would order 330X / 330E with deliveries in 2015, while NEOs would come in 2018. In current game conditions nobody would order new a/c just for 3 years. So, IMHO, it's better to add new MTOW option.

[[ATA] Sunbao]

Guys, do you really think anybody would order 330X / 330E with deliveries in 2015, while NEOs would come in 2018. In current game conditions nobody would order new a/c just for 3 years. So, IMHO, it's better to add new MTOW option.

Yes there will, i will sure do it for one, yes its only 3 year but that will be around 40 planes to get in that time span.
The mtow option is unrealistic and unfair for other plane tyeps so thats sure not the way to go.
We aim to have a realistic game

[Zombie Slayer]

Guys, do you really think anybody would order 330X / 330E with deliveries in 2015, while NEOs would come in 2018. In current game conditions nobody would order new a/c just for 3 years. So, IMHO, it's better to add new MTOW option.

Yes, as Sunbao said 3 years is 40 planes, give or take. Also, the 330NEO will share commonality with the 330/40 line so I see no reason at all to not order 330X/E when made available.

[schro]

Pricing will tell a lot about it's desirability... Later model wide bodies are priced so high dynamically that their costs don't justify the efficiency increase...

[gazzz0x2z]

Pricing will tell a lot about it's desirability... Later model wide bodies are priced so high dynamically that their costs don't justify the efficiency increase...

Which makes the game more interesting. There is no obvious choice, no sure way to win.

[ChuckPerry]

Any chance in a future update you could modify pricing to include the ability to set default prices, increase, or decrease prices (fares) at 1 base only instead of system wide?? 

[NovemberCharlie]

With the new function "create routes for the next six days" I usually don't buy slots for these seven day schedules as the last planes are usually 6-7 months away.
And even if you were to purchase those slots, they would expire before you get use them.

Wouldn't it be an idea to have a "buy slots for selected routes" on the manage routes dropdown menu?
Some schedules have 9 routes and this would save the time to "edit" all of them...

Kind regards,

NC

[gazzz0x2z]

With the new function "create routes for the next six days" I usually don't buy slots for these seven day schedules as the last planes are usually 6-7 months away.
And even if you were to purchase those slots, they would expire before you get use them.

Wouldn't it be an idea to have a "buy slots for selected routes" on the manage routes dropdown menu?
Some schedules have 9 routes and this would save the time to "edit" all of them...

Kind regards,

NC

...or even a single button "buy all slots for routes with aircraft assigned". So that, whatever you forgot to buy, works now.

[geoffreyc]

...or even a single button "buy all slots for routes with aircraft assigned". So that, whatever you forgot to buy, works now.

That would be good addition, I've only been playing a week or so and found myself in this situation a few times. Planned a few routes ahead of a plane being delivered and when the time came to "open" those routes, it was a pain to manually edit 10-20 different routes.

[[ATA] Sunbao]

Any chance in a future update you could modify pricing to include the ability to set default prices, increase, or decrease prices (fares) at 1 base only instead of system wide??

A very needed function indeed

[schro]

I'm surprised the last change log didn't include:

Automatically lock the slot page for 24 hours for any player opening a bug report about being locked out of the slot page.

Make all planes common to a player's airline invisible to it on the used market for each player that opens a bug report about no planes being available on the used market because brokers are storing them.

[Zombie Slayer]

While the constant complaints about the used market and the slot page do get annoying, the slot lock out function really is a problem. If it says 10 minutes, it needs to be 10 minutes. If it is going top be longer, the player deserves to know that it will be longer. The big problem is a player that is locked out keeps checking every 10 minutes expecting to be able to see the slot page, but that lock out warning pops up again. The loading of the slot page triggers as another click thus making it even LONGER until the player can view the slot page.

While I agree that a mechanism is needed to prevent abuse, it is also not fair the the player, the paying customer, to have deliberately misleading information displayed when the page load limit is reached. I would rather it tell me "You loaded the page x times in y minutes, you may not load this page for z minutes. Please check back then" even if it is 2 hours, than having it always say 10 minutes. That being said, a flat 10 minute ban followed by a reset on the page load count is plenty sufficient for a penalty at any airport where catching a slot drop is crucial. If a drop occurs during that 10 minutes, you missed them anyway.

Just my $0.02....

Don

[[SC] - King Kong]

Happy that some agree. Its still locked by the way. If feel mistreated in such an important part of the game and I think there might be many more that agree with me.

Hope you have some nice in game compensation for this faulty mechanism Sami.

[[ATA] Sunbao]

Happy that some agree. Its still locked by the way. If feel mistreated in such an important part of the game and I think there might be many more that agree with me.

Hope you have some nice in game compensation for this faulty mechanism Sami.

Sadly that a issue that has been her for years still not is fixed

[gazzz0x2z]

I've been blocked only once, but it was horribly frustrating : a Fairchild metro can fly 6 short routes a day. So, as usually, I opened 6 additional tabs in opera, each one for a route, and this time, I had 6 different destinations(yeah, serving 602 airports needs quite work - but that's normal). I check everything is OK, all routes are properly setup, and I enter a "confirm" frenzy, clicking it 6 times in less than 10 seconds.

And, of course, at the 6th click, slot ban. Hell, I was just filling one single plane! Yes, a single lone plane can fly 6 daily routes, that is 84 slots to reserve. Not even flying at night. Example, my current G-FAAG in current GW3. Flies From Edinburgh to Newcaste, Islay, Barra, Wick, Benbecula & Newcastle again. Every day. SX-FAB flies from Corfu to Vasteras, Preveza, Kefalonia, Tirana, Araxos & Dubrovnik each day(besides Vasteras on saturdays for the A check.). That's 82 slots to 6 different aiports, and I'm not allowed to validate all of them at once. I must first do some of them, assign them to the plane, then do the other ones, then assign the remaining ones. Very tedious, and it increases the risk of error & frustration.

NB : those planes make +250k$ per week before taxes and salaries(who are rather low anyways). My estimate is that they earn me around 125k$ per week, for a purchase price of 5M$(at the time of purchase, they're costlier now). Many people laugh at them, but under 280NM, they are insanely efficient(where slot prices are not too insane). So yes, I'd like to be able to plan them 6 daily flights at once without being slotbanned. Of course, I never had that problems with 737(4 maximum daily flights) or even RJs(5 maximum daily flights, Be it on CRJs, ERJs, A148 or Ejets). But it really annoyed me a lot.