GW1 restart options

[Sami]

The GW#1 replacement is due in a few weeks, so let's see what are wishes for the starting era.

Hoping to include cargo in this game as well right from the start (some work there is still needed, and one IT project for one airline has taken a fair bit of my recent time, but it's soon ready over there).

[yearofthecactus]

55 or 65.

Voted 55, but would be equally happy with 65.

70 is gw4 standard. 60 is just a horrible start date because of the crossover between piston and jet, and results in so much annoying legwork for a long time. 5 years earlier to make that legwork pay, or 5 years later to make that legwork lesser, would be perfect.

[Zombie Slayer]

While I wont play due to time, I voted 1965. GW3 default is 1995, GW4 default is 1970, GW2 default has been 1960, and recent GW1 is 1950. From the perspective of starting with a new generation of aircraft, and with the thought of keeping certain time frames in mind with each game, I would actually propose default start dates as follows:

GW1 1945-1948 to coincide with the release of the first post WWII era props - DC-4, Boeing 377, Convair 240, etc. Gives enough time to build on the early props before transitioning into first gen jets. 1950 is good but I would like to see it a few years earlier.

GW2: 1962-1965 as the first gen jets are all in production. Pick from DC-8, 707, VC-10, Comet, Caravelle and the DC-9 and 737 are on the horizon.

GW4: 1972-1974: Second gen jets are in production. DC-10, L1011 wide body jets are starting production, the DC-9 and 737 lines are in full swing, and air travel is growing at an exponential rate.

GW3: 1990-1995. Modern 3rd gen jets are flying, next generation aircraft are in the works and it provides a good 40 year game.

I second yearofthecactus on the 1960 start. Too late to invest in props, but too soon for most jets. Its just a bad year to begin a game as it makes the start up process overly complicated.

Just my 2 cents....

[Elladan]

Now that's a really good idea, this way personal preferences of different people can be catered for within the framework of existing gameworlds. Neat

I have voted for earliest possible start as I simply like those props but if that game is to start slightly later '62-'65, with all major early jets announced, would be a better choice than simply 1960, for the reasons stated by previous posters.

[Zobelle]

I like 1945 as you can get time out of your initial investment, But would like to start with something other than DC3's or B307's.

1965 is also good as you can jump right into jet scheduling.

[freshmore]

Personally I think it's important to have variation in start dates, so while I like the 50's, we've just done that, so for me it's a 65 or 70 start. It's a totally different tactical start. I think going for a 1940's start is a bit soon for trying that, if it was to become an option I think adding some of the other 1940's aircraft that are a bit " left field," to provide more choice. Avro Lancastrian etc.

I agree with the assessment that each GW should probably have a generally similar start period each time it restarts. So that we have a 50's already, it makes sense for the next to be 60's, 70's and 80's as each restarts. Not necessarily in that order. Personally I think 80's rather than 90's gives plenty of diverging strategies for the 90's. Do I go Classics now or do older aircraft used and to NG's etc.

[Talentz]

While I wont play due to time, I voted 1965. GW3 default is 1995, GW4 default is 1970, GW2 default has been 1960, and recent GW1 is 1950. From the perspective of starting with a new generation of aircraft, and with the thought of keeping certain time frames in mind with each game, I would actually propose default start dates as follows:

GW1 1945-1948 to coincide with the release of the first post WWII era props - DC-4, Boeing 377, Convair 240, etc. Gives enough time to build on the early props before transitioning into first gen jets. 1950 is good but I would like to see it a few years earlier.

GW2: 1962-1965 as the first gen jets are all in production. Pick from DC-8, 707, VC-10, Comet, Caravelle and the DC-9 and 737 are on the horizon.

GW4: 1972-1974: Second gen jets are in production. DC-10, L1011 wide body jets are starting production, the DC-9 and 737 lines are in full swing, and air travel is growing at an exponential rate.

GW3: 1990-1995. Modern 3rd gen jets are flying, next generation aircraft are in the works and it provides a good 40 year game.

I second yearofthecactus on the 1960 start. Too late to invest in props, but too soon for most jets. Its just a bad year to begin a game as it makes the start up process overly complicated.

Just my 2 cents....

Personally I think it's important to have variation in start dates, so while I like the 50's, we've just done that, so for me it's a 65 or 70 start. It's a totally different tactical start. I think going for a 1940's start is a bit soon for trying that, if it was to become an option I think adding some of the other 1940's aircraft that are a bit " left field," to provide more choice. Avro Lancastrian etc.

I agree with the assessment that each GW should probably have a generally similar start period each time it restarts. So that we have a 50's already, it makes sense for the next to be 60's, 70's and 80's as each restarts. Not necessarily in that order. Personally I think 80's rather than 90's gives plenty of diverging strategies for the 90's. Do I go Classics now or do older aircraft used and to NG's etc.

While not fully ready*, several early 1950s models were added(https://www.airwaysim.com/Information/Aircraft). If we can squeeze cargo in, alot of family trees are filled out for the 1950/1960s time frame. We could do a 1948 start. That said, I think 1965 would be better overall. I want to fill out all our aircraft family trees with there respective Combi and freighter models before going big with another early GW start.

Whichever date ends up the winner... please please dont start the GW with increased pax demand. Start small = slower growth. The struggle should be the first 3 years with low demand, not bottle necked over lack of aircraft (sitting on millions with nothing to do but camp twitter/UM).

Talentz

[AlanH]

Changed my vote after reading some replies and thinking about it. I enjoy the early era with piston and turboprop planes and the strategy involved with them, was lucky that GW2 was getting ready to start when I first joined. So I would like to see another early start in 1950 or earlier, but I voted for 1970.

Reason being, first we just had a 1950 start a few months ago and second I think there should be 2 really long GWs and 2 medium length ones. GW2 is about 18 months play time, that is a long wait to get to play with the early aircraft again. So if you have another GW similar to GW3, except starting in 1950 or earlier and only running for around 40 years that would allow more chances to get to play with the early birds.

So my suggestion would be something like this:
GW1 - Long, 1970-2035
GW2 - Long, 1945-2035
GW3 - Medium, 1995-2035
GW4 - Medium, 1945-1985

[Tha_Ape]

There are quite a lot of interesting comments in here!

Well, I completely agree with the idea of "fixed" starting date for each GW, so if we can't / don't want to play one we know when to come back.

Agreed also on the earlier starting date for the one starting in the 50s. Indeed, 1946-47 (just that little change) would give piston engines a little more chance (apart from DC-7 and Connies). The idea of being stuck for some years flying rusty tin cans from WW2 is kind of exciting, before jumping in the revolution that are DC-6, -7 and such. Yes, that would mean relatively short range for the first years.

Though, the thoughts about the missing data (either on earlier models or for cargo) are really pertinent, and this should be fixed before such a GW (1965 for the next one seems good and requires only cargo data).

Another interesting point would be to have a small randomization of the starting date (say, +-2 or +-3 years, so not the same ACs are available and it would make each GW a little more different.

[Sami]

Pre-1950 is not supported by the game engine but I suppose it is not too big deal to extend the base data for a few years (1947->).

[Elladan]

Whichever date ends up the winner... please please dont start the GW with increased pax demand. Start small = slower growth. The struggle should be the first 3 years with low demand, not bottle necked over lack of aircraft (sitting on millions with nothing to do but camp twitter/UM).

While I'm all for a slower, more tactical start I would not necessary want a low demand settings in a game. The side consequence of such situation is that many of the marginal routes are not feasible to serve, even towards the end of the game, especially in the long haul market. And vice-versa, with an increased demand quite a few interesting destinations would become possible, adding to the fun and flavour. Similarly, lower demand setting limit attractiveness of many larger plane types and who doesn't like A380s The solution could be to have a more gradual demand increase, starting low, growing slowly initially and then picking up the pace, ending with a nice, booming economy. Is that even possible from game engine perspective?

[MM21]

Pre-1950 is not supported by the game engine but I suppose it is not too big deal to extend the base data for a few years (1947->).

It would be good to see if we can have cargo with planes from 50s 

[MuzhikRB]

While I'm all for a slower, more tactical start I would not necessary want a low demand settings in a game. The side consequence of such situation is that many of the marginal routes are not feasible to serve, even towards the end of the game, especially in the long haul market. And vice-versa, with an increased demand quite a few interesting destinations would become possible, adding to the fun and flavour. Similarly, lower demand setting limit attractiveness of many larger plane types and who doesn't like A380s The solution could be to have a more gradual demand increase, starting low, growing slowly initially and then picking up the pace, ending with a nice, booming economy. Is that even possible from game engine perspective?

I think he was talking about the same. not to START with increased demand.
Low demand GW (like we have in GW4 now) is also not much fun.
But in current GW2 - everybody sitting on billions already while flying 5-7 fleets.

[Zombie Slayer]

I think he was talking about the same. not to START with increased demand.
Low demand GW (like we have in GW4 now) is also not much fun.
But in current GW2 - everybody sitting on billions already while flying 5-7 fleets.

I agree. No offence to Sami, but the set up in GW2 has been nothing short of a colossal failure from a game play standpoint. Chalk it up to experience and lets not start a game ever again with these parameters (please!) 700 players in 1950 only works if both demand AND production rates are proportionately increased.....but 700 people vying for 20 slots a month production rate DC-6 and Connie can end in nothing but frustration and anger for the player. The outcome could have been much different (and much more enjoyable) if the planes of the day were supplied with appropriate production rates of 50+ per month.

But more realistically the start should be as it has in the past for early starts. 200-250 players to start, growing by 1 each game month with appropriate demand and production rates for this number of players.

[Sami]

1950 and 1965 quite close so far.

(I would prefer 1950 of these two since the other world is right now at 1965 so might not be the best idea to have two worlds at the same phase.. but let's see, since 1965 is better if we consider cargo...)

[schro]

1950 and 1965 quite close so far.

(I would prefer 1950 of these two since the other world is right now at 1965 so might not be the best idea to have two worlds at the same phase.. but let's see, since 1965 is better if we consider cargo...)

A 1965 start will look like a vastly different world than a 1950 start that is in 1965 currently.

I voted for the 1965 start as the most recent 1950 start was the worst game start that I have experienced in my years playing here.

[Zobelle]

1947 start with 200 max initially would be just peachy.

[VitoNg]

1947 start with 200 max initially would be just peachy.

Considering first long game world with Cargo I guess there will be dozens of players miss the chance of starting Day 1

[Zombie Slayer]

Considering first long game world with Cargo I guess there will be dozens of players miss the chance of starting Day 1

Another reason to push for a later start. 1965ish with 350 or so would make more people happy!

[gazzz0x2z]

lack of early cargo plane is yet another reason 1965 is a good idea.