Frequency boost

[NovemberCharlie]

Hi,

As we all know higher frequency flown by an airline results in more passengers being interested in your route (because they have more options/flexibility)
However we also have a game rule that prevents alliances from providing more than 200%

This puts alliance players at a competitive disadvantage when flying the same route, for example:
I fly my route say 2x daily, my alliance mate flies it 2x daily, however my competitor flies the route 4x daily.

His routes will get a frequency boost, but mine (and my alliance mate) won't.
And since we all want to be good players and not oversupply this route I think it would be fair if the amount of frequencies amongst alliance members is counted, in stead of individual frequencies...

Kind regards,

NC

[wilian.souza2]

This is insane - if each member of an alliance was allowed to put the same amount of seats on a route, the alliance would soon own that route, depending on the number of Alliance members supplying it.

Also, taking up the most passengers on a route not necessarily equals more profit!

[gazzz0x2z]

(.../...)Also, taking up the most passengers on a route not necessarily equals more profit!

This. I could fly 40*A321neos on the ALG-ORY line, thus sucking most of the traffick. But with 8000 seats for barely 1100 demand, would it make any sense?

[Luperco]

This. I could fly 40*A321neos on the ALG-ORY line, thus sucking most of the traffick. But with 8000 seats for barely 1100 demand, would it make any sense?

Doesn't make sense also because you will get an oversupply warning and your route will be grounded.

Anyway is the frequency a real boost? Or just that the passengers are divided (more or less) equally for each plane regardless the type or other factors so smaller is better?

[gazzz0x2z]

Doesn't make sense also because you will get an oversupply warning and your route will be grounded.

Limit seems off in GW3. I've got routes with 400 seats & 170 demand without problems(now if you ask me if it's clever, I'll answer that I probably f*d up somewhere, and should do something).

Anyway is the frequency a real boost? Or just that the passengers are divided (more or less) equally for each plane regardless the type or other factors so smaller is better?

fly a 60 demand route with a 70-seater at a correct price. Have 60 pax in average.
fly a 60 demand route with 2 70-seaters at the same price. Have 35 pax in average for each plane.

is it worth it? I would write a full book about it. Just check the costs, income, slots available, and opposition(and thousands of other parameters), and plan strategically.

[wilian.souza2]

fly a 60 demand route with a 70-seater at a correct price. Have 60 pax in average.
fly a 60 demand route with 2 70-seaters at the same price. Have 35 pax in average for each plane.

is it worth it? I would write a full book about it. Just check the costs

In GW2 it seems it's worth, cause I have a good number of longhauls where there's a guy flying 4 or 5 767s where I have 2 Tristars flying, and 2 to 3 aircraft would be fair enough due to competition. This same guy takes 1 B profit a quarter. Of course he's actually earning real money elsewhere, so I believe it's just a petty strategy to hinder the growth of his rivals.

[JumboShrimp]

Anyway is the frequency a real boost?   Or just that the passengers are divided (more or less) equally for each plane regardless the type or other factors so smaller is better?

Right.  Frequency is not really a boost.  If you have Flight 1 and add Flight 2, flight 2 does not "boost" Flight 1.  Flight 1 loses pax, because pax get divided into more flights.

But if a competitor has a Flight X on the same route, that flight also loses pax.  So that's all that's going on.  Dividing total demand into more flights.

As far as alliance limit of supply no higher than 200% of demand, and there are other flights on the route (meaning, total supply is more than 200%), it probably does not make sense to add any more flights for the 2 alliance players, even if the limit was not there.