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: possible bug 707-320B  (Read 186 times)

Offline groundbum2

  • Members
  • Posts: 185
possible bug 707-320B
« on: June 14, 2018, 03:27:11 PM »
I have some 707-320s ordered for after November 1961 which is when the 320B is introduced. I try and edit these orders and get the drop down list to change the model, and get offered 120,120B,220,320 and 720, but NOT 320B which is what I'd like.

Is this a bug?

Cheers,

Simon

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 15581
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2018, 03:42:41 PM »
This is normal and purely intentional, and to my recollection also mentioned in the manual. Since you know the "better" models that are coming later you cannot change to them afterwards. (sort of anti-cheat measure one might say)

Offline Zobelle

  • Members
  • Posts: 838
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2018, 03:58:57 PM »
One should be able to change these orders at a premium, honestly.

If it costs lots of money (which judging by all the operational leases still being taken), that can prove a deterrent to all but the most powerful airlines. And even then you can only get so many units in a timely manner

Offline wilian.souza2

  • Members
  • Posts: 471
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2018, 11:41:38 PM »
How come placing an order for an aircraft, and when a newer and better variant come along change the order to it, is considered "cheating"? Makes no sense and the current system leads to filling your airline with "crappy" variants, variants unsuitable for your operations just to get your aircraft delivered first, because the current rules don't make people who long for the model wait for their right variant to come along! And besides, newer models are always more expensive than the earlier variants and they'll always be more expensive... so changing to a new model will always come at a price, the price of changing the order - or if you like, the price the airlines pay to be the ahead on the list!
« Last Edit: June 14, 2018, 11:44:02 PM by wilian.souza2 »

Online schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3766
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2018, 02:37:47 AM »
How come placing an order for an aircraft, and when a newer and better variant come along change the order to it, is considered "cheating"? Makes no sense and the current system leads to filling your airline with "crappy" variants, variants unsuitable for your operations just to get your aircraft delivered first, because the current rules don't make people who long for the model wait for their right variant to come along! And besides, newer models are always more expensive than the earlier variants and they'll always be more expensive... so changing to a new model will always come at a price, the price of changing the order - or if you like, the price the airlines pay to be the ahead on the list!

Let's suppose the DC-8 line in GW4 right now. You can order -10/-20/-30 series planes. They are all quite terrible, but the better 40/50 series are coming, and then the vastly 60 series is coming after that. Let's say you already know the roadmap, you can go ahead and get in line for 200x DC-8-10's and then upgrade those to better models as they are released. This means the production lines will be sold out for the decade with the cash rich airlines hogging all of the planes. Paying an extra 50% for a vastly superior plane is not an issue at all especially when capital costs are so low compared to revenue/profit in the earlier years. Thus, it forces a choice - big airlines can go big with crap planes OR make smaller orders as newer models are released...

Offline wilian.souza2

  • Members
  • Posts: 471
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2018, 02:54:11 AM »
This means the production lines will be sold out for the decade with the cash rich airlines hogging all of the planes.

But this is exactly the situation that happens today - 737s in GW2, for example, usually have very clogged production lines, and in some cases your aircraft will be delivered only 6 - 8 years after you ordered them. When I ordered DC9s for the first time there, I'd have to wait 5 years for delivery.

So, production lines will be clogged anyway and aircraft prices will skyrocket anyway when there are powerful airlines out there, and no "anti-cheat" measure will prevent that from happening. This actually makes it more difficult to growing airlines plan their orders. And for me, it's best to wait 15 years to get an aircraft suitable for the era than waiting 8 years to get outdated stuff.

Offline Zobelle

  • Members
  • Posts: 838
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2018, 03:21:56 AM »
As said before, you're rate limited anyhow for receiving orders. Why not allow changing orders for 40-60% of new purchase price additional?

Offline Tha_Ape

  • Members
  • Posts: 3687
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2018, 09:51:43 AM »
As Schro said, only large airlines would be able to change their orders and for that reason they would be the only ones flying the good variants while the others would be stuck with DC-8-20 (to keep the same example).
Because then the cancel to reorder trick would become useless, and there would be even less prod slots available (the ones one loses while doing cancel to reorder).
Scorched earth.
Then, going your way:
 - if the extra money to pay is actually not so high, people will keep ordering for resale with profit, even if the profit is smaller
 - if the extra money to pay is a large amount, they would instead keep everything within their alliance, and we would see even less frames on the open UM, even at very high prices.

I completely agree that the current system is absurd from a logical point of view, compared to what would happen IRL.
But I also believe that beyond that, it is a way to allow smaller airlines to have the possibility to get a few good frames once in a while, which they wouldn't get in the "change order" system (or fewer than now).

If you come out with a proposal that gives smaller airlines a fair chance to have access to the same frames than the larger ones, then I'd be glad to support your idea.

Offline Zobelle

  • Members
  • Posts: 838
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2018, 11:05:57 AM »
How about this, you can change to better variant for 40-60% added cost per frame but only half the slots keep the same dates, the other half get pushed back to the end of the line or to fill in empty slots but only after those initial ones.

Offline Tha_Ape

  • Members
  • Posts: 3687
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2018, 11:15:31 AM »
Becomes quite complicated, but yes, that could be an idea. So others can take the former slots.

2 issues I see:
 - players wouldn't cease to complain about their planes being delayed, how it's unfair, and especially if the prod line is ten years long. The way to tell them that they have to make a choice would have to be quite pedagogical.
 - alliances. Get another member with nothing on order in that prod line to immediately take them as they are freed (but could be somewhat compensated with the "greyed out" system we have for when someone cancels an order).

Not trying to demolish your proposal, rather trying to see the pros and cons so it is balanced and the majority can agree (100% of the players happy doesn't exist).

Edit: maybe far fetched, but could be "explained" by the need for the manufacturer to somewhat reorganize after one's modification
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 11:18:06 AM by Tha_Ape »

Offline Zobelle

  • Members
  • Posts: 838
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2018, 02:24:02 PM »
Well looking at it, the cancel and reorder trick already works in a similar fashion where even timing it right you dont get all your previous slots back. This simply automates that. (And yes, Im aware that one could game it by only changing one order at a time but perhaps it can be coded in that every other order change gets pushed to the next new slot (back of the line, effectively)

Keep in mind the current system can also be gamed by other alliance members to mop up the discarded slots, so really no change past allowing this process to require one less step.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 02:26:25 PM by Zobelle »

Offline wilian.souza2

  • Members
  • Posts: 471
Re: possible bug 707-320B
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2018, 07:03:27 PM »
only large airlines would be able to change their orders and for that reason they would be the only ones flying the good variants while the others would be stuck with DC-8-20 (to keep the same example).
Because then the cancel to reorder trick would become useless, and there would be even less prod slots available (the ones one loses while doing cancel to reorder).
Scorched earth.
Then, going your way:
 - if the extra money to pay is actually not so high, people will keep ordering for resale with profit, even if the profit is smaller
 - if the extra money to pay is a large amount, they would instead keep everything within their alliance, and we would see even less frames on the open UM, even at very high prices.

(...)

If you come out with a proposal that gives smaller airlines a fair chance to have access to the same frames than the larger ones, then I'd be glad to support your idea.

If this is the problem, I propose the following: a periodic closure of production slots when all the slots for a given year are occupied, and reopening it shortly before the subsequent year. This would be done only on popular models and would be triggered when the production capacity reached its maximum.

It would work this way: The production line would work like it currently does until the order backlog forces the production capacity to its maximum. When this maximum is reached, the system will take the year in which the last aircraft will be delivered and will close the production line for new orders from the subsequent year on. New orders can still be placed according to the number of available slots, until it gets full.

When it gets full, no new orders can be placed until , let's say, 3 months before all aircraft previously ordered are delivered. After that, new slots will be opened for the next year (but not the year after the next) and the system will take new aircraft orders until the slots are all full. And it goes on and on.

This would be coupled with another limitation: no airline would be allowed to order more than 100 aircraft for each year's production line, and the total number of aircraft ordered by an alliance for a production year would be limited to something line 100*(# of alliance members)*f, being f a factor not higher than 1.

This will hinder bulk alliance orders, hoarding planes within alliance comrades, will give chance to everybody place orders on popular aircraft (since the backlog will be opened for new orders each 6-7 real days at least) and will force players to plan and only buy what they really need instead of buying aircraft for the sole intent of brokering - which is the culprit of eternal "very expensive aircraft" that today prohibits many airlines from getting them.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 07:07:04 PM by wilian.souza2 »

 

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.