Is AWS dying?

[DanDan]

for me, the great thing and biggest motivation to play AWS is the change and improvement of it over time. i am currently not in any gameworlds, but i check the forums from time to time - and to my disappointment, there have been [except for a few minor aircraft-data-updates] no changes to AWS this year at all. player numbers are much lower than they were when i started playing AWS, so possibly i am not alone with my opinion?

so my -slightly provocative- question: is AWS dead?

[Sami]

Nope. Still here and going strong, or that's the plan at least 

Just personally had to prioritise in keeping the real life afloat with all the recent things in the world and in the family. But let's just say, without details, that things are looking better now.

n.b. Forums are definitely quieter since some of the chatter has moved to our Discord.

[swiftus27]

(Waves Hello)

-Discord

[Maarten Otto]

I sometimes don't play for 9 months... only to start up again to play a game world, have a great time and come back next time around half year or a year later to have another round of fun.

[FlyZef]

I'd love to see some new features like codesharing.

[herts15]

I've played this game on and off for a good 10-12 years and have to say that it's always been something I will throw myself at for 9 months then have a few months off

It's taken this long to learn the things that work and run a successful airline

When I first joined I wished it would have faster game worlds, more fluffy features like enhanced onboard offerings etc but now I've got older I still find the existing games more than enough to satisfy

[TorontoGooner]

Yes. I came back after a long hiatus to give it another try. I got laughed at before because I said it's the same players eating up the same markets every time.

I tried opening a small airline in Calgary, Canada. No threat to anyone, just four aircraft that didn't compete on anyone else's route. Then the usual suspect comes in and drives me out of business. I wouldn't care if I didn't have to pay for this game, but there's no fun in it unless you know exactly how to be in the top 1%. Yes, I get that's real life, but I play this game to get away from that.

I won't be given this game anymore money. It's pointless.

[Mr.HP]

I tried opening a small airline in Calgary, Canada. No threat to anyone, just four aircraft that didn't compete on anyone else's route. Then the usual suspect comes in and drives me out of business. I wouldn't care if I didn't have to pay for this game, but there's no fun in it unless you know exactly how to be in the top 1%. Yes, I get that's real life, but I play this game to get away from that.

Sorry to hear that, but you can't expect to sustain an airline with only 4 A/C. This isn't rocket science, and I'm sure anyone can run an airline if they read the manual and advice/guide from the forum. And running for a top positions is a little bit harder as you have to make effort in both spending brain for a sound strategy and time to execute it

I wouldn't care if I didn't have to pay for this game

I won't be given this game anymore money. It's pointless.

And wow, how much does it cost for a week playing the game? It's 0.44-0.55 Euro per week, depend on the package you buy. You talked like you spent thousand of Euro/Dollars on the game. I'm pretty sure the income from all players are barely enough for servers and stuff, not the mention the labor cost and effort of the management team

Without you, the party isn't any less fun. Ciao

[TorontoGooner]

Sorry to hear that, but you can't expect to sustain an airline with only 4 A/C. This isn't rocket science, and I'm sure anyone can run an airline if they read the manual and advice/guide from the forum. And running for a top positions is a little bit harder as you have to make effort in both spending brain for a sound strategy and time to execute it
And wow, how much does it cost for a week playing the game? It's 0.44-0.55 Euro per week, depend on the package you buy. You talked like you spent thousand of Euro/Dollars on the game. I'm pretty sure the income from all players are barely enough for servers and stuff, not the mention the labor cost and effort of the management team

Without you, the party isn't any less fun. Ciao

This is the attitude that will kill this game.

I can't grow my airline because if I do I'll get swamped on the new routes by the usual suspects. This party (game) couldn't be less fun right now. Perhaps it's time to listen to customer feedback instead of ploughing on regardless?

[Tuckernut]

The issue is when and where you enter the game.  It always works out best if you get in a game world when it opens.  If you enter later, think SMALL.  Pick a city with underserved routes with less than 75 pax a day and choose a type of aircraft appropriate to the route where you will not be a threat to anyone.  And definite choose a city that has no one else based there.  The Beginners Games are a great place to play and strategize.  If you chose a city like ATL, LHR or LAX, yes--you will get walked all over.  Try a small city feeding to a large one like OMA.  It feeds MSP, ORD, DTW, DFW and many others.  Also small cities like ICT, LIT, BTR.

I have been a loyal fan for several years and find it a very small investment and it gives me something to do when I wake up in the middle of the night and can't go back to sleep for an hour or two.

I am truly amazed that Sami has done such a great job in coding this game, a task which I find very daunting.  It's just supposed to be fun.  Now let me get back to the Jet Age.

[tungstennedge]

I disagree with getting "squashed" in LAX, ATL, LHR ect. If you get any slots in those airports you are nearly invisible as there isn't enough slots to force oversupply routes enough to cause bankruptcy.  They are by far the easiest places to play IMO.

[Todorojoz]

I am surprised by the amount of people who don't like competition. It's a fact of life and part of this game. No airline can single handedly BK another airline. If you manage your airline well, it can survive anything. If you don't, then you'll end up bankrupt.

If you don't like competition, there are games out there that are essentially a sandbox game. This is not one of those.

Lastly, I am not one of the "usual suspects" as I've only been playing for a little over 3 years. But I'm doing just fine for myself. Just takes time and strategy to hit the targets of the airline you want to run.

[Tuckernut]

I disagree with getting "squashed" in LAX, ATL, LHR ect. If you get any slots in those airports you are nearly invisible as there isn't enough slots to force oversupply routes enough to cause bankruptcy.  They are by far the easiest places to play IMO.

Perhaps that was not the best choice of words but I did have a point to make.  If you chose to enter a new game at a major airport, pick your starting aircraft carefully.  Avoid the temptation to overexpand.
The trick with large, well-served airports is to keep a close eye on the slots.  What was showing all pink zeros yesterday may suddenly show an 0800 opening but those things come with practice and you need a slot to land.  I hate to see a returning user put off by feeling that others gang up on him.  It is highly competitive and there are a lot of guys (maybe some gals?) that are really great players, like yourself.  But people are very forthcoming with advice when you get in a jam.  There are players who will mentor new users. 

[gazzz0x2z]

I disagree with getting "squashed" in LAX, ATL, LHR ect. If you get any slots in those airports you are nearly invisible as there isn't enough slots to force oversupply routes enough to cause bankruptcy.  They are by far the easiest places to play IMO.

Depends on whether you have opposition. When you are alone in Algeria or Egypt, noone is gonna be a problem, and you basically play solo. OTOH, if you begin to play in big-but-not-that-big airports, in competition-rich areas, yeah, the game can end up cutthroat. IIRC, when I played there, Detroit was a bloody battle, while JFK (too big), Memphis or Kansas City (too small) were cakewalks. And when I play in the EU, I tend to see many opponents BK while I'm growing. Even CDG is not big enough in terms of demand to slot-protect its locals, and can be extremely dangerous for the non-veteran.

[tungstennedge]

Depends on whether you have opposition. When you are alone in Algeria or Egypt, noone is gonna be a problem, and you basically play solo. OTOH, if you begin to play in big-but-not-that-big airports, in competition-rich areas, yeah, the game can end up cutthroat. IIRC, when I played there, Detroit was a bloody battle, while JFK (too big), Memphis or Kansas City (too small) were cakewalks. And when I play in the EU, I tend to see many opponents BK while I'm growing. Even CDG is not big enough in terms of demand to slot-protect its locals, and can be extremely dangerous for the non-veteran.

This is interesting because you are absolutely correct. Anything but the biggest airports suddenly gains a huge spike in difficulty, as large airports, but not as big as LAX, LHR, and ATL seem to attract as many players as the largest airports, but have in reality a fraction on the demand. I imagine in a world where ATL has 200mil pax/year Detroit would only have 60-70mil, and only a couple less players in some worlds. It obviously depends on competition, but the three airports I listed are the only ones, maybe add ORD in there which reliably slot lock in every world no matter what.

[Cornishman]

Such a shame. There are the weirdest of rules and implimentations that seem to be bluntly defended - with the greatest of respect Sami - just bluntly defended and actually they have no function but to undermine the game satisfaction here.

I just reported what I believed must have been a bug - but nope... I got shot down like always ! 

We all know the HUGE penalties that can apply if you have an airline with about 500 planes if you dare to add a 4th fleet. Even just for a short while during a fleet transition, you PAY a heavy price for this.

Well I just got caught out by another ridiculous rule:  I want to replace 140+ DC.8s with about 110 new 767ER.  Routes need reworking coz 767s need longer T/A.  I've never used the feature before whereby you create a slot but select the box to tick - "Do not buy slots for this airport"  if you further read the "What's this?" explanation here is exactly what it says about this feature:  You may choose not to buy the airport slots for new routes. This feature can be used to pre-plan routes and to 'activate' them later when you have suitable aircraft or a busy airport has new slots. 
Keep in mind that you can not fly a route if it does not have slots. To get the slots later, simply edit this route and the system will automatically try to get the slots.

So I spent yesterday making lots of nice PLANS of how to restructure my fleet without committing to anything and went to bed yesterday half-way through my plans. Today when I switched on I found to my horror - I have been charged a total of about $300 million in Fleet Commonality charges for adding a 4th fleet. I never flew a single mile with any 4th fleet but I received a blunt answer back in the Bug Report that "this is normal"

I am so p*ssed-off right now - I could honestly just fold this GW and all others and spend my gaming time and money elsewhere.  This is grossly unfair in a GW where I have struggled and struggled to keep the airline alive despite intense competition.  That is a HUGE amount of money to forfeit for NOTHING !   For having tried to plan something.

[Silentlysailing]

Yes. I came back after a long hiatus to give it another try. I got laughed at before because I said it's the same players eating up the same markets every time.

I tried opening a small airline in Calgary, Canada. No threat to anyone, just four aircraft that didn't compete on anyone else's route. Then the usual suspect comes in and drives me out of business. I wouldn't care if I didn't have to pay for this game, but there's no fun in it unless you know exactly how to be in the top 1%. Yes, I get that's real life, but I play this game to get away from that.

I won't be given this game anymore money. It's pointless.

I have to agree with this sentiment as it's been my experience. Plus my real job entails the same kind of planning. I just don't have the capacity time wise or mentally to try and compete with the top 1% for a fake game business and have to focus on my own real life fleet planning. Literally on the forums it is like real life politics trying to lobby the admin to increase your clout via mechanics and game rules kind of similar to real life. While airlines, trains and ocean shipping are consolidated in real life other sectors are very fragmented like trucking. However, there is a balance needed in gaming otherwise you lose out the majority for a select few.

[Amelie090904]

Honestly I don't get all the hate towards the admin/developer nor the "1%" (whoever this is supposed to be). Assuming you mean the top scoring airlines or the ones with the most pretax income, I probably belong to those 1% myself. And let me tell you, I failed miserably in my first few attempts. I only got better by learning from my mistakes AND by listening to more experienced players. In the end, everyone pays the same amount of money to play the game and everyone gets to play the same game with the very same game mechanics, rules, and bugs. The only difference between players is experience, skill, and commitment.

@Cornish: Totally agree in this case. This sucks.

[schlaf]

Such a shame. There are the weirdest of rules and implimentations that seem to be bluntly defended - with the greatest of respect Sami - just bluntly defended and actually they have no function but to undermine the game satisfaction here.

I just reported what I believed must have been a bug - but nope... I got shot down like always ! 

We all know the HUGE penalties that can apply if you have an airline with about 500 planes if you dare to add a 4th fleet. Even just for a short while during a fleet transition, you PAY a heavy price for this.

Well I just got caught out by another ridiculous rule:  I want to replace 140+ DC.8s with about 110 new 767ER.  Routes need reworking coz 767s need longer T/A.  I've never used the feature before whereby you create a slot but select the box to tick - "Do not buy slots for this airport"  if you further read the "What's this?" explanation here is exactly what it says about this feature:  You may choose not to buy the airport slots for new routes. This feature can be used to pre-plan routes and to 'activate' them later when you have suitable aircraft or a busy airport has new slots. 
Keep in mind that you can not fly a route if it does not have slots. To get the slots later, simply edit this route and the system will automatically try to get the slots.

So I spent yesterday making lots of nice PLANS of how to restructure my fleet without committing to anything and went to bed yesterday half-way through my plans. Today when I switched on I found to my horror - I have been charged a total of about $300 million in Fleet Commonality charges for adding a 4th fleet. I never flew a single mile with any 4th fleet but I received a blunt answer back in the Bug Report that "this is normal"

I am so p*ssed-off right now - I could honestly just fold this GW and all others and spend my gaming time and money elsewhere.  This is grossly unfair in a GW where I have struggled and struggled to keep the airline alive despite intense competition.  That is a HUGE amount of money to forfeit for NOTHING !   For having tried to plan something.

When you making a planing-schedule using "Do not buy slots for this airport" your airline still employs all the staff needed as if the aircrafts was flying with passangers. That, together with the problem you write about, should be changed!

[Cornishman]

Thank you Andre / schlaf / all the guys who commented in our alliance forum - thanks all for your kind words of support.  Thanks also to Sami (in advance) for listening to me on the subject a bit more than at first. I reported this as a Bug - but was initially told it is all correct to have done what it did to my airline, yet we can all see this is grossly unfair in what it does to your airline costs. 

Further to Sami's advice, I have made an entry about it in the "Feature Request" forum where I simply suggest - it is not fit for purpose (which is just  planning) and therefore please just remove it altogether unless it (preferably) could easily be fixed.