Obscure game rules/mechanics

[MikeS]

So I have been following closely my market share on the Sydney to Brisbane shuttle route in AoF for quite a while now.
My market share is roughly on par with a competitor Qlink. Sometimes a little higher, sometimes a little lower - probably due to maintenance.

Total market size: 4500 - 5000 pax daily.

aviamecanica - CI 75:  Operates 25 perfectly spaced 30min or 60min apart flights (except one) with an average daily total of around 3700 seats offered.
                                   Most aircraft are average aged MD-80s and DC-8s
Qlink - CI 45            :  Operates 15 flights spaced 30 min or more apart with an average daily of around 1500 seats offered.
                                   Most aircraft are newish F100

So to summarize: An airline with a 67% higher CI, a 67% higher number of flights and over the double amount of seats yields a similar result - consistently over months of observing.

In fact I noticed when I recently added my last batch of 6 daily flights with my DC 8-73s that no movement whatsoever in market share took place.
We can basically conclude that the game stops distributing any more passengers onto an airline after a certain amount of capacity/frequency in order to protect smaller airlines.

While this is neither fair nor realistic I could live with it if these rules were transparent. They are not and according to my years of reading forum posts I was under the impression that a city pair with such a market size could easily take 30min spaced flights without penalty.

So, sitting for hours trying to perfect your schedule is often not rewarded - not cool!

Mike
aviamecanica

[groundbum2]

part of the fun of the game is it's slightly opaque mechanisms. It's part of the fun of mastering it, and learning by error what works and doesn't work. I'm thinking of the karate kid where the old had the kid whack the thing on the pole over and over and over and over and the kid was like "why?". And finally he got it. Everybody needs an apprenticeship...

Simon

[MikeS]

"slightly opaque mechanisms"

a teeny bit of hyperbole? 


I guess I don't have the patience and perseverance needed for Sami's black belt!

[RALLX]

I think the more important question is, are you getting more profit by increasing the number of flights. To me, passenger share is not that important so it is not the driving force for expansion for me. It should either be increasing your own profit, or reducing your competitors' profit.

[MikeS]

I think the more important question is, are you getting more profit by increasing the number of flights. To me, passenger share is not that important so it is not the driving force for expansion for me. It should either be increasing your own profit, or reducing your competitors' profit.

Everyone has their own styles and objectives in the game. It is a highly detailed simulation and my respect to the developers for that but these undefined hidden game rules leave a huge impact on any airline (Fleet commonality anyone). If this is what it takes to make the game playable that is fine but explain it. We do get a "too small" warning for example.

[edvonbrock]

Can anyone explain why when you purchase an aircraft 40% down 60% on delivery and you decide to pay at some point before delivery you get a (very slight) discount while if you purchase 60% down and pay 40% on delivery but at some point you decide to pay the balance you get well taxed on your decision?

[Cornishman]

sorry Ed, "the label on this tin" says it all..... Obscure game rules / mechanics     (this questions asked so many times with no answer that makes any logic)

[schro]

Everyone has their own styles and objectives in the game. It is a highly detailed simulation and my respect to the developers for that but these undefined hidden game rules leave a huge impact on any airline (Fleet commonality anyone). If this is what it takes to make the game playable that is fine but explain it. We do get a "too small" warning for example.

Well, the manual is actually quite clear on the topic of fleet commonality, bold emphasis added by me:

Fleet commonality
The concept of "fleet commonality" was briefly described earlier. This is basically a model of training and administrative costs associated in keeping each of your different aircraft types flying. If you have many different types in operation these costs will be higher. Generally speaking you should not have any more than 1-3 different aircraft fleet groups in operation, and especially when you start your airline the first 4-5 aircraft should always be of the same type.

[MikeS]

Come on, it only states the obvious that fewer fleets = lower cost. I think the vast majority grasps that without any issue whatsoever. What nobody grasps, however, is the obscure mechanics behind it: When it increases exponentially with large fleets and the other steps built into it what to any user would appear like a random change.
Since it is apparently important to game play and bereft of logic there should be a table with the steps for us to look up.

Cheers!
Mike 

[schro]

Come on, it only states the obvious that fewer fleets = lower cost. I think the vast majority grasps that without any issue whatsoever. What nobody grasps, however, is the obscure mechanics behind it: When it increases exponentially with large fleets and the other steps built into it what to any user would appear like a random change.
Since it is apparently important to game play and bereft of logic there should be a table with the steps for us to look up.

Cheers!
Mike

Well, it says you shouldn't exceed three fleet types. It doesn't say you can't, but the mechanics of the game will absolutely say you can't (especially when you're large enough). A table of penalties isn't how the real world works.

An interesting real world example of sudden spikes in fleet commonality costs would be the demise od the MD80s here in the US. Some 5 years ago, delta made a huge order to stockpile parts to last the MD80s until about now, and cancelled their support contracts causing a significant number of parts to go out of production. AA did something similar after that - over 300 MD80s in total. Then look at Allegiant, who was slowly phasing out their MD80s but was reliant on the parts production lines staying running, as now everything became custom/special order. So some widget that used to be made in volume for $1 and was readily available would now cost $10 with a minimum order of a lot and have a 6 month lead time. Suffice it to say, Allegiant parked their MD80s ahead of plan.

The Delta MD90s had a similar issue - there were 2-3 engine shops that could overhaul the V2500-D5s. All but one in Australia dropped their certification to work on the engine (as Delta had just about every airworthy example of the type at the time), forcing delta to fly engines to Australia to get overhauled for 3x the labor charge that they paid when there was competition. Aaaand that's why the MD90 was parked for years ahead of plan.

The real world doesn't run off of penalty tables, but sure, this game does, but it is purposeful about not publishing the exact specs (see: optimal pricing).

[MikeS]

Thanks, schro, that was an interesting read and yes there can be many factors affecting pricing on many fronts. I am all for adding complexity to the game. However, I maintain that the game mechanics should be either logical or well explained.

These are the main ones limiting competitiveness and are very limited on logic as well:
- Fleet commonality?
- Frequency (spamming?) limiter - when does it activate penalties?
- Too small penalty. When does it kick in and how strong can it get?
- Pricing effectiveness (increasing/decreasing prices over certain limits is pointless)
A few others that are not well understood:
- How big is the passenger preference hit Soviet/Russian aircraft get?
- The whole HD/normal/premium seating effects
A good example of a mechanic that is subtle and logical:
- Aircraft age penalty on passenger preference.
That's what I could think of at the moment.
Love the game. Could just do with a bit more clarity.
Mike

[knobbygb]

Thanks, schro, that was an interesting read and yes there can be many factors affecting pricing on many fronts. I am all for adding complexity to the game. However, I maintain that the game mechanics should be either logical or well explained.

These are the main ones limiting competitiveness and are very limited on logic as well:
- Fleet commonality?
- Frequency (spamming?) limiter - when does it activate penalties?
- Too small penalty. When does it kick in and how strong can it get?
- Pricing effectiveness (increasing/decreasing prices over certain limits is pointless)
A few others that are not well understood:
- How big is the passenger preference hit Soviet/Russian aircraft get?
- The whole HD/normal/premium seating effects
A good example of a mechanic that is subtle and logical:
- Aircraft age penalty on passenger preference.
That's what I could think of at the moment.
Love the game. Could just do with a bit more clarity.
Mike

While I don't agree with a lot of the artificial, unrealistic limitations such as fleet penalties, I tend to feel that the things you mention should NOT be well explained/listed.  In real life, none of those things are something an airline can just look up, or even get a definitive answer about from a team of experts. They have to just experiment, analise, adjust and repeat.  I (and I'm sure many others) have pretty good figures on some of these obscure mechanics from a LOT of experimentation, but I'm not about to share them with competitors.  Some of this stuff is shared within alliances though.  The game is already a bit 'procedural'.  I think that if every formula for every mechanic were explained, then success would just come down to who could best process those equations and produce the ideal 'model' to follow again and again. While the weird mechanics do NOT really echo real-life, they kind of provide that same level of unknown.  In a weird way I'd like to see the effects of these change, either on a world-by-world basis or over time in the same world.  That would make things more difficult and add some real-world unpredictability.

[JesseCamacho]

Do you folks know if getting a plane from a new fleet type requires more staff then adding a plane that you're already using?

[Zombie Slayer]

Do you folks know if getting a plane from a new fleet type requires more staff then adding a plane that you're already using?

Up to a certain point, yes. IIRC its about 30 frames of the new type before staff per plane stabilizes.