AirwaySim

General forums => General forum => Topic started by: swiftus27 on January 27, 2010, 01:57:03 AM

Title: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 27, 2010, 01:57:03 AM
Okay.  To preface.  I am a tad high tonight.   Lost a close family member and got a tad loopy.

With that said:

 I am playing in the 1950s model.  Many airlines are failing but many are succeeding. Imagine all games start this way.  Up to 300 airlines can join.   As the first few years progress, and as upstart airlines fail, Sami restircts the total number of airlines allowed in a game.  Those who do join late will get a healthy bonus to starting money.   As the game continues to grow, tell the bottom XXXX airlines that they will be forced to close.  THEN, have the final 150 airlines compete in only the largest airports of the world. 

Therefore, many can start.... fewer can make it on to the next step.... few will make it national.... and fewer will make it global.    Fighting over the largest 400 airports would be interesting in the new game model wher ewe can have more than one regional hub.

Maybe it is just the booze and extra curricular tobacco talking, but this sounded really fun to me.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: munipandita on January 27, 2010, 04:27:35 AM
??
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Yb on January 27, 2010, 08:18:04 AM
I guess it is one of the games we will see in the future  :)
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 27, 2010, 11:16:19 AM
We might.... it was just a thought...  Let me try to re explain...

You start just a few years after WW2.  There'd be a lot of bankruptcies in the beginning.  This we are seeing in the 1950s game.  Once they have failed out, the game should be getting more regional with the DC6 coming out.  At that point, then you have fewer airlines fighting for those regional (more than 600nm flights)...  By the time the 1980s rolls around, multiple hubbing would be allowed.  Fewer airlines would survive at this point due to heavy competition. 

This game will only work if Sami restricts the game to size 4-5 airports, though. 
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Yb on January 27, 2010, 03:57:57 PM
We might.... it was just a thought...  Let me try to re explain...

You start just a few years after WW2.  There'd be a lot of bankruptcies in the beginning.  This we are seeing in the 1950s game.  Once they have failed out, the game should be getting more regional with the DC6 coming out.  At that point, then you have fewer airlines fighting for those regional (more than 600nm flights)...  By the time the 1980s rolls around, multiple hubbing would be allowed.  Fewer airlines would survive at this point due to heavy competition. 

This game will only work if Sami restricts the game to size 4-5 airports, though. 

Yeah probably. But not necessarily if we raise the amount of players. I sincerely think it would be much more fun if there were just three games, each for 350 players going for a long time.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 27, 2010, 04:11:57 PM
instead, you are continually starting new games.  As the number of players decreases in one, it allows the server to have space for another.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: knutm1980 on January 27, 2010, 09:47:46 PM
Just closing airlines would be a bit rude wouldn't it? Whats the criteria for getting closed down? Why not let the bigger companies have the chance for aggressive take overs instead?
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 27, 2010, 09:57:21 PM
^^^ a distinct possibility.

In many races, they cut off the bottom # of participants.   

If this game went in ERAs like I am suggesting,

You'd play the first Era in the post WW2 world.  250-300 total airlines.  They play with very short ranged planes and limited demand.
Once Era 1 is over, you move on to the Dawn of the Jet Age...  You get your first hub here.  150-200 airlines
Around 1990, you move to the Fall of The Wall.... The world is your oyster.  You get your second hub here.  Now fuel efficient planes are coming.  Did you hold out until now or did you get a fleet of 733s early on???  100-150 total airlines

1950 -- > 1970 --> 1990 --> 2010
Start --> Era 2 --> Era 3 --> End

With so few airlines and fewer airports, you don't have the mess of the ordering system.  Everyone can get planes.  And not everyone will make money. 
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Sigma on January 28, 2010, 02:35:39 AM
How does one quantify the "bottom" airlines.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: TranceAvia on January 29, 2010, 06:48:00 PM
to be fair, not every airline aims to be a multi national, and some thats their only market. for example, Logan Air (now part of flyBE) only ever wanted to serve local route in scotland where as EK only do med/long haul... but who's to say an airline such as Logan Air is a bottom airline?
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 30, 2010, 06:20:17 PM
guys, it was an idea for this GAME. 

So many of you are droning on how airlines would be eliminated. 

So, if this game was made and you wanted to run a regional airline, DONT JOIN!
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Sigma on January 30, 2010, 07:49:41 PM
guys, it was an idea for this GAME.  

So many of you are droning on how airlines would be eliminated.  

So, if this game was made and you wanted to run a regional airline, DONT JOIN!

That wasn't my point at all.  I'm not talking about the guys who want to run a little airline out of Edinburgh or something.

It's a very valid question -- How would you quantify who's in "bottom"?  You repeatedly say it, but don't clarify what you mean by "Bottom".

I can move the most passengers in a quarter but have a negative value.
I can have a highly positive value but move relatively few passengers.
...and so on and so forth

Sure, the ones' in the Top 10 or even 50 might be pretty clear and would make it regardless of the metric used.  But as you get closer and closer to the cutoff, which factor you use to determine "rank" can make huge differences in who's in there or not.  Should I dump my fares to $5 in the last quarter so I can skyrocket up the pax charts so I'm "Better"?  Should I stop buying planes so that my net worth is higher?
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Yb on January 30, 2010, 09:08:07 PM
How about total revenue sales?
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 30, 2010, 10:59:09 PM
Total cash value of airline (and CEO must take a salary in the game).

Total passengers for last 12 months (I think that this will basically require people to take each other on instead of waiting until all the other slots are filled)...

The sky is the limit here.

Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: 0zlw on January 30, 2010, 11:16:43 PM
This would be an interesting way too play but untill we can play this way we need to get a system sorted to work out which airline was the best.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on January 31, 2010, 07:31:46 PM
fewer airlines, larger airports, many hubs, tons of competition... it wouldn't be too hard to use Airline value.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Tujue on January 31, 2010, 11:11:46 PM
It would be a great challenge to start your airline in 1950 and try to survive until 2010. I liked the Early Days test scenario and like to have a long game like this idea. With fuel prices and costs increasing, the "bottom airlines" will automatically go bankrupt, because they run a fleet of inefficient aircraft.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Sigma on February 01, 2010, 01:28:27 AM
The only thing that makes the Jet Age-era games challenging at all is the amount of time that you've got to amass enough cash to make it through the Oil Crisis.  With a solid 25 years advance notice, it'd be easy as pie, particularly if the profit margins we're seeing in the "Early Days" scenario now are any indication of future versions of it.  Even if it was made random, there's still always a subset of players that can turn a profit pretty much no matter what is thrown at them simply due to having a better understanding of how the game works and how to "exploit" some of the weaknesses therein.  All a game that culls out the bottom does is simply insure that it's simply a game made up almost entirely of said players.

Until the margins in the game get under control all a 150-player 75-year-long game will get you is 150 multi-trillionaires come the end of the game.  

Then there's also the issue of stagnation.  Long games always end up with a majority of players simply 'giving up' on their airlines due to disinterest.  Some or much of this is due to limitations current within the game design, which leads to another problem...

The game really isn't designed for long-term play in 2 significant ways:  

1>  The forementioned profits which are mind-blowingly huge and therefore make economic issues moot because even the largest of recession, even the highest of fuel spikes, is financially absorbable either due to high weekly margins or so much cash in the reserves that economic "blips" don't significantly impact business.  Only when the financial model is fixed will such a scenario really be appealing.  Otherwise it just becomes a battle of the multi-trillionaires in short order.

2>  A "critical mass" is reached where the day-to-day maintenance of your airline is simply too big to bear for all but the most hardcore player who enjoys the most mind-numbingly repetitive tasks.  It's bad enough playing a long "Modern Times" scenario where you have to move 300+ schedules to new planes as your current ones get too old; at least there you can usually replace within the same fleet-group so it's only a couple-clicks.  Make it 75+ years where you not only have to do that multiple times but you have to do it with different plane models (which takes exponentially longer per plane) and that is simply unappealing to 99% of the playerbase.  The game simply isn't designed today to do that easily which makes game-worlds in excess of about 20 years painful and leads to player disinterest quickly.  Make it 75 years and I guarantee you that you won't need a 150-player world, you won't even need a 50-player world, because no where even remotely close to that many will actually want to stick it out that long come their 3rd time around replacing every plane in their fleet and having to reschedule a few thousand routes.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: swiftus27 on February 01, 2010, 10:24:47 PM
The only thing that makes the Jet Age-era games challenging at all is the amount of time that you've got to amass enough cash to make it through the Oil Crisis.  With a solid 25 years advance notice, it'd be easy as pie, particularly if the profit margins we're seeing in the "Early Days" scenario now are any indication of future versions of it.  Even if it was made random, there's still always a subset of players that can turn a profit pretty much no matter what is thrown at them simply due to having a better understanding of how the game works and how to "exploit" some of the weaknesses therein.  All a game that culls out the bottom does is simply insure that it's simply a game made up almost entirely of said players.

Until the margins in the game get under control all a 150-player 75-year-long game will get you is 150 multi-trillionaires come the end of the game.  

Not if you limit the number of airports in the game to many fewer than there are now.  Perhaps just the largest of large? Who knows.  

Then there's also the issue of stagnation.  Long games always end up with a majority of players simply 'giving up' on their airlines due to disinterest.  Some or much of this is due to limitations current within the game design, which leads to another problem...

The game really isn't designed for long-term play in 2 significant ways:  

1>  The forementioned profits which are mind-blowingly huge and therefore make economic issues moot because even the largest of recession, even the highest of fuel spikes, is financially absorbable either due to high weekly margins or so much cash in the reserves that economic "blips" don't significantly impact business.  Only when the financial model is fixed will such a scenario really be appealing.  Otherwise it just becomes a battle of the multi-trillionaires in short order.

Again, something that will change if there are enough early players and there are very few airports.  The immediate competition will help keep the multi trillionaires away.   Also, perhaps real world issues would be incorporated?  Super large airlines using 707s will get killed in the 70s ... OR Better yet.  Have someone write a storyline for the entire game and be allowed to affect change.  It could be fun if there were a "Game Master".  

2>  A "critical mass" is reached where the day-to-day maintenance of your airline is simply too big to bear for all but the most hardcore player who enjoys the most mind-numbingly repetitive tasks.  It's bad enough playing a long "Modern Times" scenario where you have to move 300+ schedules to new planes as your current ones get too old; at least there you can usually replace within the same fleet-group so it's only a couple-clicks.  Make it 75+ years where you not only have to do that multiple times but you have to do it with different plane models (which takes exponentially longer per plane) and that is simply unappealing to 99% of the playerbase.  The game simply isn't designed today to do that easily which makes game-worlds in excess of about 20 years painful and leads to player disinterest quickly.  Make it 75 years and I guarantee you that you won't need a 150-player world, you won't even need a 50-player world, because no where even remotely close to that many will actually want to stick it out that long come their 3rd time around replacing every plane in their fleet and having to reschedule a few thousand routes.

I agree with you here.  Changing the routes around could be painful if you move from 737s to 767s and the jump in turn time becomes huge.... But is this a real world issue as well???
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Yb on February 06, 2010, 04:05:14 PM
Well you hit some points here. The problem of profit margins one and for all. I am kinda obsessed with this topic in the game and I feel like changing it to reflect reality more. But not sure how yet.
Title: Re: A whole new way to play this game
Post by: Yb on February 06, 2010, 04:10:11 PM
Sigma, delete some messages, I want to write you  :)