Online Airline Management Simulation
or login using:
My Account
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Feature requests / Re: 20 year BW
« Last post by gazzz0x2z on Today at 07:23:17 AM »
(players that jump directly in the regular GW)

That would be me. But I took a lot of time reading old forum threads to know what to expect, and it taught me 2 lessons : Avoid the big boys, and prepare your fleet replacement as soon as you set up the fleet.
Feature requests / Re: 20 year BW
« Last post by Tha_Ape on Today at 06:51:46 AM »
Could be an idea, yes.
Especially about renewals: this is where most recent players fail. They grow, they grow, sometimes even in an impressive manner, and then they can't handle a renewal and fall. They don't even know how to prepare it.
(and not talking about players that jump directly in the regular GW, no, just plain players making every recommended steps)
Feature requests / Re: 20 year BW
« Last post by yoshininja on Today at 06:31:35 AM »
What I'm trying to say is that you keep 1 BW at a 10-year game length while having another one at 20 years for a slightly longer playthrough while still being shorter than the 40 or 70 year GW's which take half a year to complete.
Feature requests / Re: 20 year BW
« Last post by JumboShrimp on Today at 06:03:13 AM »
That's what the full game worlds are for.

The idea of short Beginner game worlds is that there is always a new one around the corner.  Beginning of the game world is the most exiting part, and with shorter gamer worlds, you have twice as many of them.
Feature requests / 20 year BW
« Last post by yoshininja on Today at 05:50:07 AM »
Perhaps it would be a good idea to increase the game length of one of the BW's to 20 years so people can further experiment with different tactics and fleet compositions. Beyond that, it would give newer players (me) experience on fleet renewals and saving for those D checks which currently in the BW's can be completely disregarded.

What I'm suggesting would be a BW from 2000 to 2020 with a day length of maybe 20 or 25 minutes. It might even be interesting to have this proposed 20 year BW run from 1960-1980 and 1980-2000 so players who don't want to wade into the longer GW's can still get a taste for aviation from those earlier eras.

Just a little food for thought. 
Feature requests / Re: Slot Allocation RFP request
« Last post by Zobelle on Today at 02:48:25 AM »
Solution: make slot costs for based airlines exponentially more expensive as they near saturation points or charge per addtl per flight fees for holding those slots. Exempt guest airlines (1 or two flights to) from this.
Feature requests / Slot Allocation RFP request
« Last post by dmoose42 on Today at 02:11:03 AM »
16 June 1974

Peanut Airlines would like to announce its full cooperation with the German government in GW #4 in investigating price fixing schemes by multiple German airlines at several key German airports that have prevented Peanut Airlines from having as many routes to FRA as it would desire. It is planning on petitioning the government to allow for unlimited slots at all airports so that people can do whatever they want to do whenever they want to! Why should Tulip and Owl get all the slots. We deserve some!

More conceptually, Peanut Airlines is currently struggling to understand the purpose of the slot system in AWS. For better or worse, it as has been effectively been removed as a constraint for the vast majority of airports, and for the few airports that have some element of slot constraints (LHR, FRA, LIN, HND), over the course of many game worlds, there is repeatedly incentive for airlines to stretch the rules to ensure they can access as many slots as possible at these airports. In some cases, clear violations of rules have been identified, and in other cases the rules have been stretched. Inherently, this conflict results from a slot system that is set up to reward skirting the rules as the benefit of being able to establish more routes outweighs the 'small' risk of noncompliance and being 'caught'.

There have a number of feature requests on this topic over the years, and a lot of ideas have been floated to resolve this system, most of which revolve around airport infrastructure ideas. However, in context of the CBD project and other refinements, the slot system has been largely unchanged for years. As a result, Peanut Airlines is formally requesting the Secretary of the United Nations (SAMI!) to issue an RFP for detailed proposals to outline a revised approach to airport infrastructure. In the spirit of continued improvement, Peanut Airlines announces the following outline with suggestions and requests feedback from Sami for more specific guidance to help design these potential features. dmoose42 would note that he wrote significant portions of the manual regarding the updated accounting revisions several years ago and would be interested in taking on this project. See proposed approach below.

Organizing principles:
1. Any changes to game structure should be designed in a transparent way that achieves the objective with minimum complexity.
2. Any changes to the game structure should be designed to enhance the striving aspect of the game, and provide players with interesting choices.
3. Allows for fair access and opportunity that rewards players' efforts, but also provides opportunity for newer players to unseat incumbents.

One Potential Gameplay mechanism to be fleshed out and evaluated. All numbers below are purely illustrative and have not been balanced for gameplay purposes.

One option: Sami has spoken about the revisions to the infrastructure ratings for airports and the ability to make them more dynamic. One option would be to incorporate this infrastructure rating with some of the terminal ideas. Specifically, the number of slots available to airlines not based at an airport would be tied to the infrastructure rating (infrastructure rating of 1 may equate to 5 slots an hour, where a rating of 2 may equate to 10 slots an hour. These slots would be EXCLUSIVELY allocated to airlines not based at an airport. The capacity of the airpot could also increase or decrease over time depending on usage (but any downgrades in infrastructure size would take a long time ~ 10 years?)

For airlines based at this airport, they would be allocated slots that they would be their assigned pool. This would be based on terminal development. The airline may start out with terminal size 1 (5 slots) and can upgrade over time. These upgrades would increasingly cost more money and time for the upgrade to complete (i.e., increase from size 4 to size 5 may be 20 billion and take 4 years to construct). These slots would be allocated solely to the player who built that terminal.

Pros: removes the necessity for airlines to hoard slots for most situations. For highly trafficked airports, natural growth of the airport would provide additional slots to airlines not based in that airport (similar to current system except it would be based on traffic rather than a perpetually increasing number). Airlines are encouraged to expand their operations in their airport to build the most efficient airline possible, but allows for a more thoughtful approach rather than a 'grab as many slots as quickly as possible' approach.

Cons: Some complexity from a game balance perspective (but no different than CBP and other changes over the years) and potential data storage challenges as the slot storage structure will have to change from a single set of values per airport to the available slots would depend on the airline in question. An airline based in that airport that has used all the daytime slots may only have nighttime slots available, but another airline could have an entirely different set of slot options available to them.

Additional complexity could be added (if desired) by adding quality components (quality of terminal, decay over time and necessity of updates, etc.), but Peanut thinks that these are secondary in nature to the base framework.

We request that Sami approve this RFP request, and if approved, all airlines to submit their input. One thing we really want to encourage is transparency in the mechanisms. There have been observations around the 4th fleet penalty and other mechanics that aren't fully documented. However this process goes, we want to make sure that the manual clearly outlines the game mechanics for all players.

Thank you for your consideration.

CEO Peanut Airlines
Announcements - Game World #1 / Low Airfares Aren't a Cohenspiracy!
« Last post by Jetsetter on Yesterday at 11:48:51 PM »
Nov 25, 2004 - Washington, D.C. Moscow  - Trump Puppet Shuttle (TPS), Russia's largest, fanciest, sexiest, longest running airline announced record low airfares in celebration of the reelection of friend of the airline, Vladimir Putin. President Putin, who has been ranked 'Best Looking Russian Oligarch' three years in a row, has ascended to the highest office in Russia via fair and democratic elections.

Lead puppet President Donald Trump described, "This sale is going to be yuge. The biggest sale you've ever seen. This is literally the best trade deal in the history of trade deals. People can get on the airplane, and it will take them wherever they want. Yuma, Arizona? We fly there. Kiribati? Boom, you've arrived. Mars? We have three flights a day, every day, all year long including Christmas, you can't beat this."

Trump Puppet Shuttle Chief Legal Counsel Michael Cohen stated, "Nothing." He stated nothing. He doesn't know a damn thing about Trump Puppet Shuttle, and if he knows what's good for him he will shuttle his mouth before he gets slapped with a treason charge and renditioned in a Siberian prison quarry.

Entering its 498th year of operation, Trump Puppet Shuttle has consistently wowed airborne audiences by Making Russia Great Again, and has been voted the best airline in the world by literally everybody.
Feature requests / Re: New maps
« Last post by Talentz on Yesterday at 11:04:01 PM »
It at least explains why PHL is so hosed as far as CBD goes...

Yeah, now I get it. That and why ONT has better CBD then the other non-LAX airports.

Also, how long do you plan on leaving the test map open Sami?


Feature requests / Re: New maps
« Last post by JumboShrimp on Yesterday at 10:36:12 PM »
BTW, the map works for most of the airports, but some airports end up with a blank map:
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

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.