Since the 'regular' scenarios of AirwaySim are rather full and still running for a considerable period of time we have decided to start a new mini challenge scenario to fill up the gap.
The Euro-America scenario will begin this Sunday (Aug 21st) at approximately 15.00 UTC, and it will feature a shorter game timespan with a bit faster game days than other scenarios have. And like the name suggests it will be limited to European and North American continents.
I'm kind of noob with these limited game worlds. Does this mean that you won't be able to fly anywhere else from Europe/America? For example, Europe to Asia?
Yes, it means only routes within Europe and within NA and connections between the two.
And what about the more important info? Player amount? Does it start in the 21st century or something like 80's or 90's?
PLEASE no 757s! Let's see how this game is played without them.
Also, is there any way we can do this so the clock doesnt start running right when I am going to work on a Monday morning? Why not start on a Friday (clock runs on Sat) so that everyone can be in front of their CPUs early on when it is most important?
Quote from: swiftus27 on August 18, 2011, 01:55:57 PM
PLEASE no 757s! Let's see how this game is played without them.
Also, is there any way we can do this so the clock doesnt start running right when I am going to work on a Monday morning? Why not start on a Friday (clock runs on Sat) so that everyone can be in front of their CPUs early on when it is most important?
a) no 757 would be interesting indeed!!
b) it usually starts Sat or Sun European time (--> Fri/Sat US time ;) )
c) I rather sit infront of my PC than my CPU because my CPU only works, and does not give me the screen and info I want :P (JFYI CPU = Central Processing Unit ;) )
-----------------------
Didn't we have such a scenario in the Alliance Challenge, and didn't it turn out to be a fiasko?! Anyhow... as long as there is no "top-20-airport HQ" -block (as it used to be in Euro Challenges) I am fine :)
Same problems as in Alliance Challenge.
The airports with huge North America - Europe demand skyrock, while others (like Los Angeles or Seattle) fail extremely.
A North America _or_ Europe Challenge would be more fun and makes more sense.
And why disallow 757? Why not disallow 737 or A320? Or Fokker 27? Or why don't disallow every aircraft and implement cabs...?
Quote from: Curse on August 18, 2011, 09:35:34 PM
And why disallow 757? Why not disallow 737 or A320? Or Fokker 27? Or why don't disallow every aircraft and implement cabs...?
Reasons:
1. Because this will be a scenario where this plane will unfairly dominate. There are few other narrow bodies that can do what this plane does and using the 737ers will not be feasible at those ranges due to the decreased revenue from these routes.
2. Let's try something new? Why the same ole stuff?
3. Items have been implemented to prevent the F27 slot grabbing.
4. Cabs are too slow. Plus they smell. Also, they use HD seating which greatly decreases pax comfort.
One way out of the B757 problem is to start the scenario at, say, 1976, and go until, again say, 1990. B757 would only show up towards the end; older widebodies would still be profitable and therefore would be used on the transatlantic routes; it would be a little different that the usual start dates.
Quote from: minerva on August 18, 2011, 11:12:03 PM
One way out of the B757 problem is to start the scenario at, say, 1976, and go until, again say, 1990. B757 would only show up towards the end; older widebodies would still be profitable and therefore would be used on the transatlantic routes; it would be a little different that the usual start dates.
Very true as no one exactly said what period this scenario is in... plus methinks it is also a test for speedy games in the future.
There is many airlines flying 757 over the atlantic today. So that is nothing to wine about!
Quote from: elvis141 on August 19, 2011, 12:27:06 PM
There is many airlines flying 757 over the atlantic today. So that is nothing to wine about!
but nowhere near the number that are in this game.
Quote from: swiftus27 on August 19, 2011, 12:33:57 PM
but nowhere near the number that are in this game.
Doesn't matter this is a simulation game, we should be able to simulate real airlines and their choices. If we choose to run our airline with 757s that is our choice. This is a SIMULATION, not a lets make up a fake world game.
First off, it was just an idea.
Secondly, it is just as fake of a world when you lob off the other 5 continents.
Quote from: swiftus27 on August 19, 2011, 04:00:51 PM
Secondly, it is just as fake of a world when you lob off the other 5 continents.
No it doesn't, it becomes a simulator of airlines basing themselves within those two continents, and only flying between those two.
Reason 3. It would be nice to see other tactics implemented and tried out. At this point, in a modern times scenario, one could simply make this sim all boeing/airbus with the dash8, atr, and saab. The 752 is very imbalanced due to benefits from frequency. Why fly one widebody when 3 narrows will do?
Because of how small the world will be and knowing how ineffective widebodies are, the 744, a340, and 777 will be useless if the 757 is in game. The queues for the 330 and 757 will be full.
You may disagree and that's fine. It was only a suggestion.
A321-100/-200 and 737-900ER > 757-200
And yes, I'm sure big widebodies aren't the most popular aircraft in a Europe and North America only gameworld. But opposite to you I don't think this is a 757 problem - I think it's simply because it's Europe and NA only...
Curse, what are the etops ratings on those two planes? I just don't know
I don't care.
I play AirwaySim and don't work for an aircraft manufacturer or an airline in real life who is interested in such things.
If you want to have something exactly like in real life, I suggest joining it. In 99 of 100 cases it's directly out of your door. It also has huge multiplayer parts and if you become your own African dictator, you can eventually forbid 757 in your country.
I could scramble the fuel figures a bit for various fleets (+/- 20%?). But no unrealism complaints then..
Quote from: Curse on August 19, 2011, 06:11:52 PM
I don't care.
I play AirwaySim and don't work for an aircraft manufacturer or an airline in real life who is interested in such things.
If you want to have something exactly like in real life, I suggest joining it. In 99 of 100 cases it's directly out of your door. It also has huge multiplayer parts and if you become your own African dictator, you can eventually forbid 757 in your country.
Okay, sorry to again cause you to go the adversarial route. It was an honest question.
Quote from: Curse on August 19, 2011, 06:11:52 PM
I don't care.
I play AirwaySim and don't work for an aircraft manufacturer or an airline in real life who is interested in such things.
If you want to have something exactly like in real life, I suggest joining it. In 99 of 100 cases it's directly out of your door. It also has huge multiplayer parts and if you become your own African dictator, you can eventually forbid 757 in your country.
Wonderful, Curse doesn't care, then thats fine then...
Let me answer your question of "who is interested". Lets first look at the name of the software we are using, Airwaysim, I draw your attention to the "sim" part. Sim, short for simulation, definition:
(computer science) the technique of representing the real world by a computer program; "a simulation should imitate the internal processes and not merely the results of the thing being simulated"While the NG737s and 757s may have 180 ETOPS in real life they are not used for crossing the Atlantic in massive numbers. Therefore in a simulation of the airline industry such operations, while fine for some routes should not be commonplace for LHR-JFK and similar routes. B777s, B747s, A330s and A340s should be the dominant force in high demand long haul routes in the same way those fleets shouldn't be seen flying 300NM around Europe.
When I play a simulator I want a true representation of the real world and all processes to be represented and realistic aircraft utilisation should be a part of that. Otherwise I wouldn't pay to play on AWS and would stick to the point and click airline games seen on Facebook.
Quote from: sami on August 19, 2011, 06:24:18 PM
I could scramble the fuel figures a bit for various fleets (+/- 20%?). But no unrealism complaints then..
I play AWS to enjoy as realistic of a simulation as is available on the market. It is a game and individual people are at the controls of each carrier, therefore whatever works for them will happen in the game. This is NOT a re-creation of Lufthansa, United, BA, and Qantas, it is every players individual creation.
With that said, skewing the fuel figures would change the dynamics of the game, but still leave the same problem in the end...the planes that end up having the better fuel numbers will be ordered by every carrier (even if the "best" plane is an IL-96, IL-62, or a TU-204), the order book will fill up quick creating a 3 year wait for the popular fleet types, and someone will complain that they cant get their hands on a "good" IL-62 to fly LHR-JFK with....
I say leave it how it is. Messing with the numbers will shake it up but not solve any of the "problems" the cry threads point out. Think of it this way. If the TU-204 becomes the best plane in the 150-200 seat segment, but production is not increased from the ~10 a month now, how quick will the order book sell out?
Just my 2 cents...
Don
You have a point there Don. Look at RL order books for B737s and A320, they are long to and you just have to wait.
That said I like the idea of running smaller game worlds parallel with the bigger ones. Asia Challenge would be nice for the next. What the heck even the Unless-it's-build-buy-someone-named-Ivan-or-Boris-you-can't-fly-it Challenge would be fun, in that game though I think Sami would need to tweak fuel cost a little because anything over 300 would take out 90% of all airlines.
I think if we leave the product line of 737 classic, md90 open in mt5 can reduce the backlog quite a bit
Quote from: Pai on August 19, 2011, 11:28:21 PM
I think if we leave the product line of 737 classic, md90 open in mt5 can reduce the backlog quite a bit
I don't think there are not any backlogs, since some fixes and changes to production lines were introduced in 1.3.
Quote from: Pilot Oatmeal on August 19, 2011, 04:37:33 PM
No it doesn't, it becomes a simulator of airlines basing themselves within those two continents, and only flying between those two.
How is that any more or less valid than the idea of a "simulator of airlines that operate without a 757"?
Which is no less valid than the idea of a "simulator of airlines that can't do anything but fly out and back without connections" or "simulator of airlines that require hiring 50 ground crew to service a 10-passenger plane".
It's all a question of what sami wants to do. The decision to put in the 757 or not, or make it more fuel efficient or not, or anything else, is no more or less "realistic" than any of the 1000 other gameplay-related or time/effort-related compromises that have been put into place in AWS already. There's arguments to be made to not go with swiftus' suggestions, but don't make it sound like the decision whether or not to include a particular plane somehow comprises the 'integrity' of the 'simulation'.
Quote from: sami on August 19, 2011, 06:24:18 PM
I could scramble the fuel figures a bit for various fleets (+/- 20%?). But no unrealism complaints then..
-1
Since it's called Europe/North America challenge, why not only allow airlines to use aircraft built on their continent. Boeing/MD/etc in North America, Airbus/Fokker/etc in Europe. Aircraft built in areas that don't exist are left out of the game (i.e. Brazil isn't part of the gameworld for Embraer so how can they build aircraft?).