Hi everybody! I'm an italian guy with a crush on this game. Anyway, I've recently talked to my Industrial Organization professor at the university and he joined this game in order to make a kind of "reserch" about the behaviour of player (kind of Nash Games).
So I suggested to Sami to open a new world as soon as the other worlds will end (matter of weeks) but with this features my professor suggested:
-no more than 2 airlines in a airport (in the real world there are seldom more than two airlines "nestled" in the same airport)
-all the world available to play (not as "Rise of modern airlines")
-no double legs routes (except for refuelling)
-limited numbers of players (300 should be enough)
What do you think about it? Anyone interested about this game?
For the timeline of the game, the usual 1992 to 2010/2011 would be nice (at least in my opinion)...
I'm waiting for your opinions/suggestions
That sounds like perfection! I'd be the first one to sign up!
Is sami on board? Would there be a guarantee of only two airlines per airport?
-Matt
Sounds good to me!....I'd only make the game a little longer like add another 5 years. I like the long games
I asked Sami about this "wish game" and he said that it must be discussed in the forum, then he will check how many people would like to play this game and see what happens.
Another hints I got this afternoon:
-implement UE "Open skies" regulation after 2008: so an italian airline could operate a flight from UK to USA (a classic 2 leg route, but it would be something real after 2008!)
For the "two airlines" limit... I think it has to be discussed with Sami but he wrote me we have first to get enough people to play this game. Then we can fix the limit and start playing. Moreover, I think that this game could be even more realistic thanks to the improvments added to the game engine in the last few months.
So, if you would like to play this game, please spread the word between your friends and see if we can get the numbers that Sami asked for! :)
What I meant that there are no exact plans for the next game world yet so please throw in ideas and requests...
I like the idea - it's a regular sized game world and I'm glad you brought up the "no double leg routes" idea - they annoy the bunkers out of me!
I'm in but perhaps a little less that 300 people?
Good idea, edobarto. It would be very nice for the new world like that.
I'm looking for a new world to play because what we have now are all more than 50% process.
I'm in but 300 people with a 2 airline per aiport limit... how about 200?
Well... All the figures I gave you in my previous posts came from a kind of fast and "average" data mining... Two airlines are the average numbers of airlines you can find on big airports and it doesn't necessarely mean they're both big carriers as British Airways and Lufthansa based in the same airport...
So the 2 airlines/apo limit is just a suggestions about real world. Narita hosts both JAL and ANA, Heathrow is base for British Airways and Virgin Atlantic. But Chicago is the hub for United Airlines and not any other big carrier. 400 players would be too many, but 200 would be not enough, in my opinion... If you look on the net you can find a number of international airlines which is around 350... So, I think that 350 could be a nice population for the game. And remember: we're going to play on 6 continents! :)
The two legs route is not, in my opinion, impossibile: just make possible to load pax in realistic places. I mean: if I'm flying from Las Vegas to Dubai and I'm a USA based carrier, I can load pax only in NY, not in any other country. If I want to stop over in another location, I could only reful my a/c.
Timeline: I've read all of your suggestions: what about a 25 years span? Like from 1992 to 2017? I think that going too far with the end of the game would be a mess talking about prediction of fuel prices and pax demand! :)
How about starting the game in the early eighties with the introduction of the 767/757 etc...
Could be an idea... But do you agree with my idea of limiting the number of players to 1 for airport, max 300 players and so on?
If there are no multilegged routes then OK. But this should be introduced also with the new hub systems...
I've to ask to Sami but I do not think it's a big problem... Maybe he has just to erase the related spot... :) But I've notrhing against a multi legged route if the stop over is for refuel... What do you think???
Quote from: edobarto on October 28, 2009, 05:28:18 PM
Hi everybody! I'm an italian guy with a crush on this game. Anyway, I've recently talked to my Industrial Organization professor at the university and he joined this game in order to make a kind of "reserch" about the behaviour of player (kind of Nash Games).
So I suggested to Sami to open a new world as soon as the other worlds will end (matter of weeks) but with this features my professor suggested:
-no more than 2 airlines in a airport (in the real world there are seldom more than two airlines "nestled" in the same airport)
-all the world available to play (not as "Rise of modern airlines")
-no double legs routes (except for refuelling)
-limited numbers of players (300 should be enough)
What do you think about it? Anyone interested about this game?
For the timeline of the game, the usual 1992 to 2010/2011 would be nice (at least in my opinion)...
I'm waiting for your opinions/suggestions
I greatly object to no double leg routes. Then all you have is a hub with a bunch of spokes. It is boring
I know it's boring but it's reality... As I wrote in my previous post, I'm used to compete with other airlines from the same hub but in reality the situation is one or two major carrier from every hub: it's a matter of scale economies! :)
Except for very large hubs (say LHR), in other hubs you usually have 1 major carrier with maybe another carrier with regional routes. You have two big carriers only in airport as LHR, right?
Actually in reality, Airlines do have separate Hubs although in reality they operate aircraft FROM the separate hubs rather than from main hub to second hub and beyond...
AMS has 4 airlines: KLM, transavia.com, Martinair and Arkefly. But you're right, in general there are two or maybe three airlines at one airport.
There is no intention in limiting the number of airlines at airports. As that is not done in reality either - in the countries with free market economy. It's ultimately the choice of the airline owner where to set up his firm. Airports can set restrictions based on number of available slots (or apron / hangar capacity) but I'm sure no airport would deny a new entrant "because we already have three others here".
(And LHR has 3 main carriers too by the way. And Gatwick is a main hub for 8 airlines according to Wiki...)
For the number of airlines in the world. It is closer to 1000-3000 than 200-400. It depends on how they are counted, but there are around 6000 IATA airline designators at least (though this includes also some that are clearly not airlines). So the player numbers in AWS worlds are low.
Sami,
Perhaps a dimension which may make the game interesting is for a player to declare themselves as either a domestic operator or an international operator (not both) at the beginning of the game. For many countries , domestic is not viable, but there are many that would entirely support a domestic market. This would prevent the big boys from overtaking the market inside a country but still provide access to the country via international connections. This may be very good for alliance purposes, where an international company partners with domestic airlines.
Could that fly ?
Best Regards
Richard
I would like these to be included in the game module (the rest is fine for me) :
200 players,
1 airline per airport,
1995 - 2020
Quote from: ekaneti on October 29, 2009, 08:57:32 PM
I greatly object to no double leg routes. Then all you have is a hub with a bunch of spokes. It is boring
What I object to is foreign airlines competing from my hub. It's fine if I'm flying a route to Singapore and I'm competing with a Singaporean airline. The issue is when I'm, say, competing against that Singaporean airline on a route from London to Munich. I think that carriers should have more pull in their own country and continent. So when I want to fly from London to Munich an Asian airline isn't going to have as much company image as my European airline.
I think that perhaps there should be 4 tiers of company image where you can get an extra benefit on flying domestic routes, some benefit from flying routes on your continent, a standard benefit from flying from your continent to another, and a slight penalty for flying a route where the origin and destination aren't even on your continent. For example, why would a Singaporean airline be able to compete with me as an equal on a London to Washington route?
Double leg routes within a country or continent do make sense, though.
-Matt
a thought a game 10-20 mins game day
around mid to early 80's to around 2015 or so, working theoreticall not much more expensive and longer than the ither long games.
250 players
all airports
plus we get the older a300's (?) abd 757'es and 767's and some differentb747's, mosrb game worlds havent used 747'300's new
i think this would be a good compromise.
change
20 mins per game day
1980 -2020 =40 years
should equate to 28 or 29 game credits to play 202/ 7/9 days play
or 33 or 34 for credits for 197575 - 2020 or same 20 mins-228 1/8 days play
that would provide a challenge at the start eg interest rates etc plus plenty of fleet renewwal going on throughout.
my preference jusy to let ya know is 75-2020 game 20 mins is about optimun as kit doesnt drastically shorten game time like 10 mins.
please sami are my credit calculation right.
I would like a harder game limited to Europe only, but with a high number of allowed airlines (maybe 400?) to create some really
heavy competition and try to get people to try something else than a major airline based in the country capital.
that would be a good one to replace n.america challenge, but still most of us want the full world.
Limited to 200 players and one-leg routes only sounds nice. Maybe we should try it out, play it for a few weeks and with the new payment system if you don't like the gameplay you can just leave without "wasting" the money you spent to join the game.
In real life competition on airports as LHR is limited: as you surely know, Sami, not all the airlines are allowed to land in LHR (only two of the airlines flying into LHR from North America can land in LHR, I do not know why) and however they're not allowed to increase their slots as for Emirates: that's why EK started using the A380 on that route even if it already has double daily flights into LHR.
My point is: we're talking about international carrier and it would not be fair to categorize airlines here as domestic/international because countries like Switzerland do not have a big enough domestic market to justify the category of "domestic airlines".
I'm not saying we must forbid to establish more than one or two airlines in an airport but we can suggest to do so in the headed of the game as you did in "Rise of the modern airlines": I'm against regulations because, as you said, we live in a free market environment! :) What I'm saying is that it would be more fun to limit the number of player AND suggest them to base their fleet in airport so that there're no more than two airlines! :)
Quote from: edobarto on November 02, 2009, 10:32:29 AM
In real life competition on airports as LHR is limited: as you surely know, Sami, not all the airlines are allowed to land in LHR (only two of the airlines flying into LHR from North America can land in LHR, I do not know why)
Not true anymore.
Quote from: Jimmy Ringsell on October 31, 2009, 02:22:02 PM
I would like a harder game limited to Europe only, but with a high number of allowed airlines (maybe 400?) to create some really
heavy competition and try to get people to try something else than a major airline based in the country capital.
Well we did that with North American challenge and 2/3 of the players dropped out after a few weeks.
I repeat: I do not want to put limit, but make a kind of "moral suasion" on the players. It's a kind of gentlemen agreement! ANd I think that the whole world is the only possibility: if we start to exclude those profitable routes as the Kangaroo Route and the Southern Cross Route we're f***ed up (sorry for the words!)...
also if we start mid 75 or 80 lile i've sugested we need fuel stop for lots of flights anyway. btw if you read up there i've just realised you need to add the 5 joining credits to each suggestion and 24 long go to length.
"with 3 legs we could have a rule of where the end destination of a long haul routes needs to have a stop off at a middle airport either to refuel or to refuel and pick up passengers."
on the aiport front look theres plenty of airports out there which many haven't thought as for bases, theres plenty out there with good international traffic which puts many off some airports. in fact theres more than enough for 150, and I think 2 at airports like heathrow, frankfurt, o'hare would be good. not so smaller airports like abu dhabi.