AirwaySim

The Early Days game ends soon and it will be replaced by another shorter scenario with a special theme.

Let me know your wishes!

Africa mode would be so cool with no long haul.

Quote from: Verkku.KGo on November 10, 2015, 05:43:19 PM
Africa mode would be so cool with no long haul.

We had Africa + South America a year ago, so it's this time some other region.

"Something Else..."

How about a "Regulated North America" under CAA rules?
Start 1946, no large aircraft available at the start, they must be built.


Bidding for routes, route capacity limited to 150%
Whistle-stopping/"Empty Segments" allowed. (say two-three downline cities, then back to hub.)
"Overseas US Hubs" allowed in Manilla, Tokyo, and Berlin
These rules end on Jan 1, 1982, then it' a free-for-all.
Fares may ONLY be set to default until July 1, 1979, then any allowed.

Max Airlines per route, under regulation:
Trunks (LAX-NYC, Ord-SFO): 4 (Others may whistle-stop, but only those authorized can fly non-stop, up to the route capacity limit.)
Large (FLL-NYC, Den-Ord): 3
Medium  (Ind,CVG,PHX, TPA, etc): 2
Small (SBN,ATW,EUG, etc) : 1

Same applies to Int'l routes.

A coding nightmare, I realize, but would add a whole new "Real-world" experience, especially if you could arrange sales of route authorities between airlines.

Something Else--

I like the idea of a regulated north america with an all out free for all in 82!! Also, the current early days was a cool theme but the border-less expansion kinda ruined it for me. In the long term, I would love love love to see some sort of situation involving hubs, where the demand for your main line/international/inter hub routes would creep up as you connect regional spokes. I know, I dream big.

Early days, start with post WWII, but limit number of airlines and flights.  for example if the anticipated passenger capacity between two cities is 500, dont allow a total capacity of 1000 seats, limit the number of seats to a percentage above the estimated.  Too many flights and too many airlines flying the same routes leads to no one making money.
Also, no not allow bases in different continents.

Quote from: sami on November 10, 2015, 05:31:21 PM
The Early Days game ends soon and it will be replaced by another shorter scenario with a special theme.

Let me know your wishes!

How about a world airliner with homebase + 1 hub which cannot be bigger then homebase and 1 base in every continent?

Whole world, Similar to the Early days but from say 2010 to 2030

Whole world GW between 2000 and 2020 but only "Very Big Aircraft" allowed to be used (A330, B747, A380, B777 etc)

im with YODA, but I wold say Large A/C and Very large A/C, so like 100pax plus A/C

I would like to add, if we get to pick bases in any countries like the early days (which was fun) then there should not be alliances...just an opinion

Here's a crazy idea...create a scenario with a specific start date (I personally think January 1979 would be ideal), then players choose an airline that existed on that date...fleet, hubs, routes, the works...and play until January 2000.  It would be a small game, only 40-50 players.  The airline names would be changed in such a way to recognize the actual airline.  Imagine if Braniff, Pan Am, and Northwest became the three biggest US carriers, or if Swissair and Sabena ruled Europe...=).

Quote from: helliviknow on November 10, 2015, 08:04:39 PM
Something Else--

I like the idea of a regulated north America with an all out free for all in 82!!

It could be "interesting".

Routes limited to a capacity of 150% of demand would force a total rethink in how you order and allocate aircraft. Using a 300-seat demand trunk route as an example (Say LAX-Chicago), when you are limited to a TOTAL of 450 seats of capacity, divided by 4 eligible airlines, that means you get just 113 seats, regardless of what anyone else is doing.

Do you throw ALL of those seats on just one aircraft? Or do you run two smaller aircraft for the competitive advantage? (Since all airlines were fare-controlled by the government with ony inflation adjustments allowed, the competitive differences were SEATING, and the level of inflight service, such as meals, drinks, sky hostess skirt lengths, etc)

You are also competing against the Whistle-stoppers who are not bound by the 150% route limit, but rather by the limit set by the routes they are stopping over at.
Say they run LAX-FSD-ORD:
The MAX number of seats they can run into ORD on that route is 150% of the demand on LAX-FSD, or FSD-ORD. They could run a DC-6 or a 727 over the route, but they would be limited to just the 80 FSD-LAX seats, and then 45 seats into ORD. That means they could only offer 45 seats LAX-ORD.

And they can run any number of flights over different cities from LAX-ORD, with the stop-over penalty, of course. Until 1979, you are all charging the exact same fare for it.

If you want to complicate things even further, you can add the CAB's route bidding system in, as well. (Minus the "Juan Trippe Method" of buying Senators, of course.)
In the beginning, you BID for the rights to fly a route. (Say, starting at the slot cost as a minimum bid.)
Any number of airlines with a hub at either end can bid for the non-stop rights, but it will be awarded only to the highest bidders.

When a company goes bankrupt, the route, or their portion of it, becomes available for bidding again, with the award coming 90 days after the bid deadline.
To add some poison, if you are awarded a route, you MUST fly it within 60 days, for at least two years, even at a loss. if you don't fly it at ALL times (Even during D Checks) you get fined by the CAB, heavily.

You will REALLY have to think about about where you fly, how you bid, and what you buy/lease. You won't be able to simply buy up all of the aircraft production, and simply plaster the map with flights.

Quote from: tcrlaf on November 10, 2015, 06:47:17 PM
"Something Else..." How about a "Regulated North America" under CAA rules?

The 'something else' will still be something else that falls under the capabilities of the game in current state,  ... ie. something that can be done with the current customization and settings options.

Quote from: joel1968 on November 11, 2015, 05:27:58 AM
Here's a crazy idea...create a scenario with a specific start date (I personally think January 1979 would be ideal), then players choose an airline that existed on that date...fleet, hubs, routes, the works...and play until January 2000.  It would be a small game, only 40-50 players.  The airline names would be changed in such a way to recognize the actual airline.  Imagine if Braniff, Pan Am, and Northwest became the three biggest US carriers, or if Swissair and Sabena ruled Europe...=).

Swissair and Sabena ruled Europe. At least until October 3. 2001 when they decided not to take off anymore ;D

"It's a small world after all"

Only aircraft up to 75 seats max and production lines stay open longer to accommodate this.

You wanted a challenge?

Quote from: joel1968 on November 11, 2015, 05:27:58 AM
Here's a crazy idea...create a scenario with a specific start date (I personally think January 1979 would be ideal), then players choose an airline that existed on that date...fleet, hubs, routes, the works...and play until January 2000.  It would be a small game, only 40-50 players.  The airline names would be changed in such a way to recognize the actual airline.  Imagine if Braniff, Pan Am, and Northwest became the three biggest US carriers, or if Swissair and Sabena ruled Europe...=).

I love that! I would totally be in.

Tight race between 'Cross the Pond' and 'Regional Challenge' ... Could probably run both of them, with starting intervals of ~3 weeks.

Regional game would most likely have fully free basing, like current Early Days. Atlantic scenario would have normal base rules.

Quote from: tise1983 on November 11, 2015, 02:34:46 AM
im with YODA, but I wold say Large A/C and Very large A/C, so like 100pax plus A/C

Nah, most airlines in every gw operate Large and Very Large AC anyway so that'll be boring.

Quote from: sami on November 11, 2015, 01:40:39 PM
Tight race between 'Cross the Pond' and 'Regional Challenge' ... Could probably run both of them, with starting intervals of ~3 weeks.

Regional game would most likely have fully free basing, like current Early Days. Atlantic scenario would have normal base rules.

Why not have free base rules for both? I like the freedom and planning it requires, plus makes some of the medium/large bases more attractive as the larger bases get more competition.

What about a game where you can only use 1 fleet ie boeing or a really fast game covering alot of game years but in a short real world time?......

1. If these short games for experienced players they should be cheaper because they are SHORT. Same price as a long game doesn't make sense.
    Same applies if they are introduction games (with easier rules) for beginners.

2. The short games should be a chance to work out strategies for the next long game, so start date and aircraft mix as per the next long game start please.

3. Most of these short games have EASY scenarios which are actually far too easy, not really providing any training to the beginner and of no use to the more experienced.

4. The short games are often under subscribed too (making them even easier) so adjust the Pax Nos in relation to the number of active airlines, or aircraft, so the difficulty level stays constant. That way I can work out whether I'm doing the wrong thing, wrong planes, etc or someone is pinching my Passengers.

5. Regional scenarios will suit beginners, and those regular players who always like to play in one continent (like me). But I wouldn't bother with Regional now as it's the long range stuff I'm useless at.

Thanks for a great game by the way. Do take the above as my attempts to help you get better. I'm happy if you ignore all of them.
11Air

Thanks for getting to be involved in the games for the players!

I agree, something very different. Designated areas restricts players, and they tend to come from that area. Some players  leave others at a dis-advantage, not only due to their skills, but playing the same scenarios.

How about we go for a World area, Long Haul Aircraft, current day, or recently last 5 years with onset of new major Aircraft A380, 787, A345 now plying many real times routes (I fly often worldwide on Business)
It would also reflect the modern Market, with Arab Airline rise, EU carriers in costs problems, and the opportunity to travel worldwide for the least ever.

Can we also incorporate Premium Economy please as an option, it has been around with some carriers for 10 years now, and becoming in the real world on?
It would also mean more people able to play their game, in more places, and spread through The World rather into a densse and limiting area.

So, Worldwide, large jets only, current real times-ish dates, cargo, and Premium Economy options.

this would be different, new, ground breaking with our new real time aircraft, and allow an equal footing for many to play.
Currently, the same players, great experts dominate the games played.
This would involve players from ALL world places.
Sami, the devlopment of the game is fantastic much effort over many years.
But to support you, 2/3rds leave by the end of each game, which strikes as less revenue for you.
Some of us have little time to play for months at a time, i myself flying around the world on business in real time, and cannot commit to long term games as easily.

So, worldwide, would allow you to generate more income, allow more players, more areas, different densitys (eg Australasia will always generate a maximum level compared to N America. You would have more players not pushed out, mor included, .
Thanks for inviting the input.

If not Asia and Australasia in some form?

Big jets only?  People will loose interest pretty soon.

you want unusual and a challenge how about making the political situation in an area play a large part. try, the far east 1945 to 1995, this gives you  the collapse of the Japanese empire, the masses of troop movements during the U.S occupation and the Korean war.flight/air space restrictions for the Vietnam war, Cambodia, communist China. The lack of aircraft and types  from 1945 to 1955, emerging markets(especially short haul) like the Phillipeans, the pacific islands and Malaysia plus the break up of the British Empire changing demand and the closing some airports and the opening of many others through those years.

No matter what kind of scenario, in my dreams there will be a scenario long 20 max 25 years not to handle 2.000 airplanes.
Let's say longer double the beginner scenario.

If there will be two starting, maybe we could have at least one not too much crowded! :-)

Quote from: Mr Yoda on November 10, 2015, 11:37:16 PM
Whole world GW between 2000 and 2020 but only "Very Big Aircraft" allowed to be used (A330, B747, A380, B777 etc)

I vote for this one too

Fully free basing, high pax demand, 1960-1990.

if free basing, then no alliances...jmo
but i like the bases anywhere

Soviet metal only  8),  let the Il-86 wars begin!!

I am a big fan of airwaysim. So I would like to add some points that I think management may consider for the following game.

1. First of all, Please increase the passenger demand for Asian countries such as India, Indonesia etc. Countries such as India has a     numerous number of both International and domestic airports. India is very much short of passenger demands. In real these airports plays a major role in international airport system.

2. Some airports are oversupplied with demands such as Johannesburg, Beunos Aires etc. In the current world, the demand for these airports are at an average pace. Please stick to that.

3. Please do increase the demand for shorthaul destinations rather than longhaul.

Beyond these, airwaysim is the leader in online airline management game, that's why many like me are addicted to these :)

I would like to add one more point

Please ensure the availability of connection flights. For example, Beijing to Sao Paulo is fairly a very long destinations from each other. So connecting these with another airport with good pax demand  for both the mentioned airport allows the carrier to fly larger aircraft with more passengers.
So please add the option of Connecting flights

Quote from: msv on November 14, 2015, 06:53:10 AM
I would like to add one more point

Please ensure the availability of connection flights. For example, Beijing to Sao Paulo is fairly a very long destinations from each other. So connecting these with another airport with good pax demand  for both the mentioned airport allows the carrier to fly larger aircraft with more passengers.
So please add the option of Connecting flights

You a mean a hub and spoke system instead of a point to point system? I can imagine that this is extremely difficult to code, as the whole system is very dynamic and depends on so many factors.

Hi,
I would like to be able to play an future game, 2015-2030, everything allowed, that would be cool because I have been  waiting 10 weeks and will have to wait another 10 weeks for the 1995-2030 game to be over, which I am hoping to join the next one.
Thanks for the game.

Thanks for voting everybody. The next minigames will be #1) Regional Challenge and #2) Cross the Pond.

https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,61722.0.html

Hi Sami

:) when does Early days come to an end?

You can see that from the game area front page  .. still 13 days and a bit more to go.

Since there willl be limitations on A/C types, will the types that are available have increased production rates?

Since this is a game...

Monopoly Commission Game.  No airline may provide more than 50% of route demand, hold more than 30% od airport slots.
Let the little guys compete with the Dominant players (bless them with hot pokers).

I like the 1945 start date idae, Id like to see this date in the far east. Japan had a high traffic rate due to the USA occupation plus repatriation from WW2 , the British empire was imploding causing rapid changes in traffic around India. Then there are the restrictions that would come into play with the French  Indo china war and later the Vietnam war. with its massive increase in traffic during the Vietnam war. loads of fluctuation in demands during the 1945- 1975 time frame demanding constant route and passenger changes rather than the usual slow climb in demands and routes also  an interesting time for new aircraft coming into play.

So ... Now that the Regional Challenge has been running for about a month .. Any feedback, or suggestions for future similar games?

My only feedback is it would be nice if these quick games would be 20 minute days and 17-20 years long.  10 years just is not long enough.

Other then that they are a nice break form the larger longer game worlds.

Super fast game.

5/min/day


Full world, Full length. Normal rules.

Quote from: ezzeqiel on January 03, 2016, 01:04:07 AM
Super fast game.

5/min/day


Full world, Full length. Normal rules.

Hear Hear

Quote from: ezzeqiel on January 03, 2016, 01:04:07 AM
Super fast game.

5/min/day


Full world, Full length. Normal rules.

Yep agree! Find long days a bit dull

5 minutes is pretty fast...but it would be interesting...for those with jobs it may be a turnoff...i have played a 10 minute and a 15 minute game and there is a big difference...10 minute game goes by so fast...15 minute game is pretty fast as well but manageable...

When's the new GW 3 coming up? Current GW 3 is expected to be finished by tomorrow.

GW 3 is now officially over so when is the new one going to open up?

GW3 was previously announced to start in March.

An Alliance free game, as in alliances not allowed, so the playing field is level when it comes to aircraft acquisition. I'd really like to see a long game world like this. I think we may see different people on the leader board as opposed to the usual suspects who rely on getting aircraft 2-3 times faster than non-alliance players.

I think this will encourage a different strategy not seen in this game for a long time.

Quote from: jotagrande on February 11, 2016, 11:04:52 PM
An Alliance free game, as in alliances not allowed,
.

n.

+1

I'd also like to see a world for experienced players only, maybe use the achievements for a screen to allow certain players who have accomplishments in previous games.. Every time a new world starts new players get mad because its harder then beginners and older players get mad because planes and slots get taken by inexperienced players

Quote from: bdnascar3 on February 12, 2016, 02:14:04 AM
n.

+1

I'd also like to see a world for experienced players only, maybe use the achievements for a screen to allow certain players who have accomplishments in previous games.. Every time a new world starts new players get mad because its harder then beginners and older players get mad because planes and slots get taken by inexperienced players

I'm very happy with the rookies. They keep the production lines open, prevent the best players to grow too fast, and when they BK, feed the used parket.

Will there be a new mini-game when Cross the Pond is finished?

Quote from: gazzz0x2z on February 12, 2016, 06:49:18 AM
I'm very happy with the rookies.

Unfortunately though, the rookies then get discouraged and leave the game for good. And like it or not we need more players playing, so maybe Sami will run more full worlds at one time.

Quote from: bdnascar3 on February 18, 2016, 11:42:30 PM
Unfortunately though, the rookies then get discouraged and leave the game for good. And like it or not we need more players playing, so maybe Sami will run more full worlds at one time.

I get your point, but since I'm mentoring, I notice that most rookies won't make it through anyways. Some are eager to learn, some did get most of things but just miss one or two details(I did make a mentoring where I just had to advice "raise your prices", and the guy was happily back to positive margins. All the rest was already good). But a good half do not listen, do not learn, and leaves frustrated because a "bad" player landed a few flights on their monopolies. Instead of correcting their awful schedule. Those players are never going to be regular players. This game is not for them.

Global, 1 Jan 1946 to 31 Dec 1969, 15 minute days, 3 months give or take of playing time.

Quote from: LotusAirways on February 19, 2016, 07:42:20 PM
Global, 1 Jan 1946 to 31 Dec 1969, 15 minute days, 3 months give or take of playing time.

Fly me to the moon? Ends the 20th July 1969?