Changes to rules, slot transfers (to discuss)

[Sami]

There have been now two cases were two alliance members have coordinated a slot transfer between each others in a highly slot restricted airport (read: LHR). In practise so that the member #1 has chosen to withdraw from the game or that airport and member #2 has been given early info this. When the player #1's withdrawal happened and slots were made available the member #2 was online to immediately get all those slots.

In the first case it was a matter of over 220 slots and in second of about 55. Case 1 involved penalties, case 2 not since it was rather much smaller in scale; but due to it I've started this thread to discuss on how it will be dealt with in the future.

To begin with, coordinated slot transfers between members (alliance or not) isn't something that I would like to see, since it's not "fair play". At least in such magnitude that nobody else has a chance to get those.

In longer term the slot issues will be alleviated by changes in the demand and airport systems making the world more dynamic and reducing the need for everyone to crowd the same airport. But there still too will be a couple of slot limited airports, and all those things mentioned are still far away anyway ..

I wouldn't see it necessary to write this into the rules since it's hard to monitor, but instead a slot quota system (which I have already mentioned earlier) would be perhaps the way to go. In other words a simple system that a) is in force only at the most slot limited airports, and b) allows each airline to get only X amount of slots per game week. (X being for example 14 slots per game week on an airport where less than 10% of all slots are available?)

This thread is not meant to discuss of the technical details (use this thread instead: https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,49624.0.html) but instead to talk about the possible needed changes to the rules and / or game mechanisms.


And before anything final is settled, I'd suggest not to do any such slot zigzag-transfers ...


(and to add, I'm not very pleased that again I'll have to focus on such unnecessary things and take the time away from actual development of real new stuff... But it seems to be a norm rather than exception)


(ps. if there's some other PM I've forgotten to reply now, please resend it.. Has been rather busy few weeks)

[Zombie Slayer]

Wow....

First off, the first "issue" did NOT involve two members of the same alliance but you chose to drag my name through the mud like a damn criminal, yet with Iksu and KidCo, both ACTIVE in World Link, you let them get away with it scott free. This is absolutely infuriating to me. Fair is fair, I was punished and, presumably, Dan would have been punished if he was still in the game. There is no excuse what so ever to not punish both Iksu and KidCo after you said ANY SIMILAR ACTION would be dealt with harshly....

[schro]

I'm not sure I have a well formed opinion as far as the correct way to proceed on this, but my initial gut feel is that the slot quota system is not a great way to go for the restricted airports. Of course, I'm only a week into playing at my first severe slot restricted airport, so my perspectives aren't as well developed as they will be in a few more months.

At the initial start of GW4, it was quite frustrating as an incumbent airline to acquire slots, as everyone and their mother wanted their first route to be to LHR (for obvious reasons). Up until the last couple slot drops, I did not 1. Have the funding to buy many more slots and 2. Had FAR less slots than several non-incumbent airlines (I'm looking at you, dudes in JFK). Given the nature of LHR, slots will always be in the 90% or more used range even if there's a bunch of lame duck incumbent airlines that aren't working on world domination.

If the restriction was put into place that limited the number of slots acquired per game week (especially as low as 14), it would be virtually impossible for an incumbent airline to set up 7 day schedules on a predictable basis. Given that a 7 day rotation will typically have 5-7 flights per week times 7 frames, the total need for a single slot drop and to schedule 1 rotation would be 35-49 slots (and in LHR's case, that's 1/3 to 1/2 of the slots on a 1x weekly drop). I would be quite frustrated as a player watching all of the other airlines across the game world drop in and take slots for a 7 day rotation that I can only finish half of per drop (to the point I would likely lose interest in bothering).

I need to think on this a bit more to see if there's a good interim solution - I don't think the quota system is fair towards incumbants, but the current system isn't super fair to outsiders (though, informal alliance communication can often alert others toslot availability). I'd almost think another significant price increase to major slot holders during low availability times would be the better option. Thus far in the game world, I have not been able to afford to take all of a slot drop...

[Sami]

First off, the first "issue" did NOT involve two members of the same alliance but you chose to drag my name through the mud like a damn criminal
..
after you said ANY SIMILAR ACTION would be dealt with harshly....

So first reply and the whole point of my post is ignored. Sure, great.

If you care to re-read the whole thread of your earlier issue you can see that at no point I have dragged you anywhere, actually even did not name you in any of my messages (you made a post there yourself before I had a chance actually  ... but should have locked the thread earlier there but was not online in the middle of the night..). And the only thing I posted in public about possible similar occurences was that "mass coordinated effort of transferring all slots in one go is not something that will be tolerated", and in this new case (who's parties YOU chose to name in public, not me ..) I didn't consider it to be large enough to justify losses of the slots (a very close call though, but like already mentioned based on this second case I'd like to get the final solution to this now). So to sum it up one word: Enough already...


(I would be tempted to lock this thread already and simply choose a way I'd think is the best, but let's try to civil for a moment still and see if anyone actually has anything proper to comment.)

If the restriction was put into place that limited the number of slots acquired per game week (especially as low as 14), it would be virtually impossible for an incumbent airline to set up 7 day schedules on a predictable basis. Given that a 7 day rotation will typically have 5-7 flights per week times 7 frames, the total need for a single slot drop and to schedule 1 rotation would be 35-49 slots (and in LHR's case, that's 1/3 to 1/2 of the slots on a 1x weekly drop). I would be quite frustrated as a player watching all of the other airlines across the game world drop in and take slots for a 7 day rotation that I can only finish half of per drop (to the point I would likely lose interest in bothering).

I would suspect that for the starts of the game world such quota would not apply? Or?

And you counted 49 slots, which in my mind is quote high. Let' say shorthaul plane in Europe can fly 3-4 trips per day, 7 days a week => 28 slots. If capacity is increased 1 slot per hour and airport is open 05-23, then we'd have 126 new slots. If you were to get 49 slots of those, that would mean 39% of the total which is very high for a single airline in my mind. As the basic idea here would be to simply limit on how much you can get with a "single click" so that others have a chance too! And if they don't take their chance, then in due time you can get another set .. etc.

[ezzeqiel]

I personally thing that slot constraints is the N° 1 thing that makes me abandon my airlines over and over again, and just get bored of the game...


Last game I played; this was a topic of discussion in the alliance I was into:




I mean, come on. You either have to be actually employing people to press F5 every 5 seconds or there must be some type of alliance TOO tight cooperation. It's impossible to achieve that by one person only


And It always come down to E***E members.


In that game I remember one of them (e***e) was actually sanctioned by you sami for slot maneuvers in Beijing, where one of our alliance members had to compete against that...



I always wanted the long term solution (city based demand, free market slot system, etc), but in the meantime I'd agree in a quota system.



EDIT:

If you care to re-read the whole thread of your earlier issue you can see that at no point I have dragged you anywhere

Come on sami... you don't have to drag anyone here to realize who are you talking about...

Every average AWS player knows what e***e does with slots...


It's happening again in LHR... and will happen again in the future unless something is done...

[Sami]

I'm not meaning a total cap on slots per airline per airport at this time, but simply talking on how many you can get them in a certain period for a certain airport.

If LHR would have 100 free slots right now, you would be able to get let's say max 14 of them in this game week. And if there are still some available next week, you could get another set of 14 (numbers just out of my head). In other words it would mean that for the set of new slots available other players would have a chance to get them also.

Okay, but do we then see that a member closes his base at LHR and makes 80 slots available, and then 7 of his alliance members pick up the slots and release them back to single member over a period of several game months?  ..that would be a way around it, but would be rather slow and require many users online at the same time. But I wouldn't be surpirsed to see such scheme at some point.


And ezzeqiel, would rather prefer that you edit out the alliance rants from the last part of your message. That's not relevant.


(and, have to remind that all this is related to short-term changes of the system, and in longer term I visioned things in my initial post already)

[Infinity]

In the first case it was a matter of over 220 slots and in second of about 55. Case 1 involved penalties, case 2 not since it was rather much smaller in scale; but due to it I've started this thread to discuss on how it will be dealt with in the future.

Case 2 also took place in JFK, which at that point was just as restricted as LHR. So make that 110. Not so much smaller anymore.

What makes it worse is that KidCo took the slots from that base and used them to attack me in another. I absolutely refuse to accept that such blatant rule breaking is accepted due to its allegedly smaller scale. No way.

All that happens is that I am told that work on a 'final solution' (nice terminology btw) is underway.

I find selective rule enforcement of that kind quite disturbing to say the least.

[Kontio]

Could you just remove Heathrow from the game? Everyone would be happier and no more problems!

[[SC] - King Kong]

Heathrow has little slots. Deal with it. Make sure you check regularly and be early to fly there. If you're late you missed the boat. Luckily there are about 50.000 other airports to fly to so please stop whining.

Next to that. Communication about slots is quite a normal practice for every airline. If a slot drop appears in a busy airport, do you think my alliance members stay quiet to each other? That would be very naive.

Bye

[Pukeko]

Heathrow has little slots. Deal with it. Make sure you check regularly and be early to fly there. If you're late you missed the boat. Luckily there are about 50.000 other airports to fly to so please stop whining.

Next to that. Communication about slots is quite a normal practice for every airline. If a slot drop appears in a busy airport, do you think my alliance members stay quiet to each other? That would be very naive.

Bye

I kind of agree. But I do also see merit in restricting the number of slots per airline per week (or similar) too.

[ezzeqiel]

Heathrow has little slots. Deal with it. Make sure you check regularly and be early to fly there. If you're late you missed the boat. Luckily there are about 50.000 other airports to fly to so please stop whining.

Next to that. Communication about slots is quite a normal practice for every airline. If a slot drop appears in a busy airport, do you think my alliance members stay quiet to each other? That would be very naive.

First of all, nobody is whining... Sami brought this up... And I never saw SC do what elite does with slots... One thing is friendly communication, another very different one is slot manipulation...

[Infinity]

what elite does with slots...

Did. Not does. We did do this. We were dragged through the town and forced to release them. We are just demanding a case of the same by other players to be punished in the same way. No more, no less.

[Sami]

First of all, nobody is whining...

Once more, don't go into that alliance blaming and war path. This thread is made to talk about the improvements and changes since I wanted to hear the general opinion, but sadly it seems to be impossible to stay on topic?

Now that this is repeated once more - any message not in topic will be deleted.

[[SC] - King Kong]

I want to make a remark on my post.
I'm not initiating a discussion on any alliances' integrity on slot control.

I'm pointing out that the power of alliances lie in a shared communication possibility. Of course we tell each other when slots appear, thats one of the advantages of a close cooperation and group of friends.

I do not see any benefits of limiting the amount of slots an airline can aquire. Not to the airlines at least. If one airline is larger it will be able to aquire more slots. It doesnt help to increase prices on slots, it doesnt help to reduce the amount to be bought. It is just part of a competitive market, just as the UM and ordering new planes are a competitive thing.

I'm surprised every time that people are affraid of competition. Honestly said, I love it! A strong competitor is what brings a game element in my game and makes me wanna play AWS all day (if I had ever time for that). A sandbox simulation, sorry, very boring.

Bye

[schro]

I would suspect that for the starts of the game world such quota would not apply? Or?

And you counted 49 slots, which in my mind is quote high. Let' say shorthaul plane in Europe can fly 3-4 trips per day, 7 days a week => 28 slots. If capacity is increased 1 slot per hour and airport is open 05-23, then we'd have 126 new slots. If you were to get 49 slots of those, that would mean 39% of the total which is very high for a single airline in my mind. As the basic idea here would be to simply limit on how much you can get with a "single click" so that others have a chance too! And if they don't take their chance, then in due time you can get another set .. etc.

If the slot quota does not apply in a game world until after the initial rapid slot growth is complete (and it reverts to the ~annualish drop for the rest of the game world), I think that would make the slot quota system a lot more acceptable.

I disagree that 39% would be high for a single airline on a 1x drop. Let's say there's 2 strong ones in said airport that each grab the 39% initially, that still leaves 22% for unbased airlines for an entire game week.

The number of slots that I'm proposing is related to a seven day schedule being placed on seven planes. If you look at it from a short haul perspective, if you schedule 3 routes per day per plane, 49 slots would let a player schedule 2.333 planes per quota. For a slot restricted airport (of course, I'm thinknig LHR), scheduling 2-7 planes per slot drop can be a rather miserable experience...

The issue with the quota based system overall, is that it essentially removes the reward for having time, skill and planning that is needed for a congested airport. It is not a walk in the park to be prepared for new slots to come available, and with the quota system, it takes such time, skill and planning elements out of play and essentially hands those slots to others who may not have played. You know, from each according to his means and to each according to his means ;-).

[tcrlaf]

I kind of agree. But I do also see merit in restricting the number of slots per airline per week (or similar) too.

SIMPLE FIX, just like the real world.

When a "large" (I'll let Sami determine what "large" means) number of slots drop open at an airport with over 90% slot usage, then a Closed-bid AUCTION takes place for available slots, with all players notified by in-game email.

Allow 7-14 game days for bidding. You bid more than someone else for a slot, you get it. If you cannot fill that slot in 30 days after the end of the auction, you lose it, and it returns to the open pool. If you miss out on the auction, it sucks to be you. If you cannot afford to bid on the non-restricted slots, well it sucks to be you. If the slots you win are scattered all over, it sucks to be you.

Reserve a certain number of those slots (say 20%) for airlines below the 50% Value-per-capita line to bid on. Any slots not sold to this group return to the open pool. (Represents the "New Entrants" set-aside). I'm no programmer, but that doesn't sound that hard to code. (I know, easier said than done. Sorry Sami)

Something like the system the US uses for it's slot-controlled airports, without having to click the "Buy A Senator" button. (The Juan Trippe Method)

[LemonButt]

Attached is the LHR slot distribution in GW2/DOTM6.

You can add Case #3 to the list.  I saw slots go up 3/hr and I grabbed a bunch of slots in a mad panic because that is effectively the only way to ensure you will get slots at LHR.  There is no meticulous route planning and assuming slots will be available--you have to click as fast as you can to pick up the slots, which is a huge part of the problem.  I have 4 bases in France with substantial demand (300+/day from each base) and the only slots I had were from the first game year (~20 game years ago!) and have been trying to fly into LHR from all my bases for over a decade.  I grabbed a ton of slots and went from 14 slots to 63 slots.  I ended up transferring an additional 21 slots to an alliance mate (me = French Toast, him = Empire).

As a result of this, airlines who aren't based at LHR now control a whopping 16% of slots.  I have 63 slots with 4 base airports (approx 2 flights/day from each base) and Empire has 78 slots.  Empire is based at JFK with a base at SFO with a cumulative 14000 pax/day demand that he is trying to satisfy with 78 slots, which means he would need a 1300 seat aircraft to serve 100% of demand.

The reason LHR is so profitable is because of the lack of competition and restricting slot purchases for non-based airlines isn't going to increase competition.

The easiest solution IMO is to create an overflow slot database.  Right now, the two airlines based at LHR control 5857 slots (84%).  In the spirit of increasing competition (this game is EXTREMELY boring without competition), all we have to do is create an overflow slot database where non-based players can buy slots upto the point that slots owned by based airlines = slot owned by non-based airlines.

So if the based airlines control 5857 slots, and non-based airlines have 1200, then the overflow slot pool would have 4657 slots (5857 minus 1200).  This means that based airlines can hoard all the slots they want because for every slot they take, there is another one available to non-based airlines.

This is completely unrealistic (there are several other parts of AWS completely unrealistic too BTW), but IMO is needed to balance gameplay.  If based airlines control less than 50% of slots, there is no overflow pool.  I don't think anyone will argue the point that it is airlines based at LHR versus those who aren't that are taking all the slots.  This would apply to all airports, not just LHR.  I am based at Paris Orly and I control 73% of the slots, but there are still slots avail for all hour blocks.  If those slots get used up (in any hour), then the overflow pool would kick in.  This prevents any one airline from monopolizing slots (although they can still monopolize the airport).

In order to throttle players from invading these slot constrained airports from every direction, the overflow slots should be very expensive--let's say $2 million per slot ($14 million for a set).  The breakeven on flights to the destination should take a couple years unless you are absolutely banking it, but odds are you'll face heavy competition and will be getting lower LF.

So in the end, I think it is important to address the problem versus the symptoms.  The problem being slots costs rise to infinity because the "free market" did a terrible job of ensuring availability through pricing.  By creating an overflow slot pool according to based airlines' slot control, the price of slots goes down from infinity to extremely expensive and extremely expensive ensures availability for those who are willing to pay the price.  This is the same concept as to why first class seats cost more than economy.  If they didn't, the first class cabin would be first come/first served and those willing to pay a premium are priced out of the first class market because the market price rises to infinity once the cabin is full.  By making first class more expensive, it ensures availability for those who see it as value added and willing to pay the price.

[Sami]

When a "large" (I'll let Sami determine what "large" means) number of slots drop open at an airport with over 90% slot usage, then a Closed-bid AUCTION takes place for available slots, with all players notified by in-game email.

Good idea, and has been mentioned before, but technically not feasible since this is about ~10 or less airports in each game. (ie. not worth the time and effort?)

[ezzeqiel]

Once more, don't go into that alliance blaming and war path.

Sorry.

So I make a suggestion: Auction system.

When an airport reaches a determined slot usage (let's say +70%) the auction system kicks in for that airport. Auction can be in 2 ways.



1- Higher bidder (money talking) takes the slots. Bids are made by hour.

Example
airline A bids for 1 set of 7:00 slots and is willing to pay 1.000.000
Airline B bids for 2 set of 7:00 slots and is willing to pay 750.000 (each one)
Airline C bids for 3 sets of 7:00 slots and is willing to pay 500.000 (each one)

If the airport has 4 7:00 slots, Airline A gets 1, airline B gets 2, airline C gets 1.




2-Slots are divided equally among all bidders (no money involved). No hourly reservations.

All interested bids in slots.

The system then allows slot rights purchases (like the market calls), for example 50% to foreign airlines and 50% to local ones.

Then you acquire whatever slots are available with the limit established. (like the market calls, you can make 7 calls, you can purchase 7-14-21 or whatever slots)

If you are online and come first to acquire the slots, you can choose whatever hour and day you like with your right purchases. If you come online last, you'll only be able to choose one slot left (the one that any of the other airlines didn't pick before you)

1 slot purchase right is for a 7 day set.


The problem here is when there's more bidders than slots. In that case, you distribute the slots between the ones that bid first.


Bidding open and closing are random. when a bid is closed, purchase rights are granted.


If you do not use your purchase rights before the next auction is open you loose them.

[Jona L.]

Currently on iPad at the dinner table so excuse any misspelling, will update once back at the computer.

I do think that some degree if alliance cooperation is to expected and acceptable, as KingKong already mentioned.
And since airlines irl also swap slots back and forth I think that completely forbidding it would be off, too.
I do agree that 220 and 55 (110) is a bit excessive....

I think that slot cost at OUTSTATIONS should increase faster. Not at your HQ because you need that, but you do not necessarily need as many LHR slots as HQ slots when u are somewhere else.

Nevertheless, if the LHR slots cost 50M there will be airlines that are willing to buy them. Hell, if I could get 2 or 3 more weeks in LHR I'd pay 100M each in MT. But that would be the price to pay, and would especially early on limit the incentive to send all your planes to the same destination.

My 2 cents so far. Back at computer in 20-30 mins, to be continued.


Cheers,
[SC] Jona L.