ideas to spice the games up

[Mr.HP]

So Sami asked for ideas to spice the games up, here are a few from the discord and myself:
-   Lower the default pricing -> lower margin, together with unlimited OOB, high slots, big initial A/C in the UM for more action in the beginning
-   China and India (and maybe Brazil) aviation market overtake US and Europe in the 2030s +
-   Randomized made up planes -> I prefer same planes but randomized stats (fuel consumption and range). For example: A320-200 consume 0-20% more fuel while range can be 0-20% shorter. With some luck, Russian A/C can compete well against Western A/C. The true stats won't be revealed till the plane got certified (the plane suddenly consume more fuel and have less range than ads at the launch date)
-   Higher slot cost, like if you own 40% of the total slot, any extra set can cost you hundred millions, and we can implement annual slot fee, too, which is also getting more expensive. Of course, airline got refund (full or part of) initial buying fee when release slots back to the pool. This forces the big airlines to decide to go with bigger A/C, use less slots, instead of many smaller birds -> it's a real challenge to be big, not easier, like any other online games, it's always harder for high level players to go higher. IMO, high slots cost as an anti-monopoly measure is better than 4th fleet penalty, we can remove/ tune down the 4th fleet penalty and let airlines run what they like

Please give more new ideas, or further improve them

HP

[groundbum2]

passenger cbd and connecting pax, plus alliance connections etc.

Sudden changes in routes, eg "all holidays in Mexico 30% cheaper, air traffic will rise by 50% for next 12 months" bigger and longer than we have now

ability for airline to pay for infra upgrades and get X free slots in return

4th dream fleet for no commonality penalty (max 21 planes)

alliance fee's go into pot that allow the alliance to buy new planes

[MikeS]

Simulate weekly demand in addition to daily demand for a destination:

So if a destination has 50 pax/day demand (50x7=350/week) it could be served twice weekly with a 175 seater.
Obviously less attractive than a daily 50 seat offering but this will make many more routes viable (e.g. Africa) and change how we schedule flights.

Mike

[gazzz0x2z]

-   Lower the default pricing -> lower margin, together with unlimited OOB, high slots, big initial A/C in the UM for more action in the beginning

Well, nope. It's already hard enough for beginners. Only experts will be still be able to play the game.

-   Higher slot cost, like if you own 40% of the total slot, any extra set can cost you hundred millions, and we can implement annual slot fee, too, which is also getting more expensive. Of course, airline got refund (full or part of) initial buying fee when release slots back to the pool. This forces the big airlines to decide to go with bigger A/C, use less slots, instead of many smaller birds -> it's a real challenge to be big, not easier, like any other online games, it's always harder for high level players to go higher. IMO, high slots cost as an anti-monopoly measure is better than 4th fleet penalty, we can remove/ tune down the 4th fleet penalty and let airlines run what they like

Seems cheesy to me. An, there again, deadly to beginners. I was a beginner in Glasgow, a not so big airport. I owned the airport. It would have killed me, and I'd have ragequitted. Better add dividend payments to the share holders.

-   China and India (and maybe Brazil) aviation market overtake US and Europe in the 2030s +

This : of course. Vietnam, also. Those days, there are several flights per hours in the country, which is impossible to reproduce in the game. And probably plenty others.

-   Randomized made up planes -> I prefer same planes but randomized stats (fuel consumption and range). For example: A320-200 consume 0-20% more fuel while range can be 0-20% shorter. With some luck, Russian A/C can compete well against Western A/C. The true stats won't be revealed till the plane got certified (the plane suddenly consume more fuel and have less range than ads at the launch date)

That one I like, but aviation fans are a good proportion of the player's base, and might be disgusted with "fake" planes. I'm not sure.

[schlaf]

connecting pax, plus alliance connections

ability for airline to pay for infra upgrades and get X free slots in return

4th dream fleet for no commonality penalty (max 21 planes)

alliance fee's go into pot that allow the alliance to buy new planes

Really like these ideas!!!

[schlaf]

I would like to see a AI-broker that have aircrafts only visible for new/small airlines (up to two years, and/or 35 aircrafts) , and to avoid abuse the aircraft would be available for lease only without the ability to buy them out...

That way it would be easier to start up in a existing gameworld

[Amelie090904]

Really like these ideas!!!

Me too!

[Karl]

Everything that has been mentioned so far would be interesting, but I suspect it would be difficult for an entity like AWS to program - at a fee we are willing to pay!  The possibilities for connections would be endless and almost impossible to program.  I imagine it would take a super huge computer program to keep track of the schedules, the connections, the missed connections, airfare, etc.   Would the current program be able to process all this information in a timely manner every 20-30-minute game day, week, month, or quarter?

[Karl]

Currently, all schedules must be from a hub to a spoke and return. 

My one wish to improve AWS would be the ability to add at least one flight to a schedule from a spoke airport to another airport when this world be allowed by law and international convention.  For example, if my hub city is ORD, I would like to be able to build a schedule from ORD to SFO to LAX and return. 

We can currently schedule a fuel stop.  I wonder what it would take to program this type of schedule flexibility into AWS.

[tungstennedge]

Everything that has been mentioned so far would be interesting, but I suspect it would be difficult for an entity like AWS to program - at a fee we are willing to pay!  The possibilities for connections would be endless and almost impossible to program.  I imagine it would take a super huge computer program to keep track of the schedules, the connections, the missed connections, airfare, etc.   Would the current program be able to process all this information in a timely manner every 20-30-minute game day, week, month, or quarter?

I dont think so. Routes and airports could just be edges/verticies in a graph and you could just BFS with a depth of like 3 and it would be extremely fast for each route.

[Mr.HP]

So I think the idea in this thread should be more focus in small changes that allowed instant fix, like the unlimited OOB in MT. Big changes like pax CBD, connecting pax/cargo, code share, etc wouldn't get the chance of being implemented in the near future

Thus, I summary all the ideas:

1. Small/ quick change:
a. For a hard mode GW
-   Lower the default pricing, together with unlimited OOB, high slots, big initial A/C in the UM for more action in the beginning
-   Much higher slot cost, to be in upfront cost and weekly cost. To balance the game play and give all airlines a fair chance

b. For all other GW
- China and India (and maybe Brazil) aviation market overtake US and Europe in the 2030s +
- Events have longer duration and more impact (up to 12 months and 50% increase/decrease)
- 4th dream fleet for no commonality penalty (max 21 planes)
- alliance fee's go into pot that allow the alliance to buy new planes
- AI brokers that offer planes exclusively for small/new airline (up to 2 years/ 35 planes). Lease only, no buy out option. I'd like to add that player brokers can have the option of doing it too, they can have a helping out new airlines scores or earn a bit more money sponsored by governments

2. Big changes
- Ability for airline to pay for infra upgrades and get X free slots in return
- Demand can shift from 1 day to another, enable 1 or 2 flight weekly to capture most of the week demand
- Add A-B-C-A routes

[Mr.HP]

passenger cbd and connecting pax, plus alliance connections etc.

ability for airline to pay for infra upgrades and get X free slots in return

4th dream fleet for no commonality penalty (max 21 planes)

alliance fee's go into pot that allow the alliance to buy new planes

For the sake of discussion:
- The infra upgrade payment for slots, this would mostly benefit the big airlines. What else make the small airlines benefit, too?
- uhm, what's the purpose if just 21 planes? 4th fleet penalty is only noticeable when you have like 300+ A/C, if you have that big fleet, how's the dream fleet of 21 A/C is going to benefit the airline?
- And the alliance planes are used for? Assigning to airline member? Are you suggesting increase the fee to like 2%, and the 1% extra to be used to buy A/C?

Well, nope. It's already hard enough for beginners. Only experts will be still be able to play the game.

Seems cheesy to me. An, there again, deadly to beginners. I was a beginner in Glasgow, a not so big airport. I owned the airport. It would have killed me, and I'd have ragequitted. Better add dividend payments to the share holders.

No worry, that will be in the Hard mode game world 
Glassgow isn't even in the top 100 airports of percentage of daytime slots used in HatF, even with an airline with 100 A/C, 1577 slots (45% of all slots taken, 11.8% of total daytime slot) taken. This is far below the number I used as an example (40% of all slot available would be ~6700 slots taken). The slot cost would be determined by total day time slots own, percentage day time slots own and total day time slots available. And I think the Glassgow mentioned above should be fine

This : of course. Vietnam, also. Those days, there are several flights per hours in the country, which is impossible to reproduce in the game. And probably plenty others.

Yup, I asked about that, coz SGN-HAN route is among top 10 routes in the world, and someone told me that sami is focusing in pax CBD now, and wouldn't want to touch the demand data

That one I like, but aviation fans are a good proportion of the player's base, and might be disgusted with "fake" planes. I'm not sure.

Well, a solution is to name the plane differently. Take the 320-200 for example, the real model with best stats (no reduction in range and fuel) still is 200. Any "fake" model would be named 320-2XY (XY from 01 to 99) where the X represent the % increase of fuel and Y represent the % of range decrease. So 320-255 will have 5% increase of fuel and 5% range decrease (10% if we have 20% as the max range)

[swiftus27]

Ooooh. Make the MD 12 and the Boeing SST

[groundbum2]

well to make it easier for smaller airlines (defined as less than X aircraft)

- planes available only to small players on UM 5 days before large players can buy
- if they enter a GW midway through they get serious amount of starting capital, eg 100Mill
- if they start midway through first 20 routes get instant RI of 100
- if they start midway through they get super cheap slots for six months

The ability of new players to make a huge power start midway through a game will add some excitement to all the big guys that consolidate then plod on. I would suggest power start not be available in bases already in use by other small players.

Simon

[gazzz0x2z]

Start midway is hard the first years, but quite easier after, when many other players have BK'd. and there is the advantage of building up a structure from scrach, while existing players are under the weight of their current structures, and therefore won't adapt as well. It's a complex issue. Very hard to balance properly. I wouldn't touch this even with a pole.

OTOH I do love the UM availability according to size. Could be something like 1 day of delay in availability every 100 planes in the company, or whatever in the same style. THAT would be a great equalizer (says the guy who has the most plane in its country in MT and just secured 3 very rare 738s)

Let's say there is a plane drop on saturday at 2200. Players with 99 planes or less can take them. Sunday at 2200 players at 199 planes or less can take what is remaining. Etc...A player above 2000 aircraft would have a 3 weeks delay. Just not for private listed planes (I'm not sure for player-owned planes sold on the open, opinions?)

Pleaaaaaaaase!!!!!

[swiftus27]

I'm sure all of these would work well

1.  Sliding scale of flight attendant hotness in early games.  Goes from zero to full Pan Am.  Doesn't matter by 1995.
2.  Fleet refresh budget.   How often do you paint your planes?  Redo the interior?
3.  Side income by allowing illicit "stuff" to be transported inside the cargo area of planes.  Risk is getting caught and massive hits to CI
4.  MORE SEVERE WEATHER!
5.  Negative ad campaigns (against airlines at your bases.... Definitely would not be OP)
6.  City based demand model.  Has this been mentioned?
7.  Until 1990, divide passengers into smokers and non smokers. Smoking sections that increase demand but lower satisfaction from non smokers.   

[DanDan]

Sami asked for this? Isn't there like hundreds of ideas in the feature request backlog already?

[swiftus27]

It's a forum post.  PerhPs someone will come up with something groundbreaking

[ViikkuJuwaisir]

Loving these ideas.

So I think the idea in this thread should be more focus in small changes that allowed instant fix, like the unlimited OOB in MT. Big changes like pax CBD, connecting pax/cargo, code share, etc wouldn't get the chance of being implemented in the near future

Thus, I summary all the ideas:

1. Small/ quick change:
a. For a hard mode GW
-   Lower the default pricing, together with unlimited OOB, high slots, big initial A/C in the UM for more action in the beginning
-   Much higher slot cost, to be in upfront cost and weekly cost. To balance the game play and give all airlines a fair chance

b. For all other GW
- China and India (and maybe Brazil) aviation market overtake US and Europe in the 2030s +
- Events have longer duration and more impact (up to 12 months and 50% increase/decrease)
- 4th dream fleet for no commonality penalty (max 21 planes)
- alliance fee's go into pot that allow the alliance to buy new planes
- AI brokers that offer planes exclusively for small/new airline (up to 2 years/ 35 planes). Lease only, no buy out option. I'd like to add that player brokers can have the option of doing it too, they can have a helping out new airlines scores or earn a bit more money sponsored by governments

2. Big changes
- Ability for airline to pay for infra upgrades and get X free slots in return
- Demand can shift from 1 day to another, enable 1 or 2 flight weekly to capture most of the week demand
- Add A-B-C-A routes

[Igolyto]

1.  Sliding scale of flight attendant hotness in early games.  Goes from zero to full Pan Am.  Doesn't matter by 1995.

Even before 1995, the price was what matter the most and most. We all think about the glamour of the 50' to 70' as we saw it on films and series (for the youngest of us of course) but there was limited competition (and therefore choice). As the competition started the price war started and glamour went the dodo way. Aside from some very niche players, no airline really succeeded the glamorous way.

2.  Fleet refresh budget.   How often do you paint your planes?  Redo the interior?

Most repaints occur during heavy maintenance so the game somehow already takes this into account.

3.  Side income by allowing illicit "stuff" to be transported inside the cargo area of planes.  Risk is getting caught and massive hits to CI

Sami should keep this for an April fool joke 

4.  MORE SEVERE WEATHER!

True, Sporadic events are never a real issue in the game. These events should impact the ones that schedule flights with little or no padding and less the others. The US northeast coast should be blocked for a few days every year. The same thing goes for London City closed for fog or heavy winds. Every four years France should have a general strike that cancels thousand of flights from to France but also across Europe (so the rest of the world actually has some interest in the French presidential election).

5.  Negative ad campaigns (against airlines at your bases.... Definitely would not be OP)

We like to have a p***ing match but the impact of such campaigns would be difficult to implement in the game. We have already marketing campaigns and maybe Sami could explain how this really impacts competition between airlines. Currently, if I understand correctly it only impacts the CI. It would interesting to have a more granular impact (ie if I invest 1mil in marketing at my hub and my competitor 2 then my competitor win more passengers).

6.  City-based demand model.  Has this been mentioned?

That's something I'waiting for too. It's somewhere in Samy's to-do list. A kat made her kitties in it. Wait no, there is two or three kat generations that used that spot since.

7.  Until 1990, divide passengers into smokers and non smokers. Smoking sections increase demand but lower satisfaction from non smokers.

This was more a habit than a way to make a profit. It had a cost as well. All aircraft operated during that era had yellowish parts even years later due to tobacco. Filters had to be replaced more often, astray had to be cleaned and all the cabin needed extra care. Two fatal crashes have also been directly linked to smokers as fire on board is a deadly risk. All in all, I'm not sure if the airline industry really benefited from keeping smoking passengers.