Game world suggestions - post here

[MunMaRu]

I love Air Travel Boom !

[ekaneti]

I suppose I would vote for 1967-82 just because all the other games going, less the test game, are mostly modern era.

I still prefer shorter games 6 years, like beginner length.

[EYguy]

Allrighty...

It will be one of these (most likely NOT both as there are so many other worlds going on still):

* "Air Travel Boom" (~1995-2009)
* "Jet Age"  (~1967-1982)

Game world will be about 15 years to keep it short enough. Both of them are "oldskool" scenarios and similar what we've had before but they seem popular / interesting.

Estimated start in a week or two max. (confirmed start date will be posted later)

I would play from 1988 to 2010... Just because those years are the most significant from a "aviation point of view": fall of USSR, surge of oil prices due to the first Gulf War, availability of all the necessary informations, birth of EU, deregulations of some "skies" and so on... Moreover, it will give people the chance to enjoy even the latest news (current news).

What about the double leg routes? Will they be banned?

[freshmore]

late 60's early 70's to mid 80's or so, basically a jet age

or

1990 to 2010 or so pretty much modern times.

[EYguy]

I would say 1990-2010/2011... Anyway, Sami, is it possible to anticipate the faeatures of the new world? Will it be a full world? How many players? And so on... Thank you in advance!

[Dasha]

I love a modern day game but one thing I really want to urge you...



LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PLAYERS....


450 players in a game world is stupid... as once you bankrupt once, you will never get back up to where you were... I see the same players restarting every day simply because the simple airports are taken. Let's be honest, in order to make an airline in Bucharest (for example) work when you start halfway any game, you have to be VERY experienced.

Even in the Rise of the modern Airliners, I had to bankrupt due to fuel prices (which made the game HARD and not EASY in my opinion) and by the time I had enough money to go longhaul all my routes were taken by insignificant little airlines that just started out and found a great destination in Dulles. Now I can take my loss but it's just utterly stupid and ruining my game fun when after a restart, all my routes are taken and I cannot get back to a level where I was before...

Also I want a 'short or medium' length game....

[Talentz]

Think you could bump the starting year down a few? Say... 1962-1977? 15yr game? Give us a few years to fly mostly turboprops before 737 and 727 come out?




Thanks!

Talentz

[freshmore]

yeh i'd like that actually although 80 to 95, get older 737 classics and older gen jets and start by 95 to get a320 and 737-300/400/500 and some new lond haul.

[AlistairS]

I would like the next game to start in the early 60's to early 80's.

[EYguy]

I agree with Chrissy... That's why I think it's better to limit the numbers of players. Even if Chrissy with Zantha has succedeed in creating one of the biggest airlines in the Airwaysim World, it doesn't mean she has been a rookie when she went bankrupt for the fuel prices. Anyway, I do not agree with her about the fuel prices: it's just a part of the game, we can't do anything about it!
I would suggest a number of player of around 300 (+/- 30) for the new WHOLE WORLD... So if anyone goes bankrupt, it would be possible to restart in another airport without having to go crazy with the routes. BUT another important thing will be to CANCEL THE DOUBLE LEG routes... Most of the routes are already at capacity due to the amount of double leg routes which "steal" pax from resident airlines...

[Maarten Otto]

IMO the second le routes are justified UNTIL the new game engine kicks in which allows us to open a new hub. ABC routes increase gameplay and difficulty. If you can't live with this feature then please do something about your skills in game.

[d2031k]

IMO the second le routes are justified UNTIL the new game engine kicks in which allows us to open a new hub. ABC routes increase gameplay and difficulty. If you can't live with this feature then please do something about your skills in game.

Maybe this could be a feature of the new game - a gentle easing into the new format in v1.2 (without the second hub)

[Dasha]

IMO the second le routes are justified UNTIL the new game engine kicks in which allows us to open a new hub. ABC routes increase gameplay and difficulty. If you can't live with this feature then please do something about your skills in game.

Dude this has nothing to do with skills.... If my base is A and another his base is B... I can fly A - C fine but when I go bankrupt... halfway the game the other is B is flying B - C and possibly also C - A 'stealing' my passengers on that route. This happens TOO much in a game with two kinds of players...


one is the newby who's desperately trying to make a living. In this case I can live with it...

two is the WAY too big player who doesn't care about other's and does everything to expand, which I do hate..


Limited numbers of players would already reduce this I think. Cancelling the two legs is not the way to go I think, specially not when a second hub gets implemented.



Than to get back to EY
I'm not a rookie indeed and I don't say the fuel prices should go down but I what I meant to say is that the game is qualified as EASY... but with fuel prices that high I think HARD would be better.

Then after I bankrupted I made some mistakes in planning and started flying two routes in a 737 which barely made a profit but by the time I had the money and means to correct the mistake, all the routes were taken (most even by Alliance members  )

With less players I would have had a good chance of bouncing back with my airline... 

Just to clarify some things that I don't blame anybody (except the alliance members stealing my routes after my request to safe them) but I'm suggesting things that could be improved in my opinion...

[EYguy]

Hi Otto!

To be honest, and thank God, the international flights are still partially regulated. Double legs routes are authorized on a case by case basis from each government and, just to give you an example, it's the the same way that EK and SQ deal with the presence of Emirates at Changi airport...
Until a few years ago it was completely forbidden to carry pax beginning their journey midway of the route. It was possible only on a case by case basis as mentioned before and even today it is forbidden. If you have a look at flights operated by Qantas to the USA, the carrier is not authorized to carry pax from HNL to LAX and from LAX to JFK... This is because it would "steal" pax or create overcapacity without Qantas having to bear the overhead costs of personnel permantely base in a foreign airport and blah blah blah.
This is not because of my skills or about your skills...

Talking to the mighty Chrissy (who kicked me out of KIAD a few months ago, ehehe!), I know that the fuel price is a big issue but I think it is more a problem of the concept of the game than a problem of difficulty of the game.
What I mean is that we can't have "yearly loss" in this game" and we can't accumulate cash as usually airlines do in the real life. Usually it is necessary to have huge amount of cash reservoir in this game in order to withstand shocks as the oil price surge of the 2008. Anyway, the only solution I found about this issue was the one adopted by most of the real airlines: downsizing... Eliminating all the empty flights, creating double leg routes (but I seldom used to have double leg routes if not only for tech reason) and trying to agree with competitors on tariffs on some routes (I know it is not fair but it's a real life trick).

[carloscarlos]

two is the WAY too big player who doesn't care about other's and does everything to expand, which I do hate..

I'm not a rookie indeed and I don't say the fuel prices should go down but I what I meant to say is that the game is qualified as EASY... but with fuel prices that high I think HARD would be better.

With less players I would have had a good chance of bouncing back with my airline...

hi everyone,

im am sorry but i disagree with you dasha, for a few reasons. i dont want you to get upset at me or anything but, these are just my thoughts.
i left your quotes above so you and everyone understands what i mean and what it is related to.

you need to understand one thing, because you didnt manage to go through the fuel crisis, that doesnt make from you a bad player, though you must have done a few mistakes and i dont mean when you tried to rejoin your hub in dulles. only you know what you did, but obviously something has gone terrible wrong on your company, not to clear the crisis.
you "complain" about the big players that do everything to expand, i am going to ask you a question, if somebody would have gone BK and you had a chance to fly his routes, wouldnt you?!?! if it was alliance members that took your routes, that basically only shows the part they play in an alliance!!! the big players, that exist on our game days, can only be happy because they overtook the crises. thats why they are big, besides, there are companies that were founded right at the beginning  of the fuel crisis and at this stage, they are on the top 25 airlines of the game, with over 400 planes. i think you cant judge the other players because you didnt achieve you goals due to circunstances that only you will be able to explain.
maybe if you would have picked the right hub after going BK, you would have managed to do better! onde again it is due to your judgement !

having a world with less players, dont really know how far it would go in a way to be helpfull. i say this once again, it is only up to yoou to raise your company, not to the others, some make it, some dont. but it is all down to decisions.

as for the world being classified easy, sorry to ask, but isnt it based or as close as possible as real life?! you dont consider yourself a rookie, one more reason to have thoughts on how to clear the crisis! everyone knew it was comming, some saved cash, some didnt, some had other ways to make it through. i personally wouldnt classify it hard.

now...she is gonna go ballistic at me....hehe...sorry dash, but its just my opinion.

carlos

[Sami]

The next game will be 100% same to others so far as it's still the current v.1.11 game engine.

[EYguy]

I think that the main problem that me and Dasha had (as all the other players) was having too many a/c in maintenance with too high fuel prices... It has been a deadly game for most of us because even in normal conditions we need to keep the a/c airborne as much time as possible!
I had the fault of having 4 D-checks coming in a row without having enough a/c and load factors on the key routes, so that I could put money in to pay the leasing costs for some of the a/c.
Having too many players in the game is a nice thing but in the end is going to kill the real competition. We can't relocate airlines after some time and if we move our operations we have to completely restart our companies. This will affect our strategy while in real life we could move our hubs as Lufthansa did when splitting its capacity between FRA and MUC, or Alitalia did moving back the majority of its flight to Rome. Even British Airways moved its hub, scaling them back to only LHR and GTW, closing MAN. Virgin did the opposite, expanding its hub from GTW to LHR and MAN.
In my opinion, Dasha is right... If we suggest a limit of player per airport and set a lower limit for the numbers of players I think we will enjoy more the game, and I mean we will enjoy a longer game with a smarter competition...

Edo

[bwistle]

I think maybe a late 80s to somwhere in the 2010s?

[EYguy]

I think maybe a late 80s to somwhere in the 2010s?

+1

[MunMaRu]

+1

+1 but when it start ?