Airline Mogul Forum
Airline Mogul => General Chat => Topic started by: d3funct on October 22, 2007, 05:25:28 am
-
It is now October - 10 days after the launch of the reset.
My airline is worth over $500M, and I have expanded to my full 6 focus cities and cannot expand further.
My airline runs itself.
I only have to log in once a day to ensure my routes are profitting, and to build planes to lease out.
All this after only 10 game months.
So, does this game lack substance? I'm trying to be subjective and constructive in doing this, but we need something more to aim for...
Research technologies, train pilots, something else.
At the beginning of the round, I logged in once an hour... now its once a day - by the time its 1954, it'll be once a fortnight, then I might forget and never return.
In the 10 days now since the reset, I've basically done everything there is to do - and its not even 1951 yet.
:(
I like this game, and I will continue playing, but... what are your opinions.
-
That's why there's Lockheed there to help :lol: . USE THEIR AIRCRAFTS.. fly to different continents..
-
I only started this round, but I already see what you mean. The fact is, the game advances too quickly - people have got stupidly rich in just several game months, and the pace of the game must be slowed down considerably imo. I'm finding that as soon as I have a competetive fleet I have to upgrade virtually straight away - in just a few game months this has happened loads. I know this is only a game and not a simulation, but the rate of groth in under a year of game time is too much imo - I am dreading what it will be like in late 1959. :shock:
As well as adding new stuff like you suggest (which is good as it is something else to spend your cash on so overall growth should be slower), there a loads of thing that could be done. Getting rid of short haul 0.5s is a must imo, and the whole 0.5 stuff needs addressing as a whole (which everyone knows).
Perhaps also limiting how much you can do day (either game day or real day). For example, people who have millions of euros set up at a new airport and immediately open 70 new 0.5 routes (2 issues in one :) ) -spamming every airport in reach of them. They get rich, ruins the balance of the game etc. Instead, if you could only open a set number of routes per hour or something, progress would be slower and the game would be more strategic and need more skill/thought. Players could react to each others strategies and try and influence the game, rather than logging in to find their whole 'airline' in tatters.
I also think more measures to limit certain aspects of the game would b better too - for example players could sign contracts with manufacturers so that they may only buy that make of aircraft or something - or sign to a set number. With the right selection of aircraft available something like this could really give the game more balance, as players may have to really work at being a certain type of airline rather than just alphabetically buying every gate and setting up a route.
I think the brokerage system speeds things up too much. At first I loved it and even thought maybe there could be an automated finance system too, so you could pay on the 'never, never' - but I have since thought that maybe getting rid of brokers altogether might be an answer - if people have to wait to buy outright, they cant order until they have the cash and groth is slowed a little.
These types of ideas may be rubbish, but my point is that I think there needs to be a slower pace to the game and try and get more strategy in there somewhere. Dont get me wrong, I am loving it but I have soon realised that it needs a bit more of............something!
-
:( admittedly yes, the game develops too fast... far too fast.
unfortunately, the game needs a lot at this moment. multiworlds, slowed down, hotswapping aircraft, and some reasonable solution to the .5 debates... i've got ideas for it all, but my coding speed can't keep up (for example, multiworlds takes touching up about 200 files in the game.)
The fastest way to slow this age down is to revamp aircraft deliveries, (likely the best way as well). Limit the aircraft available, and the game will be a looot slooower. cheap planes will lose some of their punch. I've done some manipulations of the route formula, repriced the aircraft to typically higher prices, and a few other changes... so (scary thought) it is a lot slower then it was last age. i periodically do some changes in minutia that either won't affect most players or won't be very noticeable. If i do anything major i'll warn you all. (i'll likely do some noticable things shortly, in some effort to slow down revenue a bit... but frankly it is a little late).
The other reason this age seems so fast is the aircraft are pretty limited. last age you could buy a 777 which could go over 9000nm... this age, you can (at present) only buy something that goes 5500nm. surprisingly big limitations it causes.
I'm hoping i can get the multiworld part done as soon as possible, but it's also got to be done right. After that hopefully i can get hotswapping aircraft out, followed by some significant measure to slow the game down (likely, revamping deliveries).
-
:( admittedly yes, the game develops too fast... far too fast.
unfortunately, the game needs a lot at this moment. multiworlds, slowed down, hotswapping aircraft, and some reasonable solution to the .5 debates... i've got ideas for it all, but my coding speed can't keep up (for example, multiworlds takes touching up about 200 files in the game.)
The fastest way to slow this age down is to revamp aircraft deliveries, (likely the best way as well). Limit the aircraft available, and the game will be a looot slooower. cheap planes will lose some of their punch. I've done some manipulations of the route formula, repriced the aircraft to typically higher prices, and a few other changes... so (scary thought) it is a lot slower then it was last age. i periodically do some changes in minutia that either won't affect most players or won't be very noticeable. If i do anything major i'll warn you all. (i'll likely do some noticable things shortly, in some effort to slow down revenue a bit... but frankly it is a little late).
The other reason this age seems so fast is the aircraft are pretty limited. last age you could buy a 777 which could go over 9000nm... this age, you can (at present) only buy something that goes 5500nm. surprisingly big limitations it causes.
I'm hoping i can get the multiworld part done as soon as possible, but it's also got to be done right. After that hopefully i can get hotswapping aircraft out, followed by some significant measure to slow the game down (likely, revamping deliveries).
Tell Stephen to hire another coder to help you :lol:
-
I think it only goes fast for y'all that know the shortcuts to 20+ planes.
I started in a small-ish market (MSY) and can't get planes fast enough. I wish I had a broker to give me good deals on 20+ planes at a time but all I can afford is a new plane here and a new plane there. I don't understand how some players have built up 100+ plane fleets so quick.
I keep thinking that I must have missed something.
-
i disagree, its a strategical game, in my opinion, hence its all about understanding of your actions and implications of those, both against players and in regard to the system set up.
the game SHOULD be easy to get into, and then pave the way for players to develop the scenario.
you have made 500m, and decided to be happy with it, thats your choice to not further develop. in such a game environment, its not like a shooter where the computer feeds you enemy after enemy, but you competing with players. in that regard, you decided to call it quits with about 50 ahead of you.
I think it only goes fast for y'all that know the shortcuts to 20+ planes.
I started in a small-ish market (MSY) and can't get planes fast enough. I wish I had a broker to give me good deals on 20+ planes at a time but all I can afford is a new plane here and a new plane there. I don't understand how some players have built up 100+ plane fleets so quick.
I keep thinking that I must have missed something.
brokers dont have the financial resources to supply players ahead of them, its a myth that people are at the front because brokers help them, i would say that they are the players who get LEAST support, simply because it is impossible to meet their demands with the resources the brokers have.
-
I think it only goes fast for y'all that know the shortcuts to 20+ planes.
I started in a small-ish market (MSY) and can't get planes fast enough. I wish I had a broker to give me good deals on 20+ planes at a time but all I can afford is a new plane here and a new plane there. I don't understand how some players have built up 100+ plane fleets so quick.
I keep thinking that I must have missed something.
brokers dont have the financial resources to supply players ahead of them, its a myth that people are at the front because brokers help them, i would say that they are the players who get LEAST support, simply because it is impossible to meet their demands with the resources the brokers have.
But how then do players within the first 1-2 real days of the game already have 10+ aircraft? I just don't understand it...
-
Some were cheating.. some were just brokers... some leased from brokers
-
But how then do players within the first 1-2 real days of the game already have 10+ aircraft? I just don't understand it...
stop judging brokers by the first two days of the game.
people you describe were cheaters and banned or brokers. look at the current top ranks, no brokers, none of the people you describe.
-
He said the first two days... .. now it's real competition.. :lol:
-
I told Will and Stephen DC-3 is not a good starter...
... I even calculated how quick the game would proceed with DC-3 and 500k.
Granted, the calculation I used was based on even cheaper planes... but still.... :roll:
-
right now i would say that both ARIA and me are raising DOP by 1m per gameday, but its already becoming difficult to keep it up, as the investments required are putting a real strain on income, since growth by now requires expensive planes.
i do however agree that for this round, prices of planes should have made twice as what they are now, to reflect inflation and such. it would have at least slowed the progress in a way that current values would not have been achieved prior to mid 51
-
I think I had six DC-3s in Day 2. I did get help from a broker who had surplus DC-3s and bought two of them in Day 1. Another 2 got delivered in Day 2. My entire Martin, Boeing and Constellation fleets were bought without the use of a broker. About 60% of my Constitution fleet is bought by myself.
ALFC is right. I'm struggling to raise my dop because I've covered most of the good routes.
I'm actually online more often than I should be, to reset routes and it still takes 90 minutes to place 10 aircraft onto routes.
-
The sim is going at a good pace for me. So far, I only have 1 DC-3 and 2 ИЛ-12s with a 3rd about to come in (I needed planes that could last, so I avoided the Dove and Aircruisers everyone else was ordering). Then again, I am playing from a market that is microscopic when compared where most of the top 100 set up base. But I am starting to climb the rankings. At least this round you'll get to see plenty of evolution with the craft, so soon enough, you can replace all those slow craft with a more speedier Turobprop and a jet craft. That should keep some of ya'll busy. On a related note, I do remember the other game to be like this too, by the end of the 1st game year, the top 10 are extremly massive, at least the 1800 airports in this game help keep things controlable for other players.
-
Maybe the airfares should be lowered to slow growth.
-
Maybe the airfares should be lowered to slow growth.
I don't think that'll do much but tick most of those guys off at smaller cities, afterall, we only do make half of what the big city guys do within the first month. I think this can easily be tracked back to the .5 loophole. If that was limited, we probebly wouldn't have this problem right now. One of my friends is a airline based out of a larger city, he flies almost exclusivly 1s and 2s. He's nowhere near the size of the .5 abusers. We should just give it some time and let other airlines get in, then making that Euro will be hard.
-
He's nowhere near the size of the .5 abusers. .
can you please stop making blanket accusations that people utilizing x.5 frequencies are some sort of abusers or cheaters?
-
He's nowhere near the size of the .5 abusers. .
can you please stop making blanket accusations that people utilizing x.5 frequencies are some sort of abusers or cheaters?
I never have suggested the .5 exclusives to be cheaters, they are afterall playing within the rules. I usually consider it like most do on the blue and white game, you can hog all the gates you want, but it sorta gets annoying after a while, thus making it a abuse. I'm using hte word abuse/abuser in the form that it's sort of a excess, I use .5s too, but only to a reasonable extent (no more than 2 per plane.) So do my friends, and they're nowhere near the size of those bigger airlines, and they've made similar movies apart from freq choice.
-
that it's sort of a excess, I use .5s too, but only to a reasonable extent (no more than 2 per plane.) .
how do you make sure its TWO PER PLANE, do you write down the id's of the planes while planning routes? i dont know your id and numbers of planes, but rest assured that keeping track on which plane does what is impossible once your airline has a certain size.
you can keep track on what happens on a route, but not single planes, its simply impossible to practically do
-
I plan to ramp up costs a lot, introduce a number of new charges which I have discussed with Will. Unfortunately over the last 4 days or so I have not had much time to go near AM never mind reading the forums. I agree AM is far too easy at the moment but I would aim to change that in the near future.
I'll be working on a number of updates in this regard soon.
-
Maybe the airfares should be lowered to slow growth.
Just an example of how I think fares need some tweaking. I make more on SNA-MSP on a Viking than SNA-HNL on a bigger aircraft Curtis. Also, the HNL flight eats up more time. Seems a little off to me that's all
-
that it's sort of a excess, I use .5s too, but only to a reasonable extent (no more than 2 per plane.) .
how do you make sure its TWO PER PLANE, do you write down the id's of the planes while planning routes? i dont know your id and numbers of planes, but rest assured that keeping track on which plane does what is impossible once your airline has a certain size.
you can keep track on what happens on a route, but not single planes, its simply impossible to practically do
yes you can just go to aircrafts and click on info. there you can see the plane's route and frequency
-
my airline is also running itself
i'm happy where it sits not too big and not too small dominating wherever i want and not harassing my alliance members
-
yes you can just go to aircrafts and click on info. there you can see the plane's route and frequency
my point was not that its impossible to find out, but impossible to practically do once you have more than say 30 planes.
-
When I have 45 Martins, 45 Stratocruisers and 20 Constellations, I don't even look at the aircraft details let alone the profits much.
As ALFC says, anything within the rules is not "abuse". If you decided to play using 1s and 2s, it's your decision and at that stage, a semi-experienced player should already know there would not even be the slightest hope of challenging for the top spots in rankings that way.
-
It is now October - 10 days after the launch of the reset.
My airline is worth over $500M, and I have expanded to my full 6 focus cities and cannot expand further.
My airline runs itself.
I only have to log in once a day to ensure my routes are profitting, and to build planes to lease out.
All this after only 10 game months.
So, does this game lack substance? I'm trying to be subjective and constructive in doing this, but we need something more to aim for...
Research technologies, train pilots, something else.
At the beginning of the round, I logged in once an hour... now its once a day - by the time its 1954, it'll be once a fortnight, then I might forget and never return.
In the 10 days now since the reset, I've basically done everything there is to do - and its not even 1951 yet.
:(
I like this game, and I will continue playing, but... what are your opinions.
Where are you based? Maybe you shoud start in a more challenging region (read: cutthroat). Or you could bankrupt you fleet and start over. Now there's a challenge you should like.
I'm over 500 mil and I am not satisfied yet. I've only got three bases and am squeezing the nickel so hard the Indian is riding the Buffalo. Wait 'till I get six!
-
that it's sort of a excess, I use .5s too, but only to a reasonable extent (no more than 2 per plane.) .
how do you make sure its TWO PER PLANE, do you write down the id's of the planes while planning routes? i dont know your id and numbers of planes, but rest assured that keeping track on which plane does what is impossible once your airline has a certain size.
you can keep track on what happens on a route, but not single planes, its simply impossible to practically do
See, once I recieve a plane, I tend to make sure I max it out as much as I can. So once I get to a point where doing 1s or 2s is impossible on it, I will send it on one or two seperate .5s. If a massive amount of planes is that big of a problem for you, maybe someone should suggest aircraft ID as part of the "View Routes" menu I think that can be helpful overall, and you can make sure that you have 2 .5s. I mentioned that I only have a small number of planes, which is 4, since I play it more like a sim (like hte front page suggests), not a game, and my city choice is not exactly a LAX or JFK, so it'll make me only a fraction of what the big city guys make, but rest assured, it's no Amundson Scott either. Another thing that might help you is to name your planes, usually by using a registration.
When I have 45 Martins, 45 Stratocruisers and 20 Constellations, I don't even look at the aircraft details let alone the profits much.
As ALFC says, anything within the rules is not "abuse". If you decided to play using 1s and 2s, it's your decision and at that stage, a semi-experienced player should already know there would not even be the slightest hope of challenging for the top spots in rankings that way.
Well, see, I'm not shooting for top rankings, if I was, I'd been "trippein" by now (hope some of you got that reference), in other words, accusing the top of cheating, and doing the most insane things to prove it. I tend to keep cheating and legal abuse serperate. For example, people who do route dumping, they're basically trying to max out the capacity of the route and make it unplayable, many consider that abuse. A new guy somehow magically out of nowhere attains 30 B377s, and dumps them on a route, I consider that abuse (route dumping) and cheating (figuring out how to get "free" planes by exploiting a code in the game somehow). Like I said, I believe in having a strong route network before a massive one (again, 2 different things in my opinion, strong one is well supported and can take a small hit, here a massive one which is not strong and supported by a bunch of .5s can fall easily, unless the demand can support it of course).
-
See, once I recieve a plane, I tend to make sure I max it out as much as I can. So once I get to a point where doing 1s or 2s is impossible on it, I will send it on one or two seperate .5s.
in practical use, with more than four planes, you cant max out a plane AND maintain your 0.5 logic, as frequencychanges on routes are far too common.
If a massive amount of planes is that big of a problem for you, maybe someone should suggest aircraft ID as part of the "View Routes" menu I think that can be helpful overall, and you can make sure that you have 2 .5s. I mentioned that I only have a small number of planes, which is 4, since I play it more like a sim (like hte front page suggests), not a game, and my city choice is not exactly a LAX or JFK, so it'll make me only a fraction of what the big city guys make, but rest assured, it's no Amundson Scott either. Another thing that might help you is to name your planes, usually by using a registration..
see previous point, you mix up your "somewhere in my sandbox wonderland" theory with suggestions as to what would be feasible when playing the game with a competetive approach. your suggestions, with no reasoning but to self censor oneself to a roleplaying limit that is not hardcoded, is impossible to use and implement with numerous planes. bez sensu!
For example, people who do route dumping, they're basically trying to max out the capacity of the route and make it unplayable, many consider that abuse.
there are FEW routes that are really unable to make a profit. most "to lhr" routes were like that at the end of the round, but with a, for the phase of the game, mild investment, you can milk profit even out of single digit routes in this game.
A new guy somehow magically out of nowhere attains 30 B377s, and dumps them on a route, I consider that abuse (route dumping) and cheating (figuring out how to get "free" planes by exploiting a code in the game somehow). Like I said, I believe in having a strong route network before a massive one (again, 2 different things in my opinion, strong one is well supported and can take a small hit, here a massive one which is not strong and supported by a bunch of .5s can fall easily, unless the demand can support it of course).
your understanding of routenetworks and how they are best attacked is simply not true, but i suppose i will not attempt to explain it, since quite frankly, you should play the game first, its a moot point explaining something that you are most likely neither able to understand due to lack of experience nor care about since you dont play with a competetive attitude.
-
See, once I recieve a plane, I tend to make sure I max it out as much as I can. So once I get to a point where doing 1s or 2s is impossible on it, I will send it on one or two seperate .5s.
in practical use, with more than four planes, you cant max out a plane AND maintain your 0.5 logic, as frequencychanges on routes are far too common.
If a massive amount of planes is that big of a problem for you, maybe someone should suggest aircraft ID as part of the "View Routes" menu I think that can be helpful overall, and you can make sure that you have 2 .5s. I mentioned that I only have a small number of planes, which is 4, since I play it more like a sim (like hte front page suggests), not a game, and my city choice is not exactly a LAX or JFK, so it'll make me only a fraction of what the big city guys make, but rest assured, it's no Amundson Scott either. Another thing that might help you is to name your planes, usually by using a registration..
see previous point, you mix up your "somewhere in my sandbox wonderland" theory with suggestions as to what would be feasible when playing the game with a competetive approach. your suggestions, with no reasoning but to self censor oneself to a roleplaying limit that is not hardcoded, is impossible to use and implement with numerous planes. bez sensu!
For example, people who do route dumping, they're basically trying to max out the capacity of the route and make it unplayable, many consider that abuse.
there are FEW routes that are really unable to make a profit. most "to lhr" routes were like that at the end of the round, but with a, for the phase of the game, mild investment, you can milk profit even out of single digit routes in this game.
A new guy somehow magically out of nowhere attains 30 B377s, and dumps them on a route, I consider that abuse (route dumping) and cheating (figuring out how to get "free" planes by exploiting a code in the game somehow). Like I said, I believe in having a strong route network before a massive one (again, 2 different things in my opinion, strong one is well supported and can take a small hit, here a massive one which is not strong and supported by a bunch of .5s can fall easily, unless the demand can support it of course).
your understanding of routenetworks and how they are best attacked is simply not true, but i suppose i will not attempt to explain it, since quite frankly, you should play the game first, its a moot point explaining something that you are most likely neither able to understand due to lack of experience nor care about since you dont play with a competetive attitude.
I said "Max them out the best I can", that means until the hours remaining reaches 0 or until it is near 0 That means I will have some planes at 0 or near 0 (like 1 or 2 perhaps?). I thought that would be easy to understand. Also, note that I played like this last round, and it worked out quite well. And I am playing the sim first (I seriously don't get why people call it a game, it says so in plain english on the front page). Heck, you have to attack me by calling me inexperianced, I was just making a point, the guy with the .5s will have a hard fall if someone comes with more frequencies and a larger plane. That is from my experiance, but I keep my points very uniform and stand by what I believe, where you seem to be in your own "Sandbox wonderland".
I also believe there is a line between competition and nonsense, competition invloves some chilvary, where as nonsense involves being a barbarian.
So to recap:
-I am not calling anyone who abuses .5s cheaters. I am only saying that it is sorta the same boat as gate hogging is on another game I'm sure you're familiar with.
-I'm not censoring, I'm just explaining my reasoning, if you want censoring, I'd be screaming "THATS NOT TRU UR CHEATING!!!!!111111111111111111." I'd be also using the "white is black" and "We're no longer at war with X, as we were never at war with X, we're now in war with Y, whom some may think we were never at war with" type of doubletalk as you would read about in 1984. Also, I'd deny everything what I've said, even when presented with it. That is censoring. Ask people I know who are playing the game, I have said many times the difference between "legal abusing" and "cheating".
I keep things in a normal, calm voice as I type this, no insults with namecalling and telling someone that they're inexperianced on things you don't need experiance for, as what you seem to be pushed into. I also explain my points, where as you just seem to repete yourself, and add insults to people's intellegence. I have run into a route that did become unplayabe last round too btw. But that was because of a fare war, and thankfully, it was near the end of the round. So no worries, and I did have a very strong network of about 176 routes I recall. Not too bad for an airline who started in mid 2005 I would say, esp from the smaller cities. I also cimbed from the 1100s or whatever new airlines tended to start to the 435th place. Don't think that I didn't use .5s whatsoever, but I only limited myself to 2 per plane, and it worked out great. Also, don't tell me my stragety has no sense (really, did you have to use polish?) Like I said, I keep my points uniform, and I play by those points the best I can, and it works out like a dream. Somehow, I have a feeling that the coders didn't intend on people flying 65 .5s with less than 10 planes when they were coding this up.
-
I also believe there is a line between competition and nonsense, competition invloves some chilvary, where as nonsense involves being a barbarian.
I absolutely agree with that. Obviously these guys don't violate the rules, but they're not doing the game any good.
-
What I want to say is...
1. Calm down. If you can't, shut up!
2. If there is a suspected abuse, report to <staff@airlinemogul.com>, esp. if you see someone new coming up with 30 B377s.
3. As long as an airline is "legal", it is not an "abuser". You may want to think of it as one because of your own beliefs, values, ideologies, or fantasies in the "sim" portion, but in "real" context, a legal airline is not guilty. An abuser could not be legal, while a legal player should not be branded as an abuser. (Please note that by saying someone is abusing 0.5, you are implying that they are operating out of the legal boundaries, which means cheating.)
4. This is a simulation game. The "sim" part is a description of the "game" part.
5. Everything here is done according to the game rules, instead of some player's ideology. If you want things change, you could try by suggesting it. However, until it is changed, other players could do as they want within the limit of the rules.
business aside, personally...
6. It is noble for players to hold high standards and to try simulate the real life situation logically. However, we also have to realise that it is a business decision on our part not to use too many 0.5's. For that business decision, we need to pay. While that kind of decision is made on free will, we can't say because the others aren't doing the same, they are immoral. This is the same as real life, where you gain less by being a moral, socially responsible employer. We have to accept the consequences of our business decision, so we should not be whining about it.
7. Tune the 0.5's down.....
8. If you don't like it, leave. There is no one forcing you to stay (Cornfield's Rule).
-
What I want to say is...
1. Calm down. If you can't, shut up!
2. If there is a suspected abuse, report to <staff@airlinemogul.com>, esp. if you see someone new coming up with 30 B377s.
3. As long as an airline is "legal", it is not an "abuser". You may want to think of it as one because of your own beliefs, values, ideologies, or fantasies in the "sim" portion, but in "real" context, a legal airline is not guilty. An abuser could not be legal, while a legal player should not be branded as an abuser. (Please note that by saying someone is abusing 0.5, you are implying that they are operating out of the legal boundaries, which means cheating.)
4. This is a simulation game. The "sim" part is a description of the "game" part.
5. Everything here is done according to the game rules, instead of some player's ideology. If you want things change, you could try by suggesting it. However, until it is changed, other players could do as they want within the limit of the rules.
business aside, personally...
6. It is noble for players to hold high standards and to try simulate the real life situation logically. However, we also have to realise that it is a business decision on our part not to use too many 0.5's. For that business decision, we need to pay. While that kind of decision is made on free will, we can't say because the others aren't doing the same, they are immoral. This is the same as real life, where you gain less by being a moral, socially responsible employer. We have to accept the consequences of our business decision, so we should not be whining about it.
7. Tune the 0.5's down.....
8. If you don't like it, leave. There is no one forcing you to stay (Cornfield's Rule).
Well, ok now that we have a mods word in this, thank you. But I still will be vocal about .5s dumping when I feel it necessary, and if not me, there will certainly be many people. I'm not really whining about it, I'm very happy my airline does the way it does (though it does sorta tick me off when some players are mad that they're too big, but that is just me, I mean, if they don't want half of what they have, I'll certainly take it at a large discount) but it does strike me funny that most of those complaining about their own growth were hte .5s users (there, didn't say that word with ab in the beginning), so felt that I had to bring out that they mostly were the ones who decided that it should be .5s all the way. I'll also stick to my definitions to legal abuser/illegal abuser (aka cheater), though I will make my point even more clear next time I use it.
I hope that no offense is taken when I say this though, but I do feel that if there is someone who dosn't agree with someone else, they should discuss their points to their best abilities, them going away might take away from some valuable discussion, as well as make everything one sided. Heck, up until the last post that ALFC and I made, I was enjoying this discussion (I only stopped enjoying it because it was getting to the point where we both were trying to prove that hte other was a crazy stupid person with no sense). That was one of the many factors that is pretty much nearly killing the "blue/white game", though there are many larger ones out there, and I, like many players don't want to see AM headed that way. So if we see a loophole that can ruin the game very easily, people will call it out.
Sorry if I'm sounding a bit like Jack Thompson or Scary Mary (ok, maybe more reasonable than them, if you've heard their stories, you'd know what I mean) some of the times when I do single out hte .5 loophole.
-
I plan to ramp up costs a lot.
It would be good to see costs go up for airlines that have every airplane model under the sun. Maintenance & training costs should double for every new aircraft model that airlines add to their fleet. I only use 2 types so my overhead should be much lower than airlines with 10 or 20 different airplane models.
Also wages should be higher for airlines based in London or Tokyo as opoosed to someone in Des Moines, Iowa.
-
I also believe there is a line between competition and nonsense, competition invloves some chilvary, where as nonsense involves being a barbarian.
I absolutely agree with that. Obviously these guys don't violate the rules, but they're not doing the game any good.
Gotta remind you guys. This is 'Airline Mogul', not 'Airline Nice Guy'.
Chivalry in business leads to bankruptcy, lower market share or pissed off shareholders. Or a combination of that.
It would be good to see costs go up for airlines that have every airplane model under the sun. Maintenance & training costs should double for every new aircraft model that airlines add to their fleet. I only use 2 types so my overhead should be much lower than airlines with 10 or 20 different airplane models.
Also wages should be higher for airlines based in London or Tokyo as opoosed to someone in Des Moines, Iowa.
I agree. Airlines that have the multiple make/manufacturer aircraft should have greater expenses to maintain them. There should be a benefit to having large numbers of the same model or even same manufacturer.
Having said that, I couldn't even venture to guess what economic impact that would have.
-
What annoys me about the 0.5 issue is that it would be a pretty easy rule change. As a temporary solution the 2x 0.5 per plane rule would be effective at closing the loophole. I know it's possible to have more than 2x 0.5's on a plane and still be within the bounds of logic, but the number of airplanes that applies to is extremely small.
I know for sure that such a rule change would have zero effect on any of the planes in my fleet. Furthermore, whenever I lease a plane I always take a look at what sorts of routes the person using it is running (just out of curiosity). I've never come across a person using more than 2x 0.5's who wasn't exploiting the loophole.
Obviously 2x 0.5's shouldn't be the long-term solution - a more elegant endpoint based system like the one Air Elbonia and I were discussing earlier would be superior. But until that can be implemented I think the 2x 0.5's would be an effective stop-gap.
The other possible solution I can think of is simply making 0.5's less profitable than a 1 frequency route. Without competition a 0.5 frequency route will be more profitable than the 1 frequency route, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
-
I also believe there is a line between competition and nonsense, competition invloves some chilvary, where as nonsense involves being a barbarian.
I absolutely agree with that. Obviously these guys don't violate the rules, but they're not doing the game any good.
Gotta remind you guys. This is 'Airline Mogul', not 'Airline Nice Guy'.
Chivalry in business leads to bankruptcy, lower market share or pissed off shareholders. Or a combination of that.
It dosn't really lead to bankruptcy, you just have to know when to be tough and when to be polite. It does pay off when you get that balence right. I know this isn't "Airline Nice Guy", but this isn't "Airline Barbarian" either, that attitude thanks to certain players pretty much kept one sim which we all might be familiar with decently playable to only 20 people (out of maybe 1000 people, excluding duplicate accounts), scared away many smaller, respectable players, and pushed one disgruntled player to finally screw up the sim for the current round (as if past hack attacks didn't damage it enough). But I feel that most of the rules here are very good and well enforced, I just wish that .5 loophole was fixed, as I think the exploitation of it is just going too far to be considered decent, I think I have a decent long term solution, which I have posted twice yesterday (one in another thread in General Chat and the other in Suggestions.) The thing is I don't know if it's feasable enough not to make the server crash.
-
I just wish that .5 loophole was fixed, as I think the exploitation of it is just going too far to be considered decent
reread dtkc's posting.
-
lower profit - airlines are earning way too much, it's just unrealistic. It would be IMPOSSIBLE in the real world
-
I plan to ramp up costs a lot.
It would be good to see costs go up for airlines that have every airplane model under the sun. Maintenance & training costs should double for every new aircraft model that airlines add to their fleet. I only use 2 types so my overhead should be much lower than airlines with 10 or 20 different airplane models.
Also wages should be higher for airlines based in London or Tokyo as opoosed to someone in Des Moines, Iowa.
Remember, we're in the 1950s here. Wages in Des Moines at that time probably were ten times of the wages in London or Tokyo (actually, I heard once the UK had a system to regulate the amount of fuel&butter way into the 1950s.
No, I don't think the airlines from the midwest would be very happy about correct wages.
-
I just wish that .5 loophole was fixed, as I think the exploitation of it is just going too far to be considered decent
reread dtkc's posting.
I have, and I agreed with him on the part about tuning down .5s. I probebly should shut up, but nowhere have I said they were cheating or abusing. I was just saying I was highly unhappy with the .5 usage. I'm sure that if people used the .5s more realisticlly, a decent growth rate would be experianced, and most wouldn't be complaining they gre too big too fast.
-
I totally agree with LOT on this, there are airlines out there that run 95% .05 routes and end up in the top 10. I know its a game and its not illegal but come on. I view the .05's like card counting in a casino, its not illegal, but the boys in the dark suits really dont appreciate it.
-
I also believe there is a line between competition and nonsense, competition invloves some chilvary, where as nonsense involves being a barbarian.
I absolutely agree with that. Obviously these guys don't violate the rules, but they're not doing the game any good.
Gotta remind you guys. This is 'Airline Mogul', not 'Airline Nice Guy'.
Chivalry in business leads to bankruptcy, lower market share or pissed off shareholders. Or a combination of that.
It dosn't really lead to bankruptcy, you just have to know when to be tough and when to be polite. It does pay off when you get that balence right. I know this isn't "Airline Nice Guy", but this isn't "Airline Barbarian" either, that attitude thanks to certain players pretty much kept one sim which we all might be familiar with decently playable to only 20 people (out of maybe 1000 people, excluding duplicate accounts), scared away many smaller, respectable players, and pushed one disgruntled player to finally screw up the sim for the current round (as if past hack attacks didn't damage it enough). But I feel that most of the rules here are very good and well enforced, I just wish that .5 loophole was fixed, as I think the exploitation of it is just going too far to be considered decent, I think I have a decent long term solution, which I have posted twice yesterday (one in another thread in General Chat and the other in Suggestions.) The thing is I don't know if it's feasable enough not to make the server crash.
I'll admit that the people doing multiple 1 or 2 EURO routes are mucking things up. However, if someone wants to throw down on my routes, I have no problem jumping into the mud with him and won't back off. I guess that was more my point.
And we'll always have a few who find success in messing up other people's fun just for the heck of it.
-
I also believe there is a line between competition and nonsense, competition invloves some chilvary, where as nonsense involves being a barbarian.
I absolutely agree with that. Obviously these guys don't violate the rules, but they're not doing the game any good.
Gotta remind you guys. This is 'Airline Mogul', not 'Airline Nice Guy'.
Chivalry in business leads to bankruptcy, lower market share or pissed off shareholders. Or a combination of that.
It dosn't really lead to bankruptcy, you just have to know when to be tough and when to be polite. It does pay off when you get that balence right. I know this isn't "Airline Nice Guy", but this isn't "Airline Barbarian" either, that attitude thanks to certain players pretty much kept one sim which we all might be familiar with decently playable to only 20 people (out of maybe 1000 people, excluding duplicate accounts), scared away many smaller, respectable players, and pushed one disgruntled player to finally screw up the sim for the current round (as if past hack attacks didn't damage it enough). But I feel that most of the rules here are very good and well enforced, I just wish that .5 loophole was fixed, as I think the exploitation of it is just going too far to be considered decent, I think I have a decent long term solution, which I have posted twice yesterday (one in another thread in General Chat and the other in Suggestions.) The thing is I don't know if it's feasable enough not to make the server crash.
I'll admit that the people doing multiple 1 or 2 EURO routes are mucking things up. However, if someone wants to throw down on my routes, I have no problem jumping into the mud with him and won't back off. I guess that was more my point.
And we'll always have a few who find success in messing up other people's fun just for the heck of it.
Ah, well, thats a different story then :lol:, that I don't really have a problem with what you just described.