1
Game Data / Italy airports official data 2015
« on: April 28, 2016, 02:04:08 am » Totali Gennaio - Dicembre 2015 (su base 2014) - Dati aggiornati a Marzo 2016 |
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: 1 2
2
[-] Suggestions / [-] Simple suggestion to improve route editing
« on: July 04, 2011, 09:48:22 pm »
I experienced that editing a route can be painfully slow when you access from a slow connection (from a mobile phone, for example).
Could you implement a faster way to calculate the price, without having to manually write down numbers and press the "update results" button a lot of times?
For example, a system with up-down arrows that updates instantly the income result, without reloading the entire page?
Thanks, Neldot.
Could you implement a faster way to calculate the price, without having to manually write down numbers and press the "update results" button a lot of times?
For example, a system with up-down arrows that updates instantly the income result, without reloading the entire page?
Thanks, Neldot.
3
Game Data / Re: 2010 traffic data for italian airports
« on: June 02, 2011, 06:02:05 pm »
In this pdf, there are the ENAC official 2010 data for all the italian airports (some small airports are missing in Assaeroporti data).
http://www.enac.gov.it/repository/ContentManagement/information/P1014822582/Dati_di_traffico_2010_iPARTE_110421.pdf
http://www.enac.gov.it/repository/ContentManagement/information/P1014822582/Dati_di_traffico_2010_iPARTE_110421.pdf
4
Game Data / 2010 traffic data for italian airports
« on: June 02, 2011, 05:52:20 pm »
Here they are, at the official site of Assaeroporti (italian airports managers association):
http://www.assaeroporti.it/ViewTotaliProg.asp?mese=12&anno=2010&lingua=en
A lot of small airports growing compared to 2009 data. And the growing trend continues in the first 2011 data.
http://www.assaeroporti.it/ViewTotaliProg.asp?mese=12&anno=2010&lingua=en
A lot of small airports growing compared to 2009 data. And the growing trend continues in the first 2011 data.
5
Game Strategy / Re: Best of the big birds ?
« on: September 22, 2010, 09:46:50 pm »
It's not only the maintenance costs that kills 747s and other big planes in the game, albeit an improvement of the maintenance formula would be welcome.
It's also the fact that, in the real world, long routes with high demand earn immensely more than regional routes.
In the game this is not the case, long routes earn only slightly more cash.
It's also the fact that, in the real world, long routes with high demand earn immensely more than regional routes.
In the game this is not the case, long routes earn only slightly more cash.
6
[+] Suggestions / Re: Initial expenses. An idea to decrease a bit the starting speed of the players
« on: September 13, 2010, 02:44:06 pm »
Thank you for your endorsement, Tiger In Training and CHR. 
7
Game Data / Re: Breguet 763 Provence speed data
« on: September 13, 2010, 02:40:25 pm »Could you provide a source for that, please?
A quick search found a few values:
Wiki (390 km/h - 210 kn)
Aviastar (380 km/h - 205 kn)
Random French site cited by wiki (215 kn)
I'm not sure if they are reliable enough...
My sources are the same that you mention. We could cautiously consider the lowest speed (205 kn).
But the speed currently in the game (105 kn) is clearly too low for this type of plane (4 engines x 6000 kw).
8
Game Data / Breguet 763 Provence speed data
« on: September 13, 2010, 11:02:52 am »
I think that the Breguet 763 Provence speed data is incorrect. The game has 105 kn as speed of this plane, but the correct speed should be 205 kn.
Thank you.
Thank you.
9
[+] Suggestions / Initial expenses. An idea to decrease a bit the starting speed of the players
« on: September 12, 2010, 08:44:41 am »
It seems fair to me that the starting base should have a cost, deducted from the starting budget of the player.
This cost could be (at least) the monthly cost of the gates itself.
This rule, if implemented, would forbid players from starting in airports bigger than 200k (with an initial budget of 500k).
For example, if the starting base was a 250K airport, the initial money of the player should be reduced to 500.000-250.000x2 = 0 euro. This way, players will be forced to choose mostly small/medium airports (50K/200K) to start with, otherwise they won't have enough money left to spend in gates acquirement.
Of course, the starting budget could be raised, for example, to 1.000.000 euro, so the players could choose a 350k airport as starting base, but at the cost of having only 300k money left to spend in gates (1.000.000-350.000x2=300.000).
I think that this rule would benefit the dynamics of the game, slowing down the initial economy, thus making the opening of a "big hub" as a target to reach, not a granted initial "gift".
Furthermore, that will reward the initial strategy of the player in choosing the base, whilst currently too many players simply choose a very big airport to have an initial advantage in route prices.
What do you think?
This cost could be (at least) the monthly cost of the gates itself.
This rule, if implemented, would forbid players from starting in airports bigger than 200k (with an initial budget of 500k).
For example, if the starting base was a 250K airport, the initial money of the player should be reduced to 500.000-250.000x2 = 0 euro. This way, players will be forced to choose mostly small/medium airports (50K/200K) to start with, otherwise they won't have enough money left to spend in gates acquirement.
Of course, the starting budget could be raised, for example, to 1.000.000 euro, so the players could choose a 350k airport as starting base, but at the cost of having only 300k money left to spend in gates (1.000.000-350.000x2=300.000).
I think that this rule would benefit the dynamics of the game, slowing down the initial economy, thus making the opening of a "big hub" as a target to reach, not a granted initial "gift".
Furthermore, that will reward the initial strategy of the player in choosing the base, whilst currently too many players simply choose a very big airport to have an initial advantage in route prices.
What do you think?
10
[=] Suggestions / Re: Base requirements
« on: September 12, 2010, 08:21:57 am »
The idea is that we need A -> (B) -> C flights. B = hub. So passenger flies from A -> (B) and 5% or so of the people on that flight go onto C to effectively 5% go A -> C via (B). This is more logical than a network 'boost' because you don't really get a network boost in the real world. And airline can operate fine without connecting any of it's hubs. It simply does it for international traffic. It's rare (there are cases though ) that you'd fly from A -> (B) -> (C) -> D. There is hardly a real life reason to fly between two hubs unless you're flying international or to very small regional airports. Normally when I fly out of my regional I only go through one hub.
This seems logical to me.
11
[++] Suggestions / Re: Create route request - uncouple from view routes
« on: September 11, 2010, 08:53:11 pm »
I agree, opening the routes page every time you schedule a route is worthless and time consuming.
I think that it would be by far most useful to open the aircraft summary page after creating a route for that plane.
I think that it would be by far most useful to open the aircraft summary page after creating a route for that plane.
12
[=] Suggestions / Re: Base requirements
« on: September 11, 2010, 08:37:19 pm »
As the starter of the mentioned previous thread about this problem, I'll repeat what I suggested there.
As happens in real world, it's fair that players can choose to start an hub wherever they want. However (as in real world) players that choose to connect all their hubs amongst them should be rewarded by an increased bonus for all their routes. A "network bonus" that adds up to the existing hub bonus.
Better still, the "network bonus" could even (realistically) allow to have higher prices in routes with many competitors.
As happens in real world, it's fair that players can choose to start an hub wherever they want. However (as in real world) players that choose to connect all their hubs amongst them should be rewarded by an increased bonus for all their routes. A "network bonus" that adds up to the existing hub bonus.
Better still, the "network bonus" could even (realistically) allow to have higher prices in routes with many competitors.
13
Game Updates / Re: New Routemap on its way
« on: August 04, 2010, 07:43:16 pm »
Perhaps I must be logged in the game at the time when the automated update takes place?
It seems that I must be logged in the game.
Now, at a quarter past the hour, I can see my new routes.
14
Game Updates / Re: New Routemap on its way
« on: August 04, 2010, 06:06:22 pm »
Hello Stephen, the new route map continue to behave oddly in my game.
Now 4 or 5 hours have passed since I created several new routes, and still I can't see them in routemap.
Perhaps I must be logged in the game at the time when the automated update takes place?
Now 4 or 5 hours have passed since I created several new routes, and still I can't see them in routemap.
Perhaps I must be logged in the game at the time when the automated update takes place?
15
Game Updates / Re: New Routemap on its way
« on: August 02, 2010, 11:19:47 am »
Update. Now the new routes and airports show correctly.
Odd, it took 2 hours instead of 1.
Odd, it took 2 hours instead of 1.
Pages: 1 2
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk