Another kind of 0.5 frequency abuse?

[fozzybr]

Excellent drawing!  Yeah, when I say "overnight", in game-lingo overnight = instantaneous with 24hr planes.

[blastpast]

Here is what I'm saying:


On the 3 hour part, like I said, I try not to go past 2x .5s per plane, what I would do is see if there is any shorter runs I can put it on that would allow a 1x (1 had 3 hrs left on my newest plane, thats where I used it on the 2.5 on a 106nm route), if not, then I just leave it alone. My loss, heck yeah, but thats just how I play. I can make another one explaining this, but with what one of my planes is doing right now. What it looks like we might not be understanding each other here.

that's how you play, but i'm pretty sure that's not how most airlines on here are playing. you do the right thing, but others dont. therefore on the last three hours, it should be 1, 2, or 3 frequency, not .5, 1.5, and 2.5.

now i am probobly one of the most guilty people with half routes. i'm using them because currently it's legal and everyone else is. and in order to compete, in most instances, you have to do what others are doing. if the "law" was changed, i'd abide of course.

i think we're kind of saying the same thing in different ways..? not sure. because i understand the whole day one a-c, day two c-a a-b, day three b-a, a-c thing. but when you start the route, if a-c and a-b were the same distance (say 11hrs total), then you could make it a-c and c-a in the same day. and a-b and b-a in the same day. meaning you should be forced to have 1 frequency, making a non-overnight stay. instead of a .5 and an overnight stay.

another idea just came to me. how about we keep .5 routes as they are, but add for every .5 route you do, you have to pay an overnight fee. this can vary per airport, or be a percentage of your dop for the route. 5% maybe. so you make 200,000 on a jfk-london route, you pay 10,000 for an overnight parking fee. this of course is waived if it's your bases you're flying between

[blastpast]

i feel totally lost right now.....  :shock: ...we've been arguing (politly may i add   ) back and forth, yet i don't know what we've agreed on...   :shock: .. lol

[blastpast]

no wait i got it. lol. ummm well see still can do the d1: a-c 12hr. d2: c-a, a-b. d3: b-a. but you can't do what you're drawing. what it looks like you're drawing is 12hr a-b, 12hr a-c in day one. but if they're 12 hrs, and you can make two 12hr flights in a day, there's nor reason you couldnt do a-b and b-a in one day, and a-c, c-a in the next day. this of course like i was saying with the profit, would have to have either a better calculation or be divided in half, as you're flying between a-b one day, and a-c the next, and continueing every other day. so doubling the profit would continue.

[fozzybr]

My post was more of a "just wondering" if there would ever be a code change to sync up with a bit more reality.

[LOT 737-300]

no wait i got it. lol. ummm well see still can do the d1: a-c 12hr. d2: c-a, a-b. d3: b-a. but you can't do what you're drawing. what it looks like you're drawing is 12hr a-b, 12hr a-c in day one. but if they're 12 hrs, and you can make two 12hr flights in a day, there's nor reason you couldnt do a-b and b-a in one day, and a-c, c-a in the next day. this of course like i was saying with the profit, would have to have either a better calculation or be divided in half, as you're flying between a-b one day, and a-c the next, and continueing every other day. so doubling the profit would continue.

Ok, what you're saying is confusing me. You also have to consider, since the route (or leg) is being run at .5, you're actually saying that specific route is operating on 12 days of the 24 in the month if they were actual 1 freqs. If you operate A-B at one, then you won't be able to run C-B since you used up all the hours. Also, you're not operating 2 planes on .5s, or the route twice so no doubling from what I understand from all the examples I've seen prior (where you have a airline putting 2 .5s on each route.)

Another thing to consider, you're running the route at 24 .5s per months, as opposed to 48 .5s per month (what 2 .5s per route or 1 freq would do). So it is not the same as what you're saying, since you've actually have half the supply of seats than you had if you did a 1 freq on a day. And that makes it easier for the plane to be filled to be profitable since the Demand of the flight is possibly much more than the supply of seats that you'd be offering.

~Edited by LOT 737-300 @ 17:32 Eastern US time.

[blastpast]

sorry yes i screwed that up as you're right as far as you could only fly a-b. and you'd need another plane to fly a-c if you wanted to fly that. which is how i think it should be. because if you do .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 etc whatever, you're saying you go

a-b

b-a, a-c

c-a, a-b

but there's no reason you couldn't have gone a-b and b-a at the same time. so then if you say .5, you're talking about

a-b
b-a
a-c
c-a
a-b
etc

that's how it should be meant. not im going to put .5 on two routes, and it's going to only go one way the first day i put it, then it can go two ways the next time. like i was saying before though the only way it could do that is if a-b was 14 hrs, but a-c was only 7 hours. so you could start with the a-b because it'd be all it could do that day because it couldnt make it back. so the following is a-b = 14hrs, a-c = 7hrs

a-b (14hrs...can't make it back on 10 hrs)
b-a, a-c (21hrs)
c-a, a-b (21 hrs)
b-a, a-c (21 hrs)
c-a, a-b (21 hrs)
and so on.

but what does everyone think on the overnight fees?

[LOT 737-300]

sorry yes i screwed that up as you're right as far as you could only fly a-b. and you'd need another plane to fly a-c if you wanted to fly that. which is how i think it should be. because if you do .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 etc whatever, you're saying you go

a-b

b-a, a-c

c-a, a-b

but there's no reason you couldn't have gone a-b and b-a at the same time. so then if you say .5, you're talking about

a-b
b-a
a-c
c-a
a-b
etc

that's how it should be meant. not im going to put .5 on two routes, and it's going to only go one way the first day i put it, then it can go two ways the next time. like i was saying before though the only way it could do that is if a-b was 14 hrs, but a-c was only 7 hours. so you could start with the a-b because it'd be all it could do that day because it couldnt make it back. so the following is a-b = 14hrs, a-c = 7hrs

a-b (14hrs...can't make it back on 10 hrs)
b-a, a-c (21hrs)
c-a, a-b (21 hrs)
b-a, a-c (21 hrs)
c-a, a-b (21 hrs)
and so on.

but what does everyone think on the overnight fees?

See my above post (which I edited). Insted of offering 48 .5 freqs on that month (which is what a 1x should do, and appears to be what you are suggesting), you're actualy offering 24 .5s per month (or 12 1xs per month.)

Also, they don't need equal flight times, what I used was a very generic 24 hr example. I could add cities D, E, F, G, Z, even Я! All those are all whole numbers (over .5), in the end of hte day, it can fly from city Я to city C and hte distance between that can be 25 nm where the difference between B and A is 200nm, as long as it fits within the 24 hr system of the game, I don't see a problem with it.

~EDIT, I just thought I wanted:
Ok, lets say that the Beginning of day 1, you did B-A, then did all that, then went Я-C at the end of it, the next day, it would be the return from С to Я and do that all over again until the end of THAT 2ND day, where it would then go from A-B. Cycle restarts like in the original "A/B/C" example, but with a few more varables added in. If you still have 3 hours left on the plane, then why not fly a 1x route that is nearby?

[blastpast]

no im not suggesting 48 .5's. but i'm not exactly understanding your argument there. i wish some other people would get in on this. i'd like to see what other people besides the two of us see our argument as. and who's more on the right. and someone without an opinion would be great. lol.

[Air Elbonia]

as the guy behind the actual route script... here's how i see it (and yes, it largely matches LOT 737's drawing).

You're allowed to arrive and depart from any airport SO LONG AS one of those airports is a focus city of yours, or an alliance focus city you have access to. (otherwise, round trips wouldn't make sense).  So. if you're flying AP1 - AP2 at 1.0 frequency, you're selling tickets in both directions.

This means, that the drawing holds up, because it essentially goes AP1-AP2-AP3 day 1, then AP3-AP2-AP1 day 2. provided either AP2 is an available focus city, or both AP1 and AP3 are available focus cities. (it doesn't matter which.)

the scenario that is allowed at present in game that's terribly illogical and defies the laws of physics (yet is at present perfectly legal) is the following.
assume AP1 is a focus city and all following are one-way flights.
AP1-AP2;
AP1-AP3;
AP1-AP4...AP1-APx.  

at no point in the 24 hours does the plane make the hop from the appropriate number of one-way flights back to the originating city.  I can write in something to automatically put in a ghost return flight, but this doesn't always work as i've presently got no way in the backend to catch which route has the ghost return flight; or worse yet, no way  to optimize which has the ghost return flight as the third one-way is created. logically any airline would want a ghost return flight on a 25nm route as opposed to on a 1000nm route.

Now. i know how to easily generate the code so that only planes flying less then 2 one-way flights have available to them one way options. that's easy. BUT it's incredibly... incredibly shortsighted. and that part bothers me.  See the following.

assume the following: AP1 is a focus city; AP3 is a focus city; all flights are one-way flights.
AP1-AP0;
AP1-AP2;
AP2-AP3;
AP3-AP4

The above is completely valid, and it is comprised of FOUR one way flights. shock. awe.  STILL i can't just say 2xfocus cities it passes through. as what if it did this instead?
AP1, AP3 are focus cities, all flights one-way flights.
AP1-AP0;
AP1-AP2;
AP1-AP3;
AP1-AP4
That's 4 one-way flights, and it passes through 2 focus cities, but two of them are officially illogical routes.

I'm hung up on, and have been for a little while, sorting out how to detect this scenario and enact the proper rules. and not only that, how to do so efficiently. (i assume nobody will play if it takes more then 25 seconds for the create route page to load each time. in fact, i get annoyed if it takes over 5 seconds.).

oh-ho-ho. it gets even more fun still.

What if.
AP1 is the only focus city an airline has but it does this: (all one-way flights).

AP1-AP2;
AP1-AP2;
AP1-AP3;
AP1-AP3;
AP1-AP4

that's five one-way flights. and it's perfectly logical by the laws of physics (as it winds up being AP1-AP2-AP1-AP3-AP1-AP4, reverse the next day). it also abides by the reigning rules of the game of the 2x.5 rule.

-_-. anyone got ideas to help me make a robust, yet logical and reasonable check for any loops in routes, and the ability to pass through multiple focus cities within the present, non-timetabled format?

[Max2147]

Yes, a two 0.5 route limit per plane is shortsighted, but I think that the benefits outweigh the cost.  With the slow 1950's planes, being able to effectively double your plane's hours is a huge and unfair loophole in the rules.  Also, using lots of 0.5 routes but still staying within the laws of physics is very difficult to coordinate, and not many players are capable of doing it.  So with a short-term two 0.5 route limit you'd be eliminating a lot of "cheating" routes and only a few legit routes.  As a quick, short-term fix I think it's the best way to go.

For a longer-term fix that allows legit 0.5 routes but bans cheating ones, you can't look at the number of 0.5's per plane.  Instead you have to look at a plane's endpoints.  In other words, where does a plane spend the night?  No matter how many routes of whatever frequency a plane has, it can only have two endpoints.  That's the real logical issue.

An endpoint is an airport a plane arrives at with a 0.5 route and doesn't depart from with a 0.5 route.  If the airplane operates only 1 frequency routes then the endpoints could be anywhere in the network.  Focus cities don't factor into it at all - it's just where the plane ends up.

So as an immediate short-term fix, put a limit on 2x 0.5 routes per plane.  Once you figure out how to code a 2x endpoint limit per plane rule into the game, replace the short-term fix with the longer term fix.

[ALFC]

Yes, a two 0.5 route limit per plane is shortsighted, but I think that the benefits outweigh the cost.  With the slow 1950's planes, being able to effectively double your plane's hours is a huge and unfair loophole in the rules.  Also, using lots of 0.5 routes but still staying within the laws of physics is very difficult to coordinate, and not many players are capable of doing it.  So with a short-term two 0.5 route limit you'd be eliminating a lot of "cheating" routes and only a few legit routes.  As a quick, short-term fix I think it's the best way to go.

you do not double the planes hours. 0.5 routes are close to useless on routes with competition, they are of limited use outside the initial growth phase.

For a longer-term fix that allows legit 0.5 routes but bans cheating ones, you can't look at the number of 0.5's per plane.  Instead you have to look at a plane's endpoints.  In other words, where does a plane spend the night?  No matter how many routes of whatever frequency a plane has, it can only have two endpoints.  That's the real logical issue.

the problem was there before the round, its not a new thing, be happy that the admins dont do knee jerk reactions and implement fixes where all implications are not apparent.
there is no real 0.5 fix unless there is a coded limit, to resolution of which air elbonia asked people to help if they know how. arbitrary limits are almost impossible to continously enforce, and difficult to communicate to whole playerbase.

So as an immediate short-term fix, put a limit on 2x 0.5 routes per plane.  Once you figure out how to code a 2x endpoint limit per plane rule into the game, replace the short-term fix with the longer term fix.

there is a limit of such a 2x 0.5 rule on destinations.
apart from the logical discontinouity, which indeed exists, i dont see a gameplay problem per se. many airlines fly 3x or 4x weekly to destnations, which is a viable way of allowing connections, which 0.5 should represent.

[Max2147]

You need to read my post closer.  I'm suggesting a long-term, hard-coded fix to the problem that removes the logical problem but still allows as many legitimate 0.5 routes as airlines want.

I'm asking for a limit of 2x endpoints per plane, which is completely different than 2x 0.5 routes per plane or 2x 0.5 routes per destination.

I just suggest the 2x 0.5 routes per plane limit as a short-term fix until the longer-term fix can be implemented.

I know that fixing this problem would hurt some airlines (including yours), but that's the price you pay for playing the game illgoically.  When you exploit loohoples you can't complain when those loopholes are closed.

[LOT 737-300]

I'm just wondering, could the extra time people say the planes gain might actually be because it did not count the time the plane should've spent on the ground? Anyways, I'm gonna try to stick more to realism (at least following the laws of physics) and try not to use .5s more than twice per plane. I'm not aiming to be #1 overall, just have a sustainable airline.

[ALFC]

no, you dont gain time, you cut capacity in half.
the current formula plays out in a way that, when there is no competition, its better to fly a 0.5 route for 3000 rather than a 1 frequency for 1500.
i have routes where someone put a 1x frequency for 1300 with a full plane, where a 0.5 frequency of the same plane barely makes 100% at 1500 price, hence the guy with 1 frequency clearly wins.
wherever there is competition, 0.5 will quickly be replaced by higher frequency, since thats the only way to make money.
0.5 only works well when you are monopoly in a market.