Northwest (NWA) does, IIRC.
Northwest: US, Holland (AMS), Japan (NRT)
As i understand,all theyre inter European flights are operated on KLM-Metal?
Aswell as theyre Japanese couterpart are operated on JAL/ANA-metal?
Sorry, I don't quite get the point. Do you propose the addition of a focus city that's reserved for one airline only as far as creating a base is concerned? The last part of the above quote I do get, and that's essentially codesharing, as far as I can tell. Codesharing is on our to-do-list but without an ETA.
Not quite what i had in mind.
basicly what i ment was:
You Choose 1 City, at start. And can only fly out of that 1 city, you cannot create anymore Hùb`s/Bases/Focus-cities.
If/when you join an alliance you could use the Hub`s/Bases/Focus-cities of other airliners that are part of the alliance, and fly out of the alliance members Hub`s/Bases/Focus-cities.
As for your suggestion...
Would it be unfair to players who don't join alliances?
Not necessarily, one idea could be to let "single" players have 2 Hub`s/Bases/Focus-cities in theyre start region.
Or 2-3 Hub`s/Bases/Focus-cities in total everywhere they choose? (Unless capacity is full on airport,ofc.)
Then if they choose to join an alliance later on they have to choose which Hub`s/Bases/Focus-cities to say good-bye to aswell as any aircrat based in thoose Hub`s/Bases/Focus-cities. in order to avoid cheating regarding changing newer/better/ etc. aircraft over to the choosen alliance Hub/Base/Focus-city a back-log would refuse any aircraft thats been moved between airports the past? 6 months?
Would it create a whole lot of conflicts in between players?
No, not more than the usual short headed comments would do?
back to topic
World dominance would require teamwork. Only the best at teamwork should be ranked#1
Teamwork isnt easy, we all know that but it serves a common good to learn in a harmless game.
and you could allways play "solo"...
Small aircraft are in favor, generally because they carry less passengers and can therefore charge more on average. With high demand and low supply, prices always go up. Also, speed is actually a factor in loadfactor calculation, so virtual passengers will in fact prefer the faster aircraft.
But at present, i dont see much of an impact on the favourability of the faster option vs. slow/small option
The example i used was based on a MXP-LHR route, as i recall around LHR 60 mill - MXP 23 mill. passengers.
So i guess demand was high, and supply low
as i recall only small and slow aircraft were occupying the route untill i placed a 52 seater with a speed factor of 4
times the slowest aircraft. i seem to recall only around 250-300 passengers were handled a day on the route.
But as we dont have different classes onboard the aircraft, and aircraft data seems to be from the manufacturers maximum capacity of passengers, it seems to me a bit an uneven distribution of favourability? since all manufacturers operate with roughly the same spacing per passenger.
We know it's too easy, which is why we're going to be introducing a lot of features that will essentially slow down the game's economy. Order books, for instance, are one way of doing that, since now you won't be able to recieve a vast number of aircraft from one manufacturer at the same time, therefore limiting the speed with which aircraft will arrive in your fleet. We will also be working on more micro-management related features in order to give you guys more work and slow down the game.
3xCheers from me
What is it about the "artificial limits"? The world "reality" is an "artificially defined" stage of interaction / performance. The "economy" is technically meaningless. That said, whether the game mimics "reality" doesn't really matter, because the "reality" is built upon "artificial limits".
->> Hence, whether the limits regarding focus cities are artificial or not, should not make any difference, and your point is invalid.
Thank you for acreditting the expression to me, but theres no reason to do so
especially since i
1. didnt introduce it.
2. asked a question, as to what is percieved and understood as an above mentioned, but thanks to you its all very clear now. Youll make a fine philosopher or spin-doctor.
A 4x faster plane is likely to have 5~6 times more seats, and thus need 4~6 times as many pax to fill. If the player operating the faster plane is satisfied with flying just the amount of pas as the slower plane would have with 100% lf, the ticket price of the faster plane would have been higher, altough the lf would be somewhere about 17~20% only.
Sounds fair enough, but still think speed should be favoured more than size. and that this should be reflected more in the form of slower planes loosing more €, to maintain lf per passenger than at present.
pardon my poor english its my 5 Language! i hope i have claryfied my suggestions.
