I have a suggestion for an improvement. In the Aircraft Type Evaluation tool, I would like to have all aircrafts not able to fly the selected route, removed from the droplist. I mean, there is no point in having the SAAB 340 in the list for a route from New York, USA to Sydney, Australia for instance. Maybe there are people that don't want to have the droplist filtered. Well, then also add a setting either in the enterprise settings themselves, or in the Aircraft Type Evaluation tool, so we can choose if we want it filtered or not.
An alternative, or an addition, is a function that actually adds all aircraft possible to make the flight to the list automatically or by a click on a button, instead of having to add aircrafts one by one manually like today. This functionality could even have filter options, like brands, max pax etc. but that would be a bonus really.
And also, the same lookup functionality for airports as for instance the Online Reservation System has, that when I enter say "mmx" or "malm" in the "From" field, I should get "Malmo Sturup" as a suggested airport avaliable for me to choose. This without having to click the "select route" button first like today. That would also be nice.
This would be unpractical and really not necessary.
Players frequently compare various routes, some may be long for a certain aircraft type. Some may not be feasible because of other constraints such as runway lengths.
It would take unnecessary computer power to calculate which aircraft can and cannot do a specific route in order to have those aircraft removed from the list at that moment, then when new route is selected, recalculate again everything etc. It makes absolutely no sense. This would not be an improvement, this would be a lag-creating process.
This would be unpractical and really not necessary.
Players frequently compare various routes, some may be long for a certain aircraft type. Some may not be feasible because of other constraints such as runway lengths.
It would take unnecessary computer power to calculate which aircraft can and cannot do a specific route in order to have those aircraft removed from the list at that moment, then when new route is selected, recalculate again everything etc. It makes absolutely no sense. This would not be an improvement, this would be a lag-creating process.
LOL! I'm a webdeveloper myself. I develop webshops for pretty large companies with many customers. I work with things like this every day. I work with user friendlyness. This can be done client side without and lag. And by the way, if I add my 15th aircraft to the list, everything is recalculated anyway today. Client side or server side. Your comments make no sense what so ever.
Making suggestions for this game, or questioning something, is like talking to a wall.
I have a suggestion for an improvement. In the Aircraft Type Evaluation tool, I would like to have all aircrafts not able to fly the selected route, removed from the droplist. I mean, there is no point in having the SAAB 340 in the list for a route from New York, USA to Sydney, Australia for instance. Maybe there are people that don't want to have the droplist filtered. Well, then also add a setting either in the enterprise settings themselves, or in the Aircraft Type Evaluation tool, so we can choose if we want it filtered or not.
An alternative, or an addition, is a function that actually adds all aircraft possible to make the flight to the list automatically or by a click on a button, instead of having to add aircrafts one by one manually like today. This functionality could even have filter options, like brands, max pax etc. but that would be a bonus really.
And also, the same lookup functionality for airports as for instance the Online Reservation System has, that when I enter say "mmx" or "malm" in the "From" field, I should get "Malmo Sturup" as a suggested airport avaliable for me to choose. This without having to click the "select route" button first like today. That would also be nice.
Totally agree. I actually like to copy the aircraft data to excel to sort it better by number of seats, flights per week, fuel cost, etc. for better comparison (which, while we're at it, is another thing that screen could use, a top row SORTING option), and it's a hassle to have to add all the airplanes manually one by one, even though 90% of them will not fly the route I want anyway. Really, this is just something one would assume would be available by default right from the start.
Making suggestions for this game, or questioning something, is like talking to a wall.
hmmm - please keep in mind, that rubiohuguey2000 is a normal player like anyone else. He is not in the position to decide wether something will be added or not to AirlineSim.
I like the suggestion somehow. Having thought about this twice I do see the problem about all aircraft with the distance of the route within the limited payload range. But not displaying all aircraft having a lower range at all may be helpful for new player.
hmmm - please keep in mind, that rubiohuguey2000 is a normal player like anyone else. He is not in the position to decide wether something will be added or not to AirlineSim.
I like the suggestion somehow. Having thought about this twice I do see the problem about all aircraft with the distance of the route within the limited payload range. But not displaying all aircraft having a lower range at all may be helpful for new player.
But once the aircraft is in the comparison list and a different route is selected, would you remove that aircraft form the comparison list?
Making suggestions for this game, or questioning something, is like talking to a wall.
As you as a paying player have the right to express your opinion about a suggestion and what you would like changed, I as paying player also have the right to express my objections to things I consider useless/not extending the gameplay further, in cases where I consider development time could be spent on other things better. This is my opinion and not that of AS.
Now don’t take me wrong, I am all for improvements. But doing one thingy is not worth the time. The whole AET needs an overhaul.
For example:
including cargo aircraft in comparison
affording split among classes when doing profitability comparison (with a slit ratio of cabin floor that can be selected by the player)
fuel price index to see profitability with different fuel prices
and then, we can talk also about adding your request.
But it’s not worth spending development time on one small feature without doing the complete overhaul of the evaluation system.
I have a different opinion. It might be usefull if you spend time in developing one small feature as long as this is only a few time with large effort to all player. Also it is necessary to collect ideas to have them once a large overhaul will take part. So as you may see, you shouldn't call anything as "useless".
“Useless” was probably a strong and incorrect word. But I would still call it a “relatively unimportant and not furthering the simulation” especially as a standalone change.
Just as a side-note: The AET used to be an internal tool for a specific purpose and once it was done I realized I could just as well provide it to the players because it can be useful in some cases. At the same time, it was never actually intended or - more importantly - designed to be a public feature. That explains why it lacks in quite a few areas. Of course, the AET could be blown up into a super-powerful tool with all kinds of bells and whistles...but right now I neither have the time nor the intend to do so. The latter mostly for game design reasons.
Just as a side-note: The AET used to be an internal tool for a specific purpose and once it was done I realized I could just as well provide it to the players because it can be useful in some cases. At the same time, it was never actually intended or - more importantly - designed to be a public feature. That explains why it lacks in quite a few areas. Of course, the AET could be blown up into a super-powerful tool with all kinds of bells and whistles...but right now I neither have the time nor the intend to do so. The latter mostly for game design reasons.
That's OK.
But as a solution, could you provide us with the necessary background information on a easily obtained way that we could build our own spreadsheets to do these calculations.
For example what I find most lacking in the current implementation, is the fact that the tool assumes a single class configuration. That is rarely the case.
So what I'd like to have is simply the information when I enter say LHR to IST that I then need to feed into my Excel that would account for the cabin configurations and catering costs etc. I assume this info would at least be the fuel cost per trip, maintenance cost per week, handling costs, ATC charges etc. We would then easily be able to crunch the numbers ourselves.
It would be great to have an export-functionality - exporting all relevant data as a .csv-file would make it possible for everybody to store these informations and evaluate in a better way which plane would be the right one. I am not into programming but I assume this would be easy done as the data are all stored in the database.
Martin, I don't know if that would be possible in conjunction with your company policy - if not please ignore my suggestion.