Hi all,
As someone who has played the game for a little while now, I believe that one area that really could do with a bit of a re-think is the “image factor” and how it is calculated. I’ll try and lay this out somewhat logically.
The problem
As I see it, the image factor and the means of calculating it takes into account factors that aren’t really relevent, whilst omitting ones that absolutely do matter. The result is that the way we all play the game becomes influenced by factors that don’t really matter (atleast in the real world), whilst negating ones that do. This also biases gameplay a little more towards the bigger, more established airlines.
What I’d take out/amend and why
The only image factor I would entirely remove is aircraft age. Simply put, the average passenger doesn’t know how old the aircraft they are travelling on. In the UK, Jet2 has for many years had a very old fleet, whilst maintaining an excellent image in the eye of the travelling public. Conversely, Ryanair has a very modern fleet but has a pretty poor image amongst the travelling public, many only fly with them because they are cheap. Further, this factor really skews the game towards more established airlines. Once the money is in, you can buy a modern fleet, you only have to equip a cabin once, no incentive to refresh it. You could be the Ryanair of the game, but you would be scoring really good image points for your 737 max, whilst a new start up operating as a legacy carrier using 737-300s or older 737NGs, would be scoring much lower than you on image - and that doesn’t feel quite right. I’ll come onto how I would replace this.
Secondly, I would rethink how much influence additional leg room has. So far as I can tell, you can add as many inches as you like and the “seat pitch” score doesnt budge. In reality, airlines who offer 2-3 inches more leg room (especially in economy) not only use this as a spearhead of marketing campaigns, but its a key factor in the public mind that makes an airline more luxury. In game, the impact seems minimal.
What I’d add
Firstly, there should be an age factor but it wouldn’t be aircraft age - it’d be cabin age. In reality, cabins need replacing, because as they age, they become shabby and outdated. This, much more so than airframe age, has a substantial impact on the image of the airline.
Secondly, a factor that really does influence the experience both on the aircraft and the perception of an airline to those on the ground is aircraft noise. I would suggest including a bar type system for this, perhaps in place of age. You could then get some really interesting image factor outcomes. For instance, smaller props, that have a bad “aircraft type” rating, would be quieter than older jet types (thinking 737-300/400 era), which would make the decision of which aircraft to start with and which to use on less busy routes more interesting. Naturally, the jets with geared turbo fans would score highly in this category, but when it comes to older types, it could help make fleet preference hierarchy feel a bit less linear.
Finally, a factor that perhaps has the biggest impact on perception in the real world is airline cancellations/delays, yet these don’t seem to impact image in the slightest. Scheduling errors, too tight turn arounds, cancellations of poor performing routes etc, should in my mind, have a substantial impact on image - it’d be great to see these factored in.
Just some food for thought - I’d be interested to hear what others think.
