I am trying to test waters for what would be the interest for private scenarios.
Idea is that if (technically feasible) small private worlds could be run by AS. With today's virtualization technology you can create multiple "virtual private servers" with either shared or dedicated resource. Of course, such servers would be admined by AS so nobody else would get access to their code. This could be either one full powerful server divided into multiple virtual servers running private scenarios, or it could be a entry-level dedicated server (e.g. something like this http://www.hetzner.de/hosting/produkte_rootserver/ex40) or a top-level VPS based on KVM architecture (http://www.chicagovps.net/kvm.html)
My logic is that if 1200 players need 4xQuad Core 3.5GHz Server with 64 GB RAM (example), 50 players would need roughly 4% of that. Even though 4% may seem limited resource, but it really does not matter if the time it takes to enter flights into ORS takes 15 seconds or 45 seconds.
The master player (for lack of better word) would be responsible for payment of the server fee (either to AS or to the server provider) and would collect the proportional "membership" fees from other players playing in that scenario (hello PayPal). A EUR49 dedicated server from Hetzner accommodating 50 players would cost about 1 Euro per player per month. AS would charge its credits to the players in the same amount as it currently does (4 credits per holding per day) for administration and oversight of the scenario (server).
Would players want to play in such private scenarios? The scenarios could be set up according to master player's intent ... e.g. only certain region of the world (e.g. North America, Asia), limited aircraft models, different amount of startup capital, no restrictions on foreign investment, etc. It could also feature "country slots" (but this could be done off-server) where players play in their desired country/region. E.g. somebody who always wanted to play in China and grow a big airline there could do so, because China would feature e.g. 3 player slots.
Would there be interest to play in such private worlds accommodating let's say something like 50 players (no more than 100)?
if the server was idle, and just waiting for input by players, your logic would be correct.
But I don't know how much server time goes to entering flights into the ORS, calculating passenger demand and such. If you talk about an established game world, with thousands of flights, the server is probably pretty busy all the time. Even when no players are online.
If you want limited game worlds (limited workload for the server) you probably would be better off by limiting the number of planes/flights rather than limiting the number of players.
I would personally would like to thank you for initiating this great idea! I have also been thinking about it myself. I like your idea of limited slot servers. To me it sounds like you are trying to push the idea of those major games like BattleField 3 or 4, Halo or whatever FPS game that exists with online mode.
Personally, I figure that AS could just create/host these servers on it's own. But we can call them V.I.P servers for instance. Because it would cost more money to operate, it should cost more money to play(also because it would be somehow limited). I think that Quimby could be taken as an example. A world with "extra" things then your average server. I would personally suggest that at the place of only paying 4 credits(2c for account, 2c for holding) we would pay 6 credits(2c for account, 2c for holding, 2c for special world). It is a suggestion and a model that at the same time could make Airlinesim interesting(various worlds, various settings) but it would also be a money generator for them.
I would LOVE to see a world with, the same amount of slots as any regular server, but 100times the demand with limited player slots of 600 ... now that would be nice to see! lol
I would LOVE to see a world with, the same amount of slots as any regular server, but 100times the demand with limited player slots of 600 ... now that would be nice to see! lol
This is a bit stretched ... you would have everybody running A380 on every single route equipped with slimline seats in Y and leisure plus in C (minimum permitted for C) if there was 100 times demand :)
I would LOVE to see a world with, the same amount of slots as any regular server, but 100times the demand with limited player slots of 600 ... now that would be nice to see! lol
That sounds more like a offline computer game (like Airline 7 or something like that) than an internet base game ;) that being said, I would totally buy an offline version of AS if they really do it :D
This is a bit stretched ... you would have everybody running A380 on every single route equipped with slimline seats in Y and leisure plus in C (minimum permitted for C) if there was 100 times demand :)
Yeah it is a bit stretched lol! But Just to say, it would be awfully nice to have worlds with different settings and limited amount of people. I would pay that extra 2c per day for it!
I hope that AS staff can comment on this topic and let us know if they ever plan to do something like this..it might be a money turner..specially if you limit the time of the world like Quimby
If you want us to run an exclusive game world, we can do that for you now and today. It will just cost you a low four-digit figure per month ;)
EDIT: EUR that is :-P
So for EUR 1123.2 per month i can have my own private world? :)
Joking aside ... what about mini worlds, as I mentioned, e.g. 50 players, that are run in shared resource environment (e.g. 10 mini worlds on one full server).
Would that not be feasible? That would make the mini-world cost EUR 112.3 per month :)
How did I get EUR 1123.2 per month as a cost? 300 holdings x 4 credits x 30 days / 2.000 credits x 62.4 EUR = EUR 1123.2
As sobelair pretty accurately assumed, player-numbers are not the key factor to our costs. Give a "mini world" with 50 players enough time to develop and it causes the same amount of load as any other game world we run.
Add on top the administrative costs involved and you end up at a figure that makes a "private AS game world" quite an expensive hobby.
As sobelair pretty accurately assumed, player-numbers are not the key factor to our costs. Give a "mini world" with 50 players enough time to develop and it causes the same amount of load as any other game world we run.
Add on top the administrative costs involved and you end up at a figure that makes a "private AS game world" quite an expensive hobby.
We should just gather around 20 to 30 players who can afford it to start a small private server community :D
I am afraid you will end up with a game world that has 10 airlines in Europe, 10 in USA, and 10 in the China. Plus 10 subsidiaries in Qatar, Pakistan and a few other open markets. The rest of the world would be empty. Unless you find players who are willing to pay a lot of money so they can be the only airline in Botswana ;-)
I am also afraid players will expect more, because they pay more. But in the end they will still have to fight for slots and passengers. It will only take a bit longer.
But then again, perhaps you could adapt the rules...
I think that we should NOT complicate our lives with this kind of "private world" stuff and just look at the current server Quimby. This could serve as a perfect example for being a more VIP world.
Martin why doesn't AS create new worlds with less limitations but you pay 2credits extra per day? I personally would love to try out one of these worlds depending on the kind of settings you guys chose to put.
Actually i would pay for a world with more limitations, for example all current settings except that passenger demand should be cut by a factor of 2 or 4. That would be a challenging world and i love challenges!
Limiting passenger demand does nothing but lower the speed at which airlines expand. I can understand why this is something people would want, especially at the beginning of a game server, but it wouldn't be any more "challenging". It would just mean people wouldn't expand so fast. If you want a challenge, make the game run on a different ORS formula that changes every month. Have the AGEX be an extreme force in passenger demand and economy. If you want a real challenge, play one of the older game worlds.
@caithes, i'm already doing that (playing on older game world since about a year - Tempelhof). It's way too easy. You just identify some cash cow routes and go ahead with them and then expend your network and you just keep adding planes one after another. And then after a while you just wait maybe some slots free up at LHR or FRA.
Limiting passenger demand does nothing but lower the speed at which airlines expand. I can understand why this is something people would want, especially at the beginning of a game server, but it wouldn't be any more "challenging". It would just mean people wouldn't expand so fast.
As sobelair pretty accurately assumed, player-numbers are not the key factor to our costs. Give a "mini world" with 50 players enough time to develop and it causes the same amount of load as any other game world we run.
Add on top the administrative costs involved and you end up at a figure that makes a "private AS game world" quite an expensive hobby.
If you want us to run an exclusive game world, we can do that for you now and today. It will just cost you a low four-digit figure per month ;)
EDIT: EUR that is :-P
What sort of configuration limitations are there?
For instance, would something like changing the PAX rights rules be possible?